The BEST Guide to POLAND
Unanswered [5]  |  Archives [1] 
 
Witamy, Guest  |  Members
Home / History43

Interactive map of Poland 960-2004


Gregrog Activity: 4 / 100
Joined: 2 Feb 2009 ♂
 
22 Aug 2012  #1

polmap.republika.pl/mapy/polska2010.htm

Use red arrows at the bottom of the map.
Description in Polish.

Harry Activity: 65 / 13,518
Joined: 2 May 2007 ♂
 
22 Aug 2012  #2

Interesting to see it leaves out the territory Poland seized when joining the Nazis in their invasion of Czechoslovakia. And still shows Poland as holding territory in Czechoslovakia which was lost before the Polish-Soviet war even started. Wonder what other 'mistakes' are there.
Grzegorz_ Activity: 52 / 6,270
Joined: 16 Nov 2006 ♂
 
22 Aug 2012  #3

Interesting. Could tell us more about the agreement Poland made with "nazis" ?
4 eigner Activity: 2 / 901
Joined: 15 Aug 2011 ♂
 
22 Aug 2012  #4

Wonder what other 'mistakes' are there.

yep, this map isn't very accurate.
jon357 Activity: 53 / 10,847
Joined: 15 Mar 2012 ♂
 
22 Aug 2012  #5

It doesn't surprise me they lied about the opportunistic land grab in Teschen. I suspect that omission is one of several.
Ziutek Activity: 7 / 97
Joined: 23 Feb 2012 ♂
 
22 Aug 2012  #6

nteresting to see it leaves out the territory Poland seized when joining the Nazis in their invasion of Czechoslovakia.

The caption titled "1939 III" has

"Przyłączenie Zaolzia i Jaworzyny do Polski"

"Addition of Zaolzie and Jaworzyna to Poland"

Is that what you mean?
jon357 Activity: 53 / 10,847
Joined: 15 Mar 2012 ♂
 
22 Aug 2012  #7

'Przylaczenie'!

That's certainly one way of putting it!
Ziutek Activity: 7 / 97
Joined: 23 Feb 2012 ♂
 
22 Aug 2012  #8

But it's not "lying about the opportunistic land grab in Teschen", is it?
xzqbq7 Activity: 2 / 104
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 ♂
 
23 Aug 2012  #9

Nice, as they say the rear view is always 20/20.

Now, would you please post your desired maps for 2020, 2030, 2050?
OP Gregrog Activity: 4 / 100
Joined: 2 Feb 2009 ♂
 
23 Aug 2012  #10

I'm perfectly happy with present borders:) Maybe the Kaliningrad Oblast isn't very desired, but I don't mind.
4 eigner Activity: 2 / 901
Joined: 15 Aug 2011 ♂
 
23 Aug 2012  #11

I'm perfectly happy with present borders:)

I believe, you guys would be better of with previous borders from 1939.
OP Gregrog Activity: 4 / 100
Joined: 2 Feb 2009 ♂
 
23 Aug 2012  #12

With state of almost civil war with Ukrainians and other minorities? It's far better to peacefully moan on my Polish neighbour ;)
4 eigner Activity: 2 / 901
Joined: 15 Aug 2011 ♂
 
23 Aug 2012  #13

if you put it that way, none of your neighbors can be really happy with your borders but it is what it is, be happy to live in peace.
delphiandomine Activity: 56 / 14,791
Joined: 25 Nov 2008 ♂
 
23 Aug 2012  #14

I believe, you guys would be better of with previous borders from 1939.

What, stuck to the East, with shockingly bad infrastructure in the former Russian (and to a certain extent, Austrian) areas?

Now, would you please post your desired maps for 2020, 2030, 2050?

Same as it is now. Borders are largely irrelevant in today's Europe anyway.
4 eigner Activity: 2 / 901
Joined: 15 Aug 2011 ♂
 
23 Aug 2012  #15

What, stuck to the East, with shockingly bad infrastructure in the former Russian (and to a certain extent, Austrian) areas?

Yeah, from a "business' point of view you're certainly right but historically, it was much longer in Polish hands than its western parts.

What you said is like choosing a stranger over your family member.
delphiandomine Activity: 56 / 14,791
Joined: 25 Nov 2008 ♂
 
23 Aug 2012  #16

It might have been much longer in Polish hands, but the East was already a significant burden in the II RP - even if WW2 didn't happen, it's likely that it would still be a very poor and undeveloped region. Don't forget that the "Recovered Territories" were Polonised quickly and effectively - whereas Poles were very much minorities in some areas and not even a significant majority in the cities.

Let's also not forget that with the border going West, Poland is much more "central" than it was then.

And at least from a military point of view, the current borders are much easier to deal with.
4 eigner Activity: 2 / 901
Joined: 15 Aug 2011 ♂
 
23 Aug 2012  #17

Don't forget that the "Recovered Territories" were Polonised quickly and effectively

What do you call "recovered territories"?
Palivec Activity: - / 384
Joined: 22 Apr 2011 ♂
 
23 Aug 2012  #18

"Recovered territories" is a propaganda term of the Polish Commies to describe the former German territories, which belonged to Poland for some time in the Middle Ages.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recovered_territories
sofijufka Activity: 2 / 191
Joined: 13 Mar 2012 ♀
 
23 Aug 2012  #19

it's likely that it would still be a very poor and undeveloped region.

I dont't think so - remember the Eugeniusz Kwiatkowski's plans of COP [including Lvov]
jon357 Activity: 53 / 10,847
Joined: 15 Mar 2012 ♂
 
23 Aug 2012  #20

But it's not "lying about the opportunistic land grab in Teschen", is it?

Yes, it is.It was a military invasion. By the way, the English translation is 'annexation' rather than addition, a word which leaves plenty unsaid.
Ziutek Activity: 7 / 97
Joined: 23 Feb 2012 ♂
 
23 Aug 2012  #21

Are you saying I should have used "annexation" or that the map maker should have used "aneksja"?
Grzegorz_ Activity: 52 / 6,270
Joined: 16 Nov 2006 ♂
 
23 Aug 2012  #22

Yes, it is.It was a military invasion.

So how many bullets did they fire ?
Harry Activity: 65 / 13,518
Joined: 2 May 2007 ♂
 
23 Aug 2012  #23

The caption titled "1939 III" has

"Przyłączenie Zaolzia i Jaworzyny do Polski"

"Addition of Zaolzie and Jaworzyna to Poland"

Is that what you mean?

a) It wasn't in March 1939, it was October 1938.
b) The map does not show that land grab.

Could tell us more about the agreement Poland made with "nazis" ?

Could you tell me where I said anything about an agreement Poland made with "nazis" ? No? Oh, so when you said "more", you were actually lying: how surprising.

It was a military invasion.

As shown below:

Polish army invading Czechoslovakia
Grzegorz_ Activity: 52 / 6,270
Joined: 16 Nov 2006 ♂
 
23 Aug 2012  #24

Ok, so Poland didn't make any agreement with nazis...

Now please tell us how many Czechs were killed during this military invasion.
Ziutek Activity: 7 / 97
Joined: 23 Feb 2012 ♂
 
23 Aug 2012  #25

Harry

a) It wasn't in March 1939, it was October 1938.
b) The map does not show that land grab.

a) 1939 III is only the title of the caption and presumably represents the state of affairs, not the actual events,
in (March?) 1939. The caption itself reads

"1938 Aneksja Austrii i Sudetów przez Niemcy. Przyłączenie Zaolzia i Jaworzyny do Polski"

b) If you flick between that and the previous map, there is a definite enlargement of Polish territory
where I understand Zaolzie to be. If it's not that, what is it?
Harry Activity: 65 / 13,518
Joined: 2 May 2007 ♂
 
23 Aug 2012  #26

Now please tell us how many Czechs were killed during this military invasion.

Polish forces killed exactly the same number of Czechs as the Nazis killed during the same invasion.

Perhaps you can tell us how many Czechs were killed by Polish soldiers when Poland joined the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia?
jon357 Activity: 53 / 10,847
Joined: 15 Mar 2012 ♂
 
23 Aug 2012  #27

Are you saying I should have used "annexation" or that the map maker should have used "aneksja"?

Either one or the other - however annexation is a better word than addition. Invasion would be better yet.

So how many bullets did they fire ?

See the picture in post #23.
delphiandomine Activity: 56 / 14,791
Joined: 25 Nov 2008 ♂
 
23 Aug 2012  #28

Invasion would be better yet.

No, annexation is fine. Invasion tends to suggest that a war was fought - annexation is more "right, that's mine".

You'd never say that Poland was invaded during the partitions - it was a simple annexation.
OP Gregrog Activity: 4 / 100
Joined: 2 Feb 2009 ♂
 
23 Aug 2012  #29

Zaolzie terrain:
caption IX 1918, XII 1918 in Polish hands
since caption II 1918 in Czech's till caption III 1939.
Grzegorz_ Activity: 52 / 6,270
Joined: 16 Nov 2006 ♂
 
24 Aug 2012  #30

Perhaps you can tell us how many Czechs were killed by Polish soldiers when Poland joined the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia?

Well, It is totally irrelevant and off-topic, typical Polonophobic garbage but If you need this knowledge so much... according to my knowledge 6 or 8.

See the picture in post #23.

Yes, I see. What does it have to do with shooting at anyone ?




Home / History /
Interactive map of Poland 960-2004
Bold Italic [quote]
Click this icon to move up back to the quoted message. Polish letters:
 
To post as guest, enter a temporary and unique username or login and post as a member.