The BEST Guide to POLAND
Unanswered  |  Archives 
 
 
User: Guest

Home / History  % width posts: 75

Yalta Conference and Poland


pirate - | 22
19 Jan 2010 #31
The truth of the matter is the UK was not a major player at the end of World War 2, our empire was crumbling and we'd been bankrolled during the war by the Americans, who had no stomach for fighting the Russians.

Were we really expected to confront Russian on our own?

If the Poles are going to lay the blame at anyone's door maybe they should look at their own leaders and their forays into Russia - if you keep poking a dog with a stick eventually it's going to bite you.

"Poland wants war with Germany and Germany will not be able to avoid it even if she wants to." -- Marshall Rydz-Smigly
1jola 14 | 1,879
19 Jan 2010 #32
"Poland wants war with Germany and Germany will not be able to avoid it even if she wants to." -- Marshall Rydz-Smigly

This quote floates around the neonazi sites to prove we started WWII along with "Judea declares war on Germany."

If the Poles are going to lay the blame at anyone's door maybe they should look at their own leaders and their forays into Russia

Yeah, we brought communism on ourselves. You are going to fit in here just fine. We expect great things from you. Welcome!
Bratwurst Boy 9 | 10,447
19 Jan 2010 #33
This quote floates around

Well...it throws a light at the tensed relationships between our states then (and typical polish overestimation).

Poland was geared up for a fight as was Germany...plus Poland counted on France and GB to get her nuts out of the fire should Germany prove to be to much!

Yeah, we brought communism on ourselves.

If I were mean I would say that after all you DID fight on Stalins side and helped him win..but I won't! ;)
pirate - | 22
20 Jan 2010 #34
This quote floates around the neonazi sites to prove we started WWII along with "Judea declares war on Germany."

The Daily Mail and Telegraph aren't neonazi as far as I'm aware. Besides if it is a quote and on neonazi sites so what?? It's still a quote and therefore indicative of the man's sentiment. If the phrase was never used - it's an entirely different matter.

With reference to the other point - did Polish forces ever enter lands that the Russians considered theirs??? I believe that'll be a yes!! Fairing quite admirally as well by all accounts!

So if you play big boys games, you play by big boys rules.

I didn't state Polish people brought Communism on themselves, that the leaders did.

Like the leaders in the UK have made us a target for every nut job with a Koran.
jonni 16 | 2,485
20 Jan 2010 #35
This quote floates around the neonazi sites

Personally I don't read such sites, but what interests me is whether or not he really said that, and if so, when and to whom did he say it, and what he meant in context.
pirate - | 22
20 Jan 2010 #36
It was at a public speech whilst inspecting Polish troops, didn't he realise the Neonazi's were listening and would be posting it on websites in 70 years time!!
Ironside 50 | 10,922
20 Jan 2010 #37
If the Poles are going to lay the blame at anyone's door maybe they should look at their own leaders and their forays into Russia - if you keep poking a dog with a stick eventually it's going to bite you.

that is your ignorance of Polish history speaking or your logic is "different"?

Poland wants war with Germany and Germany will not be able to avoid it even if she wants to." -- Marshall Rydz-Smigly

one sentence out of context by the man who didn't run Polish diplomacy or government prove exactly nothing.
Bratwurst Boy 9 | 10,447
20 Jan 2010 #38
one sentence out of context by the man who didn't run Polish diplomacy or government prove exactly nothing.

Well...he said that at a ceremony of graduates of a military academy if I remember it correctly.
At least it speaks volumes about the mood in the country I would say...
jonni 16 | 2,485
20 Jan 2010 #39
the man who didn't run Polish diplomacy or government

Marshal Rydz-Smigly.

When did he say it?
Bratwurst Boy 9 | 10,447
20 Jan 2010 #40
When did he say it?

Daily Mail, August 6th, 1939
jonni 16 | 2,485
20 Jan 2010 #41
Bratwurst Boy

I wonder why? On the whole he was a very sensible man, respected to this day.

There must be more to this.
Bratwurst Boy 9 | 10,447
20 Jan 2010 #42
What more...two countries about to go to war....blood has to be heated up, propaganda to spill, the masses made to scream enthusiastic...the same old everywhere!

What else should he have said?
Ironside 50 | 10,922
20 Jan 2010 #43
At least it speaks volumes about the mood in the country I would say...

well? German state was hostile to independent Poland and wasn't liked, are you surprised?

night!
jonni 16 | 2,485
20 Jan 2010 #44
He was a Field Marshall. He must have known the true state of Poland's armed forces and materiel. I wonder if that was before or after Hitler's 'Polish sabre-rattling' speech.
Bratwurst Boy 9 | 10,447
20 Jan 2010 #45
He was a Field Marshall. He must have known the true state of Poland's armed forces and materiel.

Well...ESPECIALLY if you know about it better than the masses. What should he have told them?

"Ummm...erm....okay guys...we better cave in...my tank has crashed three times on me on my way here...we have no chance and you can't trust frenchies anyhow....let's go home..."

I think he would have been punished for "defeatism" then...
Mr Grunwald 29 | 1,961
20 Jan 2010 #46
"Ummm...erm....okay guys...we better cave in...my tank has crashed three times on me on my way here...we have no chance and you can't trust frenchies anyhow....let's go home..."

Oh he would lost his recognition in a second lol
Ozi Dan 26 | 569
20 Jan 2010 #47
My point is a simple one and one that many Poles overlook

Your point is in fact not such a simple one, and it is misleading because you've failed to give context (whether deliberately or through naivety) to Sikorski's postulation, as follows:

1. The 'pragmatism' of the proposed boundary was only theoretically pragmatic to all parties because it was made in contemplation of Poland emerging from WW2 as a sovereign and free nation, as well as on the basis that the USSR would leave Poland alone.

2 Ergo, Sikorski's proposed demarche was made on the basis that in return for territory a rapprochement with the USSR would be the consideration, along with Poland's sovereignty guaranteed (plus of course German territory in compensation).

3. Your bald assertion, taken at face value, suggests and presupposes that Sikorski would give away territory dear to Poland in exchange for no consideration from the USSR - this is, to say the least, far fetched.

4. A parable? I'm not getting on with my neighbour so in an effort to heal the rift I propose to give my neighbour my vehicle in exchange for my neighbour leaving me the heck alone and not trying to steal my stuff. I tell my 'friends' of my intentions. I become incapacitated and my neighbour takes it from me, when my 'friends' are watching, and also takes my house, rapes my wife, forces my children into servitude and steals my grandad's war medals. My 'friends' later justified the transaction by saying I told them I intended to part company with my car anyway thus the result was inevitable - they just 'forgot' what I expected in return but didn't want to step on my neighbours toes. Realpolitik doesn't make it right. Puts a different spin on it, doesn't it Sjam.

The 'reality' you suggest was not a consequence of Sikorki's proposal, nor was it 'inevitable', nor a justification per se, but don't let that get in the way of your arguments.

Troll lesson no.1 ....... Why let facts stand in the way of a good arguement ;-))))

Indeed. I've found that one should exercise caution when saying these types of maxims lest the obvious occur. I've got one too however - people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones :-))))))))))))))))))))))

if you keep poking a dog with a stick eventually it's going to bite you.

Aarrghh me hearty - wouldn't the more appropriate metaphor have been poking the parrot with a cutlass?

Pray tell, in all seriousness, what you mean by poking the Russians. A piece of eight to you if you come up with one example that justifies Poland getting the metaphoric bite.

Were we really expected to confront Russian on our own?

Not at all - that is unrealistic and I don't believe that was the expectation. I believe that the grievance lies in the diplomatic arena.

I've commented substantially elsewhere in this forum on my thoughts there and as far as I know, my assumptions remain unchallenged and prevail. Those posts are mainly in my thread "What did Poland get out of the wars and struggles for others" and discuss the Teheran Conference, estoppel, balance sheets of contributions and other such things. I'm sorry but I don't intend searching then cutting and pasting my old comments but you should be able to find them using the 'search' tool if you're interested in having a read. I'd welcome a serious challenge to my theories.....anyone?

"Poland wants war with Germany and Germany will not be able to avoid it even if she wants to." -- Marshall Rydz-Smigly

Can we please have the entire dialogue if possible? I can't imagine that the Marshall would have walked up, said just those words, then departed. Perhaps what was said before and after will give context and meaning and settle this 'quandary'.
pirate - | 22
20 Jan 2010 #48
one sentence out of context by the man who didn't run Polish diplomacy or government prove exactly nothing.

Marshal of Poland, Polish political figure, Commander-in-Chief of Poland's armed forces, and a painter and poet. After many earlier successes as an army commander during the Polish-Soviet War, Rydz succeeded Józef Piłsudski as General Inspector of the Armed Forces in 1935. Source Wiki.

Obviously a very insignificant man - how foolish of me to have brought it up.
Ironside 50 | 10,922
20 Jan 2010 #49
Obviously a very insignificant man - how foolish of me to have brought it up.

do you try to make a point here or you are interested in the true picture ?

Can you find full text not only single quote ?
Bratwurst Boy 9 | 10,447
21 Jan 2010 #50
Can you find full text not only single quote ?

Maybe the Daily Mail has an archive where we could find it...
But this special quote is from an article from 6th August 1939.
Ironside 50 | 10,922
21 Jan 2010 #51
But this special quote is from an article from 6th August 1939.

do you have a link?
Bratwurst Boy 9 | 10,447
21 Jan 2010 #52
Oh god...I once had it....lemme go looking..

Okay...I give up....I can't find the original.
But I believe the paper has an archive! I wished they would put it online like Times or Spiegel recently...

Nothing beats reading original articles from that time - history as it's best!
Ironside 50 | 10,922
21 Jan 2010 #53
Okay...I give up....I can't find the original.

I can only find a text by Danish bloke who I believe is fascist and is trying to justify Nazis.

thanks anyway BB:)
pirate - | 22
22 Jan 2010 #54
do you try to make a point here or you are interested in the true picture ?

Just a tongue in cheek response to the "he wasn't political comment.

Aarrghh me hearty

Oh errm crumbs you stumped me errrm of hang on it's coming to me..... Didn't Polish forces reach Moscow??

Hand over the plunder, ye land lubber!!!
Ironside 50 | 10,922
22 Jan 2010 #55
Just a tongue in cheek response to the "he wasn't political comment.

can you post full texts from Daily Mail or you have found it on the page of this Danish fascist ?
Exiled 2 | 425
22 Jan 2010 #56
Poland was already sold in 1943 as part of the agreement with soviets for post-war control.The issues which were decided in Teheran were the fate of Yugoslavia and Greece and the fate of Germany was decided in Yalta.
Harry
22 Jan 2010 #57
Poland was already sold in 1943 as part of the agreement with soviets for post-war control.

Although I know that there is no chance of you answering, I'll ask anyway: for what price was Poland sold?
Exiled 2 | 425
22 Jan 2010 #58
for what price was Poland sold?

For 1 million dead soviets in eastern european theatre,Austria,Finland and half of Berlin.In fact Poland was sold in a package with Hungary but Poland was a special case since it was an allied state while Hungary had actively participated in Wehrmacht operations so its fate was sealed.

For Poland Stalin threatened to freeze the eastern front and cause hundreds of thousands of western soldiers to die,so really UK and USA had no alternative.
Harry
22 Jan 2010 #59
What absolute rubbish! Why would hundreds of thousands of western soldiers die if Stalin froze the Russian front in 1943? And why would he do something so stupid from a military viewpoint? In 1943 the war was far from won.

You comment about half of Berlin is also complete bollocks.

I wasn't aware that at the end of the war Britain and the USA owned Austria and Finland. Do you perhaps have some sources about that?
Exiled 2 | 425
22 Jan 2010 #60
It is simple.There were some options.For example they could say:''Every teritorry which our troops enter first will develop the according system that is if soviet troops enter first,the country will become communist,if westerners enter first,the country will become capitalistic.''

But we see soviet troops entering Austria in 1945 and conquering Vienna and Austria entering the western block while US troops enter CR and CR becomes free to become communistic while soviet troops conquer Berlin and give half of it to Westerners and they do not invade Finland to finish Scandinavia.


Home / History / Yalta Conference and Poland
BoldItalic [quote]
 
To post as Guest, enter a temporary username or login and post as a member.