The BEST Guide to POLAND
Unanswered  |  Archives 
 
 
User: Guest

Home / History  % width posts: 117

The Greatest King of Poland?


Des Essientes 7 | 1,291
15 Jun 2011 #91
He saved us from Turks & Tatars.

He saved the Austrians from them and look how they repaid Poland in spades. Polski your Islamophobia is un-Polish. Don't ape western Europeans and Zionists who are Islamopobic because they know the colonial crimes they have commited against Muslims have made Muslims dislike them. Poland is above this.
PolskiMoc 4 | 324
15 Jun 2011 #92
Jan Sobieski fought Turks in a few battles actually.
Where Turks were trying to take Poland like

Battle of Żurawno
Battle of Lwów (1675)
Battle of Trembowla
Battle of Żurawno

If not for Jan Sobieski then Poland may have been taken by Turks

Of course The Battle of Vienna
& Battle of Párkány
Where Poles helped others

But also against Tatars in Battle of Podhajce (1667)
Which was also big. If not for that Poland may have been taken by Tatars.

Islam is anti Polish. They are Anti Pork & Anti Alcohol.
They can't take our Kielbasa & Vodka away from us.

Yes, It is true that Austria repaid Poland with horror.
But, If Austria was taken down then Poland was next.

Yes, Well Muslims started with Europe first.
The Crusades were first called by the Byzantine as a response to Muslims invading the Byzantine.

Of course Western Europeans focused more on looting & pillaging the area of Palestine rather than saving the Byzantine.

I don't see much of a difference between Western Europeans & Arab types.

To me Western Europeans are just depigmented Arabs. Exept maybe Scandanavians.
Palivec - | 380
15 Jun 2011 #93
He saved the Austrians from them and look how they repaid Poland in spades.

Austria paid 500.000 Reichsthaler to Poland. This wasn't enough?
And he saved the Austrians? He provided the smaller force in a coalition army raised by the pope, where the king of Poland was the commander since he was the highest ranking participant.
Des Essientes 7 | 1,291
15 Jun 2011 #94
Austria paid 500.000 Reichsthaler to Poland. This wasn't enough?

The Austrians could've kept their thalers and not participated in the partitions of Poland and that would have been much better. Poland's saving Austria only to have Austria rend Poland apart a few decades later will forever be an example of the most despicable ingratitude.
Palivec - | 380
15 Jun 2011 #95
Ingratitude? Poland and Austria signed a treaty. Poland provided military support, Austria paid for it. They were even. It's as simple as that... at least outside of Poland. And Poland didn't save Austria, since the Polish military contingent was the smaller one in a coalition army.
PolskiMoc 4 | 324
15 Jun 2011 #96
It was Jan Sobieski's charge of Polish Winged Hussars which won the Battle of Vienna.
Palivec - | 380
15 Jun 2011 #97
You mean in a battle against 100.000 Turks 20.000 Poles won the battle?
But yes, in Vienna you can find a monument to the Ukrainian cossacks, even in Cyrillic, to remember the "Polish" troops. :D
Des Essientes 7 | 1,291
15 Jun 2011 #98
It was Jan Sobieski's charge of Polish Winged Hussars which won the Battle of Vienna.

This is the truth despite the fact that Poles were a minority among the troop count of the anti-Turkish forces. The Polish Hussars were the warriors that the Turks and Tartars feared and fled from, not the masses of Germans which were killed by the Sultan's forces in great numbers and not at all respected nor feared.
Palivec - | 380
15 Jun 2011 #99
I love it when history becomes a fairy tale full of dragons, knights in shiny armour and evil villains. :D
Sokrates 8 | 3,346
15 Jun 2011 #100
He's correct though, its only the presence of polish forces that won the day.

The German forces fought without effect for hours, the Poles took about 45 minutes to break the back of the army, Poles not only did most of the fighting but all of the winning.

You mean in a battle against 100.000 Turks 20.000 Poles won the battle?

No, against Turks approximately 8000 Poles won the battle since thats how much heavy cavalry was there, in the space of under half an hour in 3 charges they killed and wounded over 15.000 men, scattered the turkish centre, killed almost all HQ officers, destroyed the camp and artillery.

Germans at the time were busy fighting small detachments of Sipahi and completely unable to do anything but cling on for dear life.
Des Essientes 7 | 1,291
15 Jun 2011 #101
I love it when history becomes a fairy tale full of dragons, knights in shiny armour and evil villains. :D

Read the history books there were no dragons, nor were there evil villians at the Battle of Vienna, but there was Sobieski and his winged hussars which the Tartars and Turks knew, and feared, and fled from.
Sokrates 8 | 3,346
15 Jun 2011 #102
Tartars and Turks knew, and feared, and fled from.

Thats not really true, the Turkish army at the time was among the best and outside Poland no one could shoulder it, before the general flight of the turkish army the polish charges were met by turkish cavalry repeatedly, only when the Turks ran out of cavalry and got their front infantry lines broken did they flee.

Ingratitude? Poland and Austria signed a treaty. Poland provided military support, Austria paid for it. They were even. It's as simple as that... at least outside of Poland. And Poland didn't save Austria, since the Polish military contingent was the smaller one in a coalition army.

No they were not even an no the treaty did not oblige Poland to go in full force, Poland could for example send a 1000 infantry and thats it, the point is Poland saved the existence of Austria and Austria took part in destruction of Poland less than a hundred years later.
Palivec - | 380
15 Jun 2011 #103
No they were not even an no the treaty did not oblige Poland to go in full force, Poland could for example send a 1000 infantry and thats it, the point is Poland saved the existence of Austria and Austria took part in destruction of Poland less than a hundred years later.

The treaty defined that Poland and the HRE should support each other with 60.000 (HRE) and 40.000 (Poland) troups in case the Turks would attack Krakow or Vienna. Both parties couldn't provide enough troops since the time was too short, and the HRE fought against France, which attacked the HRE at the same time.

The treaty moreover defined that Austria had to pay 500.000 Reichthaler to Poland and take over all Polish debts from the war against Sweden... and that was 6 month before the battle of Vienna.

Read the history books there were no dragons, nor were there evil villians at the Battle of Vienna, but there was Sobieski and his winged hussars which the Tartars and Turks knew, and feared, and fled from.

They fled after the combined cavalry attacked the Turks.

No, against Turks approximately 8000 Poles won the battle since thats how much heavy cavalry was there, in the space of under half an hour in 3 charges they killed and wounded over 15.000 men, scattered the turkish centre, killed almost all HQ officers, destroyed the camp and artillery.

Oh, did they count the Turks killed by Poles separately? You know, since the combined cavalry attacked the Turks and not the Poles alone. And the HRE provided 20.000 troops of cavalry.

The German forces fought without effect for hours, the Poles took about 45 minutes to break the back of the army, Poles not only did most of the fighting but all of the winning.

The German troops you mention were mostly light infantry, the heavy cavalry of 20.000 troops you mentioned comprised of both Polish and troops of the HRE, and the Turks collapsed after both flanks attacked.
Sokrates 8 | 3,346
15 Jun 2011 #104
The treaty moreover defined that Austria had to pay 500.000 Reichthaler to Poland and take over all Polish debts from the war against Sweden...

See? Not only are you an ignorant but also a liar, there was nothing about the debts, the sum or the amount of forces involved, the exact wording was "all available forces" which is focking vague.

Oh, did they count the Turks killed by Poles separately? You know, since the combined cavalry attacked the Turks and not the Poles alone.

The charge was not combined, the only place where it was combined is wikipedia, Germans got stuck on countercharging Sipahi units that numebered some 6000 men, Poles broke through and did all the fighting.

So yeah its safe to assume that out of these 15.000 casualities more than 90% were caused by Poles, its a historical fact that the success was achieved by polish cavalry while german elements were completely ineffective, especially infantry which not only failed to dent the turkish units but suffered appalling losses itself.

The German troops you mention were mostly light infantry, the heavy cavalry of 20.000 troops you mentioned comprised of both Polish and troops of the HRE, and the Turks collapsed after both flanks attacked.

I'd be worried about your dislike of Poland if not for the fact that you're an ignorant dumbass, 20.000 charging troops consisted of 8000 heavy cavalry and 7000 light cav such as Woloskie banners for a grand total of 15.000 Poles and 5000 German and Austrian Cuirrassiers and Reitars who got bogged down for the remainder of the battle.

The German troops as such consisted of pikemen, musketeers and a few companies of roundshielders, they got a bloody nose from the Turks and did not participate in the main charge nor in the pursuit.

So yes the battle was fought and won by Poles, they could probably do it without the german support since in reality it was nil and even after Poles broke into the camp the german reiters could not disingage the Sipahi, it took the support of petyhorskie banners (again Poles) to salvage that situation as well.

So back to square one, yes Poles won under Vienna, no it could not be done without them, yes they could win if they were there alone since they did most of the fighting anyway.
Bratwurst Boy 6 | 10,527
15 Jun 2011 #105
I love it when history becomes a fairy tale full of dragons, knights in shiny armour and evil villains. :D

Polish history is full of it! :)

It's similiar to the bragging about the Battle of Britain...yes Poland played an important part innit but they wouldn't had stand a chance if there weren't the Brits , and the Brits wouldn't had stand a chance if they weren't supported by a huge plethora of Allies.

They could only win together.

The same with the Battle of Vienna, it was a war mainly between the Habsburgs and the Ottomans. Without the alliance with the Germans and others and not to forget the long, brave resistance of the Viennese people, holding out in the brutal siege, where would the proud polish troops be.

Bear that in mind!
Sokrates 8 | 3,346
15 Jun 2011 #106
It's similiar to the bragging about the Battle of Britain...yes Poland played an important part innit but they wouldn't had stand a chance if there weren't the Brits

Oh please not German chauvinism again, Battle of Britain is different from Battle of Vienna in that in BoB Poles caused something like 13% of casualities whine under Vienna it was more than 90% small difference no?

The same with the Battle of Vienna, it was a war mainly between the Habsburgs and the Ottomans.

No its not, the Habsburgs were beaten, their capital besieged more than half their army destroyed.

Without the alliance with the Germans and others and not to forget the long, brave resistance of the Viennese people, holding out in the brutal siege, where would the proud polish troops be.

Bear that in mind!

Well? They'd still be under Vienna, still charging downhill and winning? You did make the case in point that Vienna held out for a long time but my point is that on the fields before it there were Poles and Turks and Germans were just a sideshow.

The brutal truth of the time was that outside of Poland no one really knew how to fight Turks, they had a string of victories and a powerfull army with an exotic and effective way of doing things, the only equally effective force in Europe were the Poles and it showed on the fields before Vienna.

If it makes you feel better both Poland and Turkey would be overshadowed in the next 30 years but at Vienna its Poles vs Turks and everyone else is cannon fodder.
isthatu2 4 | 2,704
15 Jun 2011 #107
I love it when history becomes a fairy tale full of dragons, knights in shiny armour and evil villains. :D

mate, id just give them this one....a small force of mounted troops in the right place at the right time can topple empires........but I dont want to get all "classics" on you,Im sure Dessi can fill you in there :)
legend 3 | 664
15 Jun 2011 #108
He provided the smaller force in a coalition army raised by the pope, where the king of Poland was the commander since he was the highest ranking participant.

Having a stronger smaller force was often better than a larger weaker force. Consider that.

Seems to be yet more proof that you aren't Polish.

Seriously your getting kind of picky and repetitive. You know very well what he meant in the sentence.
Forums arent the best place to attack someones spelling/grammar (many people type differently than in an essay). This is an international English language speaking forum about Poland everyone is entitled to their opinion regardless of how Polish they are!

You mean in a battle against 100.000 Turks 20.000 Poles won the battle?

Hey smart guy... In early times it was quite common for the smaller army to beat a larger army.
Bratwurst Boy 6 | 10,527
15 Jun 2011 #109
Would not have been a battle in Britain if there were no brits dumbass.

That's what I meant, you idiot!
Without the allies and the brave citizens of Vienna there would be no battle. Acknowledging that you couldn't do it alone doesn't diminish your achievements, dumbass.

No its not, the Habsburgs were beaten, their capital besieged more than half their army destroyed.

This victory marked the beginning of the Habsburg hegemony in central Europe and the fall of the Ottoman Empire.

You don't get to rule till down to the Balkans in the wake of this battle if you are destroyed...
isthatu2 4 | 2,704
15 Jun 2011 #110
That's what I meant, you idiot!

Nah,face it BB, he got you there :)
I was tempted to bring up cassino......you know, a tiny force of falshies holed up for months against the might of the combined 5th and 8th armies,bombed to buggery by day and night air raids and assualted on dozens of occasions by men from so many countries it would make your nose bleed trying to remember them all.......but hey ho, again, twas the Poles who won that battle......

But,on a day long battle,yes, one small contingent of troopers can turn the tide and effectively "carry the day".
Bratwurst Boy 6 | 10,527
15 Jun 2011 #111
The brutal truth of the time was that outside of Poland no one really knew how to fight Turks, they had a string of victories and a powerfull army with an exotic and effective way of doing things, the only equally effective force in Europe were the Poles

Really!

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish-Ottoman_War_(1620%E2%80%931621)

The Polish-Ottoman War (1620-21) or First Polish-Ottoman War was a conflict between the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and the Ottoman Empire over the control of Moldavia.
It ended with the Commonwealth withdrawing its claims on Moldavia.[1]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish%E2%80%93Ottoman_War_(1672%E2%80%9376)

Polish-Ottoman War (1672-76) or Second Polish-Ottoman War was a war between the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and the Ottoman Empire, as part of the Great Turkish War.

It ended in 1676 with the Treaty of Żurawno and the Commonwealth ceding control of most of its Ukraine territories to the Empire.

When Poles fighted the Ottomans alone they weren't as successful....allies were needed!
There is no shame in admitting that! Germans and Austrians needed allies too....

Nah,face it BB, he got you there :)

How so?
Where would the Poles had been without the allies...where would GB be without the allies?
The US and Russia saved both your bacons...not to mention the other plethora of useful (and less usefull) allies.

Would had anyone of you alone a chance of beating Germany? Really???

So where did he "got" me?
Sokrates 8 | 3,346
15 Jun 2011 #112
You don't get to rule till down to the Balkans in the wake of this battle if you are destroyed...

Yes you do, Austria had one main hub and it was Vienna, no Vienna meant literally no Austria.

When Poles fighted the Ottomans alone they weren't as successful....allies were needed!

Given that Poles were the only country to stop the Ottomans alone yes they were succesfull, see Battle of Khotyn.
Nathan 18 | 1,363
24 Jun 2011 #113
Given that Poles were the only country to stop the Ottomans alone yes they were succesfull, see Battle of Khotyn

The Polish-Ukrainian-Lithuanian army numbered 30,000 (18,000 cavalry, 12,000 infantry) and further 25,000–30,000 Ukrainian Cossack army, led by hetman Petro Konashevych-Sahaidachny (mostly infantry).

So have of the allied army were Ukrainian Cossacks.

The army, following a common Commonwealth defense when facing large Ottoman armies, employed deep defences by building separate field works in front of the camp's defences. These field works were designed to allow the use of cavalry counter attacks, especially crucial for the Commonwealth relying on its elite Polish Hussars and Ukrainian Cossacks

Khotyn
Sokrates 8 | 3,346
24 Jun 2011 #114
Nathan only according to wikipedia:)
Nathan 18 | 1,363
24 Jun 2011 #115
I found my favorite Polish site "Kresy" ;) and there was an article in regards to Khotyn battle of 1621:

W 1621r. w obliczu groźby zagrożenia wojennego ze strony Turcji zawarła sojusz z Kozakami, chcąc pozyskać wśród nich około 20 tys. żołnierzy. Konaszewicz uzyskał nadany przez Zygmunta III tytuł hetmana i przyprowadził do obozu wojsk koronnych pod Chocim 40 tys. Kozaków.

Quick translation: Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth made an alliance with the Cossacks in the face of the danger from the Ottoman empire...Ukrainian Cossacks - 40,000, Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth - 25-26,000.

Główną rolę w obronie Chocimia odegrała piechota polsko- litewska , wsparta w taborze przez piechotę zaporoską. Na barki Kozaków spadł też główny ciężar walki. Odparli oni pięć z dziesięciu szturmów tureckich. Dokonali też wielu nocnych wycieczek, zadając Turkom ciężkie straty.

Translation:
The major role in the defense of Khotyn was played by Polish-Lithuanian infantry, supported by the Zaporizhian infantry in the camp. The Cossacks also faced the major heat of the battle. They repulsed 5 out of 10 Turkish attacks. They also made multiple night raids which ended with heavy Turkish losses. When the disease made it difficult for Chodkiewicz (Polish commander) to continue and he was thinking to leave the battlefield, Konashevych-Sahajdachnyj (Ukrainian commander) strongly demanded him to hold the positions. On his intervention only the line of defence was reduced. When Chodkiewicz died the Cossacks made another raid to show the Turks that the death of the leading commander is not going to undermine the spirit of the army.

W czasie pertraktacji pokojowych z Turkami posłowie polscy nie zgodzili się na porzucenie Kozaków i uzyskanie za ich głowy korzystniejszych warunków pokoju. Określili oni Kozaków jako "towarzyszy naszych". Szczegóły zawartego układu pokojowego nie były jednak dla Kozaków korzystne.

Tr.:In the course of the peace-talk conduction with the Turks, the Polish delegates refused to abandon the Cossacks and gain for their heads better conditions of the peace negotiations. The delegates described the Cossacks as "our friends". The details of the signed treaty were not favourable for the Cossacks though. The Commonwealth forced the Cossacks to withold from making maritime raids against Turkey as well as Crimean Tatars against raids on Kresy (mostly western Ukraine and Belorus). Disappointed the Cossacks left the camp, not waiting for the gratitude and celebration of the victory. It was the last allied battle of Polish and Cossack forces of this scale. It gave the Cossacks with no doubt the feeling of power and own capabilities. In their proposals directed to Zygmunt III it was clearly seen that they will be striving to establish own state. They also demanded the equal rights to the Orthodox faith, agreement on living in the szlachta and royal wlosciach (quarters?) without the necessity of the vassal obligations. They also demanded to be allowed to be recruited as mercenaries by other monarchs. And at last the withdrawal of the Crown army from the Kyiv wojewodstwo (administrative region surrounding Ukraine's present capital of Kyiv). Their proposals were not accepted, which ended badly for Polish-Ukrainian brotherhood of weapon.

kresy.pl/kresopedia,historia,rzeczpospolita?zobacz/bitwa-pod-chocimiem-1621

I know that this is one of your so-called "baits" to write a two-word nonsense and wait for my great effort in translating articles written in your own language. But I am not trying to persuade you. You are a history student, not me. Instead of wasting time on stupid games you might as well put in, maybe, some interesting thoughts which don't involve words like "monkeys", "serfs" and "we alone did everything".

To say that battle of Khotyn 1621 was Polish victory where

Given that Poles were the only country to stop the Ottomans alone

is simply to be one of the many "historians" out there. It is so difficult, though, to find sober and honest ones.
On the other hand, I found out about another Khotyn battle in 1673 where nevertheless the forces participated were Polish-Lithuanianarmy against the Ottoman empire.
Sokrates 8 | 3,346
26 Jun 2011 #116
Lol Nathan i could figure you'd post a wiki like site, this site is run by a couple of 17yr olds, there were about 10.000 Cossack troops at Chocim, half of these were polish armoured Cossacks, as in Poles:)))))
massachusetts
2 Jul 2011 #117
The greatest king of Poland? Hmm... Polish school books teach about all of them with such great sympathy. They made me love them all. You sometimes might think it is some fricking fairy tale not history.


Home / History / The Greatest King of Poland?
BoldItalic [quote]
 
To post as Guest, enter a temporary username or login and post as a member.