The BEST Guide to POLAND
Unanswered [9]  |  Archives [1] 
 
Witamy, Guest
Home / History   893 posts

WWII - who really was the first to help Poland?


Crnogorac3 1 | 306    
12 Jan 2018  #631

youtu.be/4d8Lw8MEjsU

Interesting observation by dr. William Pierce about the WWII situation in Poland.

If Britain and France had a defense pact with Poland and were its true allies then how come when Poland was invaded from two sides, they only declared war against Nazi Germany but didn't fire a single shot at the direction of the Soviet Union which occupied the eastern half of Poland?

kaprys 1 | 1,427    
12 Jan 2018  #632

@TheOther
I know it was complicated. And there were different types of the Volksliste.
TheOther 5 | 3,507    
12 Jan 2018  #633

they only declared war against Nazi Germany but didn't fire a single shot at the direction of the Soviet Union

That simply tells you that the war wasn't really about Poland, but about Germany. Just like in WW1, both Brits and French tried to prevent a powerful competitor from controlling Europe.
kaprys 1 | 1,427    
12 Jan 2018  #634

In what way was it about Germany? About the Lebensraum or the Lebensborn. About believing in being superior and regaining national sejf esteem?
To be honest, I'm far more concerned with the victims of the war, rather than the reasons ...

edit: oh, did you mean the French/British declaration of war?
Crnogorac3 1 | 306    
12 Jan 2018  #635

Britain and France had an obligation under the defensive treaty in case someone attacks Poland to step in. If Nazis and Soviets both invaded Poland at the same time, then how come supposedly Polish allies Britain and France didn't declare war on the Soviet Union as well, why only declare war on Germany? This is the mistery.

This is what I tried to explain to dolnoslask, that so-called Polish allies gave false assurances to Poland.
Dougpol1 25 | 1,785    
12 Jan 2018  #636

I have no fam in Katowice

Make up your mind Dirk. Ziemowits' index notes will tell that your family owned hotels and supplied meat to the commies, all in Katowice, which of course still doesn't explain your unsubstantiated theory that the Nazis were quite pally and all ship-shape, and so less feared than the Soviets.
TheOther 5 | 3,507    
12 Jan 2018  #637

oh, did you mean the French/British declaration of war?

Yes.

In what way was it about Germany?

Politics. The French and Brits were always opposed to a central power in Europe, especially after that nation turned into a worldwide competitor both economically and militarily. When the Germans attacked Poland their opponents saw that as the final push to reestablish the old pre-WW1 power structure, so they had to react. I believe the war was initially about preventing the Third Reich from becoming a global competitor again, and not so much about the liberation of Poland. That's why they didn't declare war on the USSR.
Dougpol1 25 | 1,785    
12 Jan 2018  #638

so-called Polish allies gave false assurances to Poland.

Lol - that's rich. And the more fool us for being your allies in 1914. We all know how that turned out.

I believe the war was initially about preventing the Third Reich from becoming a global competitor again

What is it about people on this board tonight - is it the cold weather affecting the brain cells? The Nazis were evil and had to be stopped, and Britain stood alone against them for quite some time.

Never, ever, forget that. You should be ashamed TheOther.
dolnoslask 5 | 1,834    
12 Jan 2018  #639

Britain stood alone against them for quite some time.

Very true.
Dirk diggler 7 | 3,085    
12 Jan 2018  #640

Ziemowits' index notes will tell that your family owned hotels and supplied meat to the commies, all in Katowice

That's extremely pathetic that people have to keep 'index cards' about individuals they've never met from an online forum. Here's a new index card for you to make - write in big bold letters GET A LIFE! Don't you have friends, a wife, or anyone else in the real world you guys can devote energy too instead of seeing if a stranger you've never met stories line up? And you're just as pathetic for referencing such...

But fyi if you're going to play detective, at least get the facts straight. Yes, an uncle owns a towering hotel in a mid sized town near Katowice but not in that city itself. The meat business supplied meat to anyone willing to pay/barter for it and it was in Wroclaw - some of those may or may not have included commies. Idk...

Britain stood alone against them for quite some time.

Hitler didn't even want to attack Britain as he saw the Brits as Aryans. France rolled over completely - the entire country of France despite all their equipment held out for less time than just the Warsaw Uprising alone. Pathetic bunch of pansies. Polish airmen helped Britain win numerous battles against the Luftwaffe.
TheOther 5 | 3,507    
12 Jan 2018  #641

The Nazis were evil

No doubt.

Britain stood alone against them for quite some time.

Yeah, especially in Munich...

<sarcasm>
Never, ever, forget that. You should be ashamed, Dougpol1.
</sarcasm>
Dougpol1 25 | 1,785    
12 Jan 2018  #642

Polish airmen helped Britain win numerous battles against the Luftwaffe.

Yes we know that Dirk, but thanks for pointing it out, again. But TheOther seems to think that the Second World Was was all about the world economy. At the very least,that doesn't say much about the standard of education in Australian High schools.
Dougpol1 25 | 1,785    
12 Jan 2018  #643

...supplied meat to anyone willing to pay/barter for it and it was in Wroclaw - some of those may or may not have included commies

Your alter ego boasted about it, that was all. So those Russians can't have been all bad in that case, seeing as your family helped to perpetuate the system that they forced upon Poland?
Dirk diggler 7 | 3,085    
12 Jan 2018  #644

So would any person that worked in PRL regardless of their position.... you have to work to survive even if you disagree with the government's policies. Otherwise,

that same exact argument could be made against you since you are helping perpetuate the current system that PiS has installed in Poland by working, living in the country, and pay taxes. Every milk bar, waiter, grocery store, kiosk, etc. did the exact same thing as we did - provide food, work and paid taxes. And no, I don't have much of a problem with Russians. I find that Russians and Poles actually have a lot in common seeing as we're both traditional, Christian Slavs that reject the multiculturalism, hordes of migrants from ME/Africa, have a populist government, have made gay marriage illegal, etc.
TheOther 5 | 3,507    
12 Jan 2018  #645

But TheOther seems to think that the Second World Was was all about the world economy.

To further improve your superior British school education:

Sir William Seeds, British ambassador to Moscow, wrote in a secret telegram on 18 September 1939: "I do not myself see what advantage war with the Soviet Union would be to us..." and that "our war aims are not incompatible with reasonable settlement [in Poland] on ethnographic and cultural lines." Behind the scenes, the British felt there was a clear balance to be struck between 'morality' and traditional, old-fashioned, national self interest.

historyextra.com/qa/why-did-britain-and-france-not-declare-war-soviet-union-when-red-army-marched-poland-september-19
Dirk diggler 7 | 3,085    
12 Jan 2018  #646

Well, Churchill wanted to liberate Poland (operation unthinkable I believe it was called) but of course it was cancelled. The West didn't do sh1t for Poland - hence the Western Betrayal. France and England did NOTHING when Poland was invaded. Absolutely no material support...

If Russia or another country invaded again it's highly likely that the pansies would again do nothing. That is why Poland must be strong on its own and rely first and foremost on themselves.
kaprys 1 | 1,427    
12 Jan 2018  #647

@Crnogorac3
It was called the Phoney War ...
I don't know how politically correct it is .. but my History teacher said they probably didn't think the war would spread all over Europe ... and the world.

Why didn't they declare war on the USSR? I really don't know. Perhaps they already knew they were not going to take any action. After all, it was two weeks after they declared war on Germany ... and didn't do much.
TheOther 5 | 3,507    
12 Jan 2018  #648

The West didn't do sh1t for Poland

The problem is that there are actually two different versions of history out there: the Anglo-American one, and the continental European one. If you ask an American or a Brit, they will always proudly tell you how they "liberated" Europe. No mention of the millions of Russian soldiers who lost their lives, no mention of the allied bombing of French and Italian cities, no mention that they sold out to Stalin in Yalta. You'll have to ask a mainland European to get the other side of the story.
Dougpol1 25 | 1,785    
12 Jan 2018  #649

Sir William Seeds, British ambassador to Moscow,

He was most likely cuckoo. Wikipedia states this was his last post. I am impressed of course by your diligence; however we were talking about the Third Reich, not the Soviet Union, and you said that Britain and France didn't want Germany to be a world power again as they were as Imperial Germany under the Kaiser.

The war wasn't about that, whatever some old buffer said at the time, though was it?
dolnoslask 5 | 1,834    
12 Jan 2018  #650

I do not myself see what advantage war with the Soviet Union

notwithstanding the fact that if Britain (Alone at that time) declared war on Russia it would be fighting the war on two fronts, its crucial naval safe haven of Scapa Flow would be open to Russian attack, the British fleet would have been destroyed by Russian/German cooperation leaving it with no chance of fighting off invasion.

Hitler opened a front with Russia look at what happened.

Sorry Britain was bled dry (ldepletion of gold reserves) during the war, it was in no position to make any threats or decisions in the support Poland, It was struggling to barely take care of its own people.
Crow 145 | 6,919    
12 Jan 2018  #651

Britain stood alone against them for quite some time.

Quite some time. Please. Don`t you have at least little bit of shame???

Death Toll of World War II
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties

United States > 419,400
Britain > 450,900
Yugoslavia > 1,700,000
Poland > 6,000,000
Soviet Union > 27,000,000

Not to mention all Anglo colaborational business with Nazis that was ongoing during WWII
Dougpol1 25 | 1,785    
12 Jan 2018  #652

The West didn't do sh1t for Poland

And next time she might well leave Poland to rot. Better get some class and admit that we came good on our pledges.
The facts as laid down by historians are simply these Dirk. Britain was ill prepared after years of appeasement. When we were able to prosecute the war, we did. If we had had Lancaster bombers in 1939 we would have used them. We had no standing army of any size on the continent. Why would we need it? France had the largest field army in the world, at 600,000 troops (defensively deployed, tis true).

We declared war on Germany, knowing from generational memory the Europe wide devastation and sacrifice that would follow. Why don't Poles bleat against the Swedes, who were the real cowards here? If I was British prime minister, I would demand long due for gratitude for the fact. If we hadn't declared war, it might have been better, as America would have had to come in from the off.

In the meantime far more Poles would have died. But true to form, let not any Pole be ever grateful for anything at all.
TheOther 5 | 3,507    
12 Jan 2018  #653

He was most likely cuckoo. ... The war wasn't about that, whatever some old buffer said at the time

That was the official position of Britain at that time. The "old buffer" didn't come up with that telegram all by himself. Nice try, though.

Look, I'm not saying that the British intentions weren't noble or what, but you simply can't deny the fact that there were many other factors involved (amongst them a lot of self interest) that led to the British declaration of war. If you disagree - explain Munich, explain why they had a secret protocol attached to the defense pact that said Britain will only come to the aid of Poland in case of a German aggression (but not a Soviet one).

From the same source as above:
"An answer given in the House of Commons in October 1939 revealed only that the Poles had "understood" that "the agreement should only cover the case of aggression by Germany."
Dougpol1 25 | 1,785    
12 Jan 2018  #654

they sold out to Stalin in Yalta.

2-1 is a majority. What was Churchill supposed to do? Challenge a dying man and a professional to a drinking contest?
Dougpol1 25 | 1,785    
12 Jan 2018  #655

Source please?

That was the official position of Britain at that time. The "old buffer" didn't come up with that telegram all by himself

Source please? Ambassadors certainly can come up with their own agenda, or rather the Foreign Office does. The Foreign Office has throughout history often gone AWOL from what the government of the day actually intends. And anyhow, Dirk is suggesting that Britain was dragging it's feet. As soon as Chamberlain resigned, we cracked on as best we could, and as Dirk paradoxically states, thank God the Poles were there to bolster the defences.
Dougpol1 25 | 1,785    
12 Jan 2018  #656

Anyhow TheOther, you can't squirm away from the post you made regarding the economic power of a Nazi Germany, and that being the real reason for war.

That is not true, and as a Briton I object. Australia didn't at first have to prosecute the war. We did, together with the Poles et al. The reason was that Germany, as a tyranny, "such as the world has never seen", after several practice runs, invaded Poland and we had pledged to defend Poland, and we so attempted to do.

Dirk and other nationalists wouldn't be grateful if one ran into a burning building to save his granny, but there you go.
dolnoslask 5 | 1,834    
12 Jan 2018  #657

Challenge a dying man

The above should have told the Soviets to withdraw to the pre 1939 lines or suffer the consequences of nuclear war. but I think he was a liberal so he gave it all up hoping he could convince the soviets to be nice to all the people they had enslaved.
Taxpaying voter 1 | 146    :-(
12 Jan 2018  #658

they sold out to Stalin in Yalta.

I keep hearing this and I keep asking the same question but I never get an answer: in a sale/purchase transaction the selling side provides a product or service and the buying side pays a price to the selling side, what price was the UK paid by the USSR for Poland?
TheOther 5 | 3,507    
12 Jan 2018  #659

2-1 is a majority. What was Churchill supposed to do?

Roosevelt and Churchill both agreed to Stalin's demands. Churchill was heavily criticized for that in Parliament.

what price was the UK paid by the USSR for Poland?

en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/sell-out

"A betrayal of one's principles for reasons of expedience"
Crow 145 | 6,919    
12 Jan 2018  #660

Britain don`t love Poland and using Poland and Poles. Always did it, always will. Brits doing that to all Europeans. Profit on our misery and pray to God to prologue our misery. When our misery ends, begins British misery. Britain is like the f*****g funeral man.




Home / History / WWII - who really was the first to help Poland?
Click this icon to move up back to the quoted message. Bold Italic [quote]

 
To post as Guest, enter a temporary and unique username or login and post as a member.