The BEST Guide to POLAND
Unanswered [11]  |  Archives [1] 
 
Witamy, Guest  |  Members
Home / History   32

Poles also killed innocents



Bogdan26 1 | -    
14 Jul 2016  #1

Anti-Polish operation by the UPA nationalists in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia resulted in a total of 80,000-100,000 victims in the 1943-1945. Now Poles call this genocide.

Then how should we treat their so called retaliation measures against Ukrainians in the same regions? The number of Ukrainian victims is estimated at 13,000 - 20,000. Isn't it genocide as well, I wonder?

There was obvious antagonism between Polish and Ukrainian populations fighting for the land. And I suspect Poland is after some territorial gains using genocide as a starting point of the campaign.


dolnoslask 2 | 1,152    
14 Jul 2016  #2

"Poland is after some territorial gains "

I don't think so , Poland has plenty of land but too few people, with more migrating abroad each day, if anything Poland needs more Ukrainian migrants.
gregy741 3 | 1,008    
14 Jul 2016  #3

The number of Ukrainian victims is estimated at 13,000 - 20,000. Isn't it genocide as well, I wonder?

are those ukrainian vitims of UPA pogrom?there was quite a lot of Ukrainians killed by UPA as well.
or are you talking about wisla operation?
Harry 79 | 13,373    
14 Jul 2016  #4

The number of Ukrainian victims is estimated at 13,000 - 20,000. Isn't it genocide as well, I wonder?

Strictly speaking neither the actions of the UPA or the Polish government were genocide. Both were what is referred to as ethnic cleansing.
gregy741 3 | 1,008    
14 Jul 2016  #5

tho Polish government used expulsion as a way of cleansing while UPA used axes.
how come chopping quarter of million civilians with axes is not genocide Harry?
beside this guy doenst know what hes writing about.this 20k Ukrainians killed,were Ukrainian victims of UPA(the one married to polish women were also killed). HE thinks they were killed by poles.
Ziemowit 8 | 2,505    
14 Jul 2016  #6

The number of Ukrainian victims is estimated at 13,000 - 20,000. Isn't it genocide as well, I wonder?

What is the source of that number? According to the "Association of the Ukranians in Poland", 20,000 was the total number of Ukrainians living in Poland in 1947 before the "Wisła" operation was started. And the Ukrainian Association never calls the "Wisła" operation call "genocide". The number of victims of the operation is counted in hundreds. See the link zup.ukraina.com.pl/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=80&Itemid=23

(available in Ukrainian also).

There was obvious antagonism between Polish and Ukrainian populations fighting for the land.

That was no antagonisim about the land whatsoever. The Volyhnia massacre was simply ethnic cleansing. Polish villages in Volhynia whose entire populations were murdered by the Ukrainians have disappeared from the map ever since. No Ukrainian people moved there after the massacres and lands have been abandoned.
Harry 79 | 13,373    
14 Jul 2016  #7

how come chopping quarter of million civilians with axes is not genocide Harry?

Because of what the word means. Even if you over-inflate your number by tripling it a few more times, it still wouldn't have been genocide.

No Ukrainian people moved there after the massacres and lands have been abandoned.

And one can say the same about what were Ukrainian villages in what is now Poland, and what were Polish villages in what is now Poland.
smurf 39 | 1,999    
14 Jul 2016  #8

Why can't we be all inclusive? Let's just say that both Ukraine and Poland committed genocide.
Crow 137 | 5,750    
14 Jul 2016  #9

There is the difference between the crimes committed. There are crimes committed with different aims. Only crimes committed by the plan (what is generally followed by some genocidal ideological background) to reduce some population (which include crimes on captured fighters, civilian man, woman and children) are to be labeled as genocide. Any other crimes committed during war are that- `war crimes`. It of course, don`t make those crimes acceptable. They aren`t acceptable. Just, there is the difference in motifs for crimes, which speak of scale of a crime. Behind `genocidal crimes` stays entire society, behind `war crimes` stays just people (or military command) involved on terrain.
smurf 39 | 1,999    
14 Jul 2016  #10

Any other crimes committed during war

Can't really call what happened 'war' though can we.

They were opportunistic murders by both sides
Harry 79 | 13,373    
14 Jul 2016  #11

Why can't we be all inclusive? Let's just say that both Ukraine and Poland committed genocide.

Because when we start to misuse the word, we are left with no words to describe fates such as that which befell the Romani people during the Porajmos. While what a Ukrainian organisation and the Polish state did to Poles and Ukrainians, respectively, was terrible, the Porajmos was of an entirely different magnitude.
Crow 137 | 5,750    
14 Jul 2016  #12

They were opportunistic murders by both sides

But, moment when UPA decided to side with Nazis, UPA embarrassed Nazi anti-Slavic ideology (similar to ustashe from Croatia). That makes their crimes genocidal crimes against Poles. Polish crimes on Ukrainians didn`t have that dimension.

Anyway, from the angle of common interests of Slavic civilization, all that was one great tragedy. One of our many.
smurf 39 | 1,999    
14 Jul 2016  #13

That makes their crimes genocidal crimes against Poles. Polish crimes on Ukrainians didn`t have that dimension.

So where does that put the crimes of Poland against the Czechs?

weeklyuniverse.com/2003/poland.htm

Or when Poland invaded Czechoslovakia was it done bloodlessly?
Doesn't seem to be much if any data concerning how many lives were lost when Poland joined Germany to invade Czechoslovakia just prior to WWII
dolnoslask 2 | 1,152    
14 Jul 2016  #14

The history Teschen goes deeper than WWII

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Teschen
gregy741 3 | 1,008    
14 Jul 2016  #15

Doesn't seem to be much if any data concerning how many lives were lost when Poland joined Germany to invade Czechoslovakia just prior to WWII

huh? invade? recovered treacherously stolen zaolzie land by cynical czech. Poland was very modest approach to them after what czech did there in 1920.
if i were president i would order to hang every czech in zaolzie , after what they did there. czech acquisition of zaolzie is most shameful example of people being scum.they shamelessly invaded Poland when we fought Bolsheviks in the east,pathetic opportunist land grabbing..fkin losers.they quick to point "polish invasion" but dont want to remember how they got zaolzie in first place.

Or when Poland invaded Czechoslovakia was it done bloodlessly?

indeed it was bloodlessly.

funny,how those polish neighbors have nerve to cry over 2 world war.all of em that is lithuania SStonia,ukraine russia and slovakia joined Hitler in carnage of land grabbing and slaughter. they quick to forget about that.typical losers blaming poland for every misconduct to divert attention from their past and ppl learning about their enormous war crimes
smurf 39 | 1,999    
15 Jul 2016  #16

huh? invade? r

Depends on whether your Czech or not I suppose

indeed it was bloodlessly.

Well, at least that's good
Marsupial - | 937    
15 Jul 2016  #17

It was bloodless and not an invasion. However, shamelessly opportunistic. No an event I am proud of.
Ziemowit 8 | 2,505    
15 Jul 2016  #18

However, shamelessly opportunistic. No an event I am proud of.

Certainly not an event to be proud of. But you should remember that this Polish "invasion" of Czechoslovakia in 1938 is an excellent opportunity for all those British and Irish clowns on PF to jump on Poland in the hope of diverting attention from Britain, France and Italy happily signing the treaty with Herr Hitler in Munich in 1938 which allowed Germany to peacefully grab half of Czechoslovakia without firing a bullet. So they brag about Poland joining the Nazi Germany in invading Czechoslovakia instead, whereas in reality there was no Nazi invasion whatsover. Only an agreement between friends: Britain and Hitler's Germany to "save" peace in Europe with no Czechs or Slovaks invited to Munich to bring their views on that "peace".
smurf 39 | 1,999    
15 Jul 2016  #19

Certainly not an event to be proud of.

Certainly not

1938 is an excellent opportunity for all those British and Irish clowns on PF to jump on Poland in the hope of diverting attention from Britain, France and Italy happily signing a treaty with Herr Hitler in Munich in 1938 which allowed Germany to peacefully grab half of Czechoslovakia .

Touched a nerve eh?

Chill out mate

I asked an honest question of Crow, no need to be a d!ck. I understand it's your default setting, but we're all trying to be friends here now so maybe you'd like to withdraw your

Irish clowns

statement. I find that pretty offensive. I would never call bring your nationality into it.
Sure, I'd call you a clown, but one's nationality has nothing to do with such things.
So please edit or withdraw your xenophobic slur.

It sucks what Poland did on the Czechs, it sucks that the Czech stole that land first and it sucks that the allies went with trying to appease Hitler.

But it also sucks that the allies after WWI didn't allow Silesia to remain part of Germany when the Silesian people in two referendums voted to remain part of Germany.

But, y'know, that's history, we need to learn it and learn from it. Most people don't and that's why we as a race are doomed to constantly repeat the mistakes of our ancestors.
Atch 9 | 1,653    
15 Jul 2016  #20

British and Irish clowns on PF to jump on Poland in the hope of diverting attention from Britain, France and Italy happily signing the treaty with Herr Hitler in Munich in 1938

I find that pretty offensive.

Have to say Ziemowit that I agree with Smurf. That kind of silliness is unworthy of a man of your intelligence. There are only two Irish members who post here regularly so it's quite rude of you to suggest that Smurf and I are fools. Speaking for myself I'm not in the habit of 'jumping on Poland' either.

As for us trying to divert attention from Britain's actions, why would we want to do that? We weren't involved in any of it and back at that time in the 1930s relations between ourselves and Britain were pretty cool.
Veles - | 164    
27 Jul 2016  #21

1. The goal of Ukrainian nationalists was not to fight with Poles, but to exterminate them completely from the land they wanted to control. And they basically did. Hence, it is a genocide. What Polish side did in a response was a revenge for the actions of Ukrainians.

2. Poles who are aware of ethnic cleansing done by Polish soldiers are against such actions and are more likely to consider these people war criminals instead of heroes. Ukrainians still consider their war criminals as heroes.

3. No matter what Poles did, it does not change a fact of what Ukrainians did. Just because Poles killed Ukrainians afterwards doesn't magically switch a genocide to "tragedy", like many people prefer to say.

4. Poland aggression on Czechoslovakia was dictated by previous aggression of Czechoslovakia on Poland. Poland have not sided with Germans, but have seek opportunity, just as Czechoslovakia did when Poland was attacked by the Soviet Union.
Ironside 44 | 8,232    
27 Jul 2016  #22

Anti-Polish operation

Take your Nazi ass out of here and pronto. I see that you're asking for it.

And I suspect Poland is after some territorial gains using genocide as a starting point of the campaign.

Boy, those lands are Polish ancient lands and they're ours, we don't need to make up stories or claims like you do all the time.

Unfortunately Poland is not after restoring those land where they belong, rather try very hard to help your so called country to say afloat. I don't know what for.
Harry 79 | 13,373    
27 Jul 2016  #23

czech acquisition of zaolzie is most shameful example of people being scum.they shamelessly invaded Poland when we fought Bolsheviks in the east,pathetic opportunist land grabbing..fkin losers.

I wonder if certain people are ever going to learn that simply repeating a lie a million times does not make it any less of a lie.

The reality is that Poland and Czechoslovakia both claimed certain land in 1918. So as to avoid war over the area, representatives of both nations agreed that year that no sovereignty would be exercised over the area until its status had been finally settled. Then early the next year Poland decided to organise national elections in the disputed area. Czechoslovakia objected to that and reminded Poland about the agreement. Poland ignored the objection, so Czechoslovakia invaded part of the area. Poland was not fighting the Soviets at that time (it was actually fighting the Western Ukrainians, the same Western Ukrainians it would later ally with before stabbing them in the back and selling their country to the Soviets). Unfortunately this military action was not bloodless: innocent people died because the government of Poland did not keep its word.
Grzegorz_ 52 | 6,196    
27 Jul 2016  #24

so Czechoslovakia invaded part of the area.

Poland's fault. Always ;) They were forced, had no other choice (like allowing people living there to decide).
Ironside 44 | 8,232    
27 Jul 2016  #25

was actually fighting the Western Ukrainians, the same Western Ukrainians it would later ally with

No, as a matter of fact that wouldn't ally with them, they would ally with Petliura and The Ukrainian People's Republic or Ukrainian National Republic, nothing to do with Eastern Galicja and Lwów.

Learn your history Harry. As you put it "wonder if certain people are ever going to learn that simply repeating a lie a million times does not make it any less of a lie"
Veles - | 164    
27 Jul 2016  #26

Harry - the conflict between Poland and Czechoslovakia over Cieszyn began in 23th January 1919. I mean military conflict. It lasted until 28th July 1920. In 1918 it was decided that by far mentioned territories will be under control of both nations - the parts inhabited by Polish population will be under Polish rule, while the parts inhabited by people of Czechoslovakia will be under Czechoslovakian rule. The latter were not happy with that solution, spreading some historical claims over territories inhabited by Poles. Mentioned lands were strategic for Czechoslovakia railroad, and territories full of coal. It is not important to list them at the moment. What is crucial is that Czechoslovakia wanted to control the whole area and it has nothing to do with Poles doing what they wanted.

Tomas Masaryk have received a letter from Poland where Poles asked Czechs to find a diplomatic solution over disputed areas. In response Czechoslovakia have "conquered" Spisz and Orawa. Czechoslovaks taking advantage from Polish-Ukrainian war (yes, not with Soviets - there is a different story with Soviets involved), have taken whole Cieszyn.

Making story short: territories inhabited by Poles were in Poland, those inhabited by Czechoslovaks were in Czechoslovakia. Czechoslovaks had territorial claims, and in result Zaolzie inhabited by Poles was incorporated to Czechoslovakia.

So how Poles have attacked Czechoslovakia? Poland did exactly the same thing which Czechoslovakia have done back then. Commenting how Poles were evil by taking some land from Czechoslovakia, which Czechoslovakia took from Poland few years before in a similar circumstances is either lack of basic historical knowledge about certain region or time period, or is extreme ignorance and hypocrysy.
Harry 79 | 13,373    
27 Jul 2016  #27

No, as a matter of fact that wouldn't ally with them, they would ally with Petliura and The Ukrainian People's Republic or Ukrainian National Republic, nothing to do with Eastern Galicja and Lwów.

I wasn't talking about the West Ukrainian People's Republic, I was talking about the Ukrainian National Republic, who were people from Western Ukraine, the same people later stabbed in the back by Poland when their country was sold to the USSR by Poland.

Czechoslovaks taking advantage from Polish-Ukrainian war (yes, not with Soviets - there is a different story with Soviets involved), have taken whole Cieszyn.

That simply isn't true: 58.1% of the area went to Czechoslovakia, the rest went to Poland. Please limit your posts to facts.

So how Poles have attacked Czechoslovakia? Poland did exactly the same thing which Czechoslovakia have done back then.

Poland agreed in 1920 which land was Czechoslovakia and which was Poland. Then 18 years later Poland took land which it had agreed belonged to Czechoslovakia; taking land by force or the thread of force from another country which you have agreed is land which belongs to that country is invading that land. At no time had Czechoslovakia agreed that the land their troops secured in 1919 was Polish land.
Ziemowit 8 | 2,505    
27 Jul 2016  #28

I think there existed a signed agreement between both sides in which the demarcation line was drawn up had been reached at some stage. You don't mention that agreement at all. Also, you don't mention any specific dates of events upon which one could judge your claims.
Grzegorz_ 52 | 6,196    
27 Jul 2016  #29


Oy vey ! That area was a disputed territory like a 100 others in Europe at that time. Czechs seized it by force when they got an opportunity to do that. Nothing more to see here except for pathetic Polonophobes, who made it one of their favourite issues. Some of them can even spam about it for tens of posts, again and again. Pathetic dickheads.
Veles - | 164    
27 Jul 2016  #30

I am not even going to bother. If you - Harry - want to play such games, find yourself another opponent. I am not going to comment your statement about division of Cieszyn region - which OBVIOUSLY HAPPENED - but after Czechoslovak army was there. Action -> reaction. War -> peace treaty. Have fun.




Home / History / Poles also killed innocents
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.