Sire Brenshar
5 Jul 2010
Sire Brenshar
5 Jul 2010
News / Will Komorowski be Poland's worst ever president? [72]
What is Komorowski's stance concerning Tusk? Or any one else of importance?
What is Komorowski's stance concerning Tusk? Or any one else of importance?
Sire Brenshar
16 Jul 2010
Life / How Polish are you? [74]
51% on the first one, and 100% on the second (even though I wasn't sure about two of the answers)
51% on the first one, and 100% on the second (even though I wasn't sure about two of the answers)
Sire Brenshar
17 Jul 2010
News / Why are Czechs more effective than Poles and Poland? [116]
That is not a good thing. You mind telling me what religion the most murderous regimes in human history were?
They are an athiest country so the don't have loony priest on the radio preaching hate.
That is not a good thing. You mind telling me what religion the most murderous regimes in human history were?
Sire Brenshar
17 Jul 2010
News / Why are Czechs more effective than Poles and Poland? [116]
Now those are some nice places, I should visit one day.
Anyways how does anyone know is Czechs "whine" less than Poles? They didn't go through as much fortunately, and they are entitled to say or whine as much as they want if they feel so inclined. As can we (Poles).
Like i told you they only got Prague, and some small citys.
Brno Second largest city.
lala
Ostrava Third largest city.
lala
Most 14'th largest city.
lala
Brno Second largest city.
lala
Ostrava Third largest city.
lala
Most 14'th largest city.
lala
Now those are some nice places, I should visit one day.
Anyways how does anyone know is Czechs "whine" less than Poles? They didn't go through as much fortunately, and they are entitled to say or whine as much as they want if they feel so inclined. As can we (Poles).
Sire Brenshar
18 Jul 2010
Genealogy / Polish-Ukranian roots and genes [72]
Muslim? You are aware of when Islam began, no?
This is probably the dumbest stuff I have ever read on PF concerning history
and start stealing culture and society from asian and muslim cultures. This is why Slavic people are very backward and have copied cultures from the countries around them.
Muslim? You are aware of when Islam began, no?
This is probably the dumbest stuff I have ever read on PF concerning history
Sire Brenshar
23 Jul 2010
News / Poles and rest of us needs strong Poland [49]
Why does Crow seem to be more patriotic than most Poles?
Why does Crow seem to be more patriotic than most Poles?
Sire Brenshar
1 Aug 2010
Sire Brenshar
2 Aug 2010
History / Polish history is 100% glorious [297]
I think Polish history is a broken chain of glorious events more;
In many occasions Germans/Ukrainians/Jews/Russians/and other people of all sorts suffered at the hand of Poles.
Seriously Harry, your knowledge of Polish History is terrible, and you should refrain from posting such gross inaccuracies on this forum.
I hate Polonophiles like you, who think that Poland is the chosen nation or something, and I hate even more those who actively preach such things, and thankfully you aren't posting this stuff on other forums.
Do us all a favor, Harry, and learn some real Polish history. You'll find that it is rather glorious, especially compared to nations like England, but you'll also find that it has some blemishes.
Please do not post again until you learn a few things.
I think Polish history is a broken chain of glorious events more;
In many occasions Germans/Ukrainians/Jews/Russians/and other people of all sorts suffered at the hand of Poles.
Seriously Harry, your knowledge of Polish History is terrible, and you should refrain from posting such gross inaccuracies on this forum.
I hate Polonophiles like you, who think that Poland is the chosen nation or something, and I hate even more those who actively preach such things, and thankfully you aren't posting this stuff on other forums.
Do us all a favor, Harry, and learn some real Polish history. You'll find that it is rather glorious, especially compared to nations like England, but you'll also find that it has some blemishes.
Please do not post again until you learn a few things.
Sire Brenshar
2 Aug 2010
History / Polish history is 100% glorious [297]
...
What's your problem? Go back to Sturmfront Harry...
Or take the advice I gave you before.
Mods, can you ban this crazy guy?
No they didn't! Your accusations are nothing but lies told by the entire world apart from Poland in order to besmirch the glorious reputation of Poland! It is all a perfidious Jewish/Communist/British/German/Russian/homosexual/satanist plot!
...
What's your problem? Go back to Sturmfront Harry...
Or take the advice I gave you before.
Mods, can you ban this crazy guy?
Sire Brenshar
2 Aug 2010
Sire Brenshar
2 Aug 2010
History / Polish history is 100% glorious [297]
Yes he is, he is probably the most obvious reason why "some posters" are so "patriotic".
He's looking for reactions and he's certainly getting them too.
Now was that sarcasm or did he genuinely just assault you there...?
Which Czech attack are you referring to?
My greatest sympathy for victims of Poles is mostly the blotched way of dealing with Ruthenians in the VII century and how it eventually helped cause the Deluge, and with the Lithuanians, Czechs, and especially the Ukrainians during the XXth.
Other than that Polish History is rather Glorious.
he is not playing a game, he provides observations about how some historical events are handled on PF by the Polish posters.
If anything some of the posters are playing a game of a "hit and run".
If anything some of the posters are playing a game of a "hit and run".
Yes he is, he is probably the most obvious reason why "some posters" are so "patriotic".
He's looking for reactions and he's certainly getting them too.
Saying that shows that you are either Jewish or a homosexual, or both.
Now was that sarcasm or did he genuinely just assault you there...?
Let us not forget that £ambinowice was swept under the carpet for so long. Oh, the attack on the Czechs was wild and wrong.
Sokrates is the best with his WWII analysis. It just goes to show how different books and direction can lead you 'poles' apart.
Sokrates is the best with his WWII analysis. It just goes to show how different books and direction can lead you 'poles' apart.
Which Czech attack are you referring to?
My greatest sympathy for victims of Poles is mostly the blotched way of dealing with Ruthenians in the VII century and how it eventually helped cause the Deluge, and with the Lithuanians, Czechs, and especially the Ukrainians during the XXth.
Other than that Polish History is rather Glorious.
Sire Brenshar
2 Aug 2010
History / Polish history is 100% glorious [297]
Not Harry's fault, but he certainly is a major roadblock in it all. (Perhaps I blamed Harry a bit to strongly in my previous post)
Now you are taking it too far, since no one (except for Sokrates maybe, but that's just his way of getting a point across) has said anything with the equivalent of that.
Hmmm; Harry and Sokrates, I would like to see the two together in their very own personal thread...
of course it is Harry's fault that some people are not able to discuss the historic events in Poland in a constructive way. Bad Harry!!!!
Not Harry's fault, but he certainly is a major roadblock in it all. (Perhaps I blamed Harry a bit to strongly in my previous post)
You're a gay Ukrainian Jew? That's as low as sub-humans can get. No wonder you are so jealous of the ubermenschen Poles!
Now you are taking it too far, since no one (except for Sokrates maybe, but that's just his way of getting a point across) has said anything with the equivalent of that.
Hmmm; Harry and Sokrates, I would like to see the two together in their very own personal thread...
Sire Brenshar
3 Aug 2010
History / WWII - who really was the first to help Poland? [901]
Check the Yad Vashem ...
Despite all their shortcomings (many which were not their fault at all) Britain and France were the first to help Poland, if only by declaring war.
Also to say that "Churchill" sold Poland... you must remember that CH did an incredible amount to try and prevent that, and was quite unhappy by the ways things turned out.
He is not unlike Pilsudski in this regard, when Pilsudski was forced (by many factors, and especially by political opposition from home) to abandon Ukraine to the Bolsheviks.
what did the Poles do to help Polsish Jews?
Check the Yad Vashem ...
Despite all their shortcomings (many which were not their fault at all) Britain and France were the first to help Poland, if only by declaring war.
Also to say that "Churchill" sold Poland... you must remember that CH did an incredible amount to try and prevent that, and was quite unhappy by the ways things turned out.
He is not unlike Pilsudski in this regard, when Pilsudski was forced (by many factors, and especially by political opposition from home) to abandon Ukraine to the Bolsheviks.
Sire Brenshar
3 Aug 2010
Life / POLISH MYTHS - let's debunk or prove them! [140]
You and Harry conducting a war?
There is basically only Sokrates who thinks otherwise about what you just posted...
*Polish history is free of blemishes and there are no dark periods in Poland's history as an independent country at all*
Myth.
Myth.
You and Harry conducting a war?
There is basically only Sokrates who thinks otherwise about what you just posted...
Sire Brenshar
3 Aug 2010
Life / POLISH MYTHS - let's debunk or prove them! [140]
I've heard the exact opposite...
and having been raised in Canada (sorry) I must say it seems infinitely times better than in North America.
And at any rate, "bad" education in Europe is generally "the best" compared to many other countries.
I've heard the exact opposite...
and having been raised in Canada (sorry) I must say it seems infinitely times better than in North America.
And at any rate, "bad" education in Europe is generally "the best" compared to many other countries.
Sire Brenshar
4 Aug 2010
News / New cross war in Warsaw [530]
All the babcias were collaborating?!
Why exactly is this thread called "new" cross war? Was there a previous one too?
Andd they survived Stalin by collaborating
All the babcias were collaborating?!
Why exactly is this thread called "new" cross war? Was there a previous one too?
Sire Brenshar
17 Aug 2010
Life / A FILM ABOUT POLISH LIFE...with me as a star in it... [60]
Believe it or not, there are quite a few under-aged people on PF forums... Just putting that out there.
EDIT: I'm quoting McCoy btw... I'm not to sure why MareGaea is in there...
polish - british co-production ...bigger, harder, longer ... wildrovers new movies coming soon to the cinemas all around the europe ...
Believe it or not, there are quite a few under-aged people on PF forums... Just putting that out there.
EDIT: I'm quoting McCoy btw... I'm not to sure why MareGaea is in there...
Sire Brenshar
17 Aug 2010
History / Norman Davies - the Brit who loves Poland and becomes one of Us [250]
That was confusing on Davies part, along with all the Anglicization of Polish names. I feel I can't name any Polish WW2 hero by their real name or not confusing it with someone elses anymore.
The completely unprofessional labelling of Poland as "The First Ally", and the insistence on refering to the country by that moniker, immediately marked him out as biased.
That was confusing on Davies part, along with all the Anglicization of Polish names. I feel I can't name any Polish WW2 hero by their real name or not confusing it with someone elses anymore.
Sire Brenshar
17 Aug 2010
History / Norman Davies - the Brit who loves Poland and becomes one of Us [250]
Harry and Poland simply don't mix properly...
Like putting lots of salt in ice cream... Take the salt out!
Harry and Poland simply don't mix properly...
Like putting lots of salt in ice cream... Take the salt out!
Sire Brenshar
19 Aug 2010
History / Colonel Mikolaj Sciborski - unknown Polish leader of OUN [20]
Good for Mikolaj! Very unfortunate he was killed; he could have been a great example for helping Ukrainian-Polish relations during and after the war.
Please ignore Sokrates. He does not represent the majority of Poles, in fact he only represents an isolated, depraved, hate-mongering, and a very tiny minority of us.
Good for Mikolaj! Very unfortunate he was killed; he could have been a great example for helping Ukrainian-Polish relations during and after the war.
Please ignore Sokrates. He does not represent the majority of Poles, in fact he only represents an isolated, depraved, hate-mongering, and a very tiny minority of us.
Sire Brenshar
4 Sep 2010
News / Black Haitians considering themselves as Poles [31]
Who someone is is entirely up to them, it doesn't matter what blood they have or where they were born.
Who someone is is entirely up to them, it doesn't matter what blood they have or where they were born.
Sire Brenshar
26 Sep 2010
News / Poland could emerge as new European and world power. If? [116]
No, that is completely wrong.
"Neither Holy, nor Roman, nor an Empire"
The Holy Roman Empire was only really formed in 955, after the battle of Lechfeld; The big push was caused by the Magyars: they would drive the German Princes to unite togeather, and after Otto I's victory to accept him as Emperor.
Charlemagne's regime actually had very little impact on HRE's formation, contrary to many histories.
The Vatican has been a world power since 400AD, the Roman Empire never went away it just changed its name to the Holy Roman Catholic Church with a larger Empire.
No, that is completely wrong.
"Neither Holy, nor Roman, nor an Empire"
The Holy Roman Empire was only really formed in 955, after the battle of Lechfeld; The big push was caused by the Magyars: they would drive the German Princes to unite togeather, and after Otto I's victory to accept him as Emperor.
Charlemagne's regime actually had very little impact on HRE's formation, contrary to many histories.
Sire Brenshar
28 Sep 2011
History / Are Poles grateful to the Russians for winning the war? [120]
The general opinion (by historians at least) is that it took all of the big three to win the war. Each individually (Well, except Britain) had the resources, man power, and industry to be able to defeat Nazi Germany, only none/neither of them were in the right strategic position to do it, so they required the aid of one another. America was on the other side of the Atlantic and the Soviet Union made some crucial mistakes at Barbarossa's start, mostly due to the unique politicization of their army, that almost cost them the war, and negated them of some of their greatest benefits.
Even if there was no Eastern front, Rommel would not have any more troops coming his way; His logistics were pretty much already stretched to their max as things were. Unless they managed to somehow end Britain's naval dominance in the Mediterranean. Even if he could pull off a victory, it gained nothing for Germany, really. The goal was simply to cut British supplies from their colonies. Certainly a huge nightmare for the Brits, but Germany would be no better off.
Stalingrad wasn't actually that much of a loss for Germany, rather it was more of a moral boost for their enemies. Even after Stalingrad Germany was able, and indeed still carrying out massive offensives. It was Kursk that lost the war for Germany, as they would be forced on the defensive, and we all know what that means on the steppes.
Germany would never have signed a treaty, remember they were there for Lebensraum. It was life or death for both sides.
To the topic itself, my opinion is that those Poles who actually know their history or care about it, would tend to be ungrateful. Only a few wouldn't. Its stupid to blame the Russians however, (First of the Soviet Union was hardly composed solely of Russians) as Stalin was its complete ruler. He was obeyed or people died.
I do not think Poles should be grateful, really, but being Anti-Russian because of it is simply stupid. Of course Poles would rather not be dead, but having their freedom taken away again afterwards is barely a substitute.
I'm not sure Uncle Sam would have won the war either( Britain would defiantly not have won alone.), had Hitler not invaded Russia, than a stalemate would have ensued, Rommel may well have won in the desert if he had all the Eastern Front troops at his disposal.
The general opinion (by historians at least) is that it took all of the big three to win the war. Each individually (Well, except Britain) had the resources, man power, and industry to be able to defeat Nazi Germany, only none/neither of them were in the right strategic position to do it, so they required the aid of one another. America was on the other side of the Atlantic and the Soviet Union made some crucial mistakes at Barbarossa's start, mostly due to the unique politicization of their army, that almost cost them the war, and negated them of some of their greatest benefits.
Even if there was no Eastern front, Rommel would not have any more troops coming his way; His logistics were pretty much already stretched to their max as things were. Unless they managed to somehow end Britain's naval dominance in the Mediterranean. Even if he could pull off a victory, it gained nothing for Germany, really. The goal was simply to cut British supplies from their colonies. Certainly a huge nightmare for the Brits, but Germany would be no better off.
Stalingrad is what broke them so yes I am grateful to the Russian war contribution. They could just have easily signed a truce with the Germans like Lenin did with the Treaty of Brest-Litvorsk in 1917 and given away a chunk of their territory
Stalingrad wasn't actually that much of a loss for Germany, rather it was more of a moral boost for their enemies. Even after Stalingrad Germany was able, and indeed still carrying out massive offensives. It was Kursk that lost the war for Germany, as they would be forced on the defensive, and we all know what that means on the steppes.
Germany would never have signed a treaty, remember they were there for Lebensraum. It was life or death for both sides.
To the topic itself, my opinion is that those Poles who actually know their history or care about it, would tend to be ungrateful. Only a few wouldn't. Its stupid to blame the Russians however, (First of the Soviet Union was hardly composed solely of Russians) as Stalin was its complete ruler. He was obeyed or people died.
I do not think Poles should be grateful, really, but being Anti-Russian because of it is simply stupid. Of course Poles would rather not be dead, but having their freedom taken away again afterwards is barely a substitute.
Sire Brenshar
28 Sep 2011
History / Are Poles grateful to the Russians for winning the war? [120]
They didn't "let" anyone have anything. Russia could hardly have taken it all for herself. She did what she needed too.
But super-accuracy aside, the gist of your comment is completely correct. Russians, or rather Soviet apologists, (I doubt most Russians even care) should not demand Poles to be grateful. It simply doesn't work that way. You don't save somebody from murder just to rob them.
Not calling anybody a Soviet apologist or even stating that somebody is demanding Poles be grateful, but just putting my points and thoughts up on the forum's wall.
Is that kinda like saying that Poles should have been grateful to Imperial Russia because the Russians didn't let the Prussians and Austrians have all of Poland in the partitions?
They didn't "let" anyone have anything. Russia could hardly have taken it all for herself. She did what she needed too.
But super-accuracy aside, the gist of your comment is completely correct. Russians, or rather Soviet apologists, (I doubt most Russians even care) should not demand Poles to be grateful. It simply doesn't work that way. You don't save somebody from murder just to rob them.
Not calling anybody a Soviet apologist or even stating that somebody is demanding Poles be grateful, but just putting my points and thoughts up on the forum's wall.
Sire Brenshar
28 Sep 2011
History / Are Poles grateful to the Russians for winning the war? [120]
What, you mean in today's world?
No country is really "free", they all have obligations to their neighbors: treaties, alliances, common enemies, etc. A free country in this world is one that won't last long. You can't have no friends and expect the big neighbors to tear you apart.
I'd say we, as Europeans, should we create a real, complete EU, would be as free as we could get without endangering our individual nations. Of course, I find it hard to believe such a thing would ever happen.
Completely off topic by the way. Lets discuss the actual situation at hand.
Naturally. But it wasn't a matter of choice for the Poles. Its simply how things turned out. What is important is today's reactions to it, and I say Poles should not spit on Russians for what happened, but just accept it as an unfortunate consequence (or even better, the price) of liberation.
This is something entirely else. The thread is about should Poles be grateful for the Soviet "liberation". Katyn didn't happen during that.
i mostly agree with what you commented, but honestly, do you think poles or anyone else in europe(all countries under us influence) are 'really free'?
i think that is a big lie. maybe it is not felt directly, but think about it. ;)
i think that is a big lie. maybe it is not felt directly, but think about it. ;)
What, you mean in today's world?
No country is really "free", they all have obligations to their neighbors: treaties, alliances, common enemies, etc. A free country in this world is one that won't last long. You can't have no friends and expect the big neighbors to tear you apart.
I'd say we, as Europeans, should we create a real, complete EU, would be as free as we could get without endangering our individual nations. Of course, I find it hard to believe such a thing would ever happen.
Completely off topic by the way. Lets discuss the actual situation at hand.
I would rather live in a communist country than under Nazi occupation. Not ideal but it's like getting a really nasty painful slap and have someone prod you with a stick (Russia) or being shot in both legs and being dunked in Ice cold water and be urinated and shat on and spat on (Nazi Germany)
what would you perfer? I think I ill take the slap and a little prod with a stick and keep my legs.
what would you perfer? I think I ill take the slap and a little prod with a stick and keep my legs.
Naturally. But it wasn't a matter of choice for the Poles. Its simply how things turned out. What is important is today's reactions to it, and I say Poles should not spit on Russians for what happened, but just accept it as an unfortunate consequence (or even better, the price) of liberation.
Oh yeah, Poles have many reasons to be grateful, Katyn is one of them.
This is something entirely else. The thread is about should Poles be grateful for the Soviet "liberation". Katyn didn't happen during that.
Sire Brenshar
28 Sep 2011
History / Are Poles grateful to the Russians for winning the war? [120]
This has been said many times already.
"Liberation" (I did use quotes previously mate) is a flexible word here: Poland was "liberated" from the Nazis, aye? That doesn't mean it was "liberated", as in "free of foreign control".
Poles don't have any reason to be grateful to the Soviets at all!!!
This has been said many times already.
not liberation, for winning the war.
Poland was never liberated by the Soviets, Poland was invaded and Poles were enslaved by the Soviets for over 4o years.
Poland was never liberated by the Soviets, Poland was invaded and Poles were enslaved by the Soviets for over 4o years.
"Liberation" (I did use quotes previously mate) is a flexible word here: Poland was "liberated" from the Nazis, aye? That doesn't mean it was "liberated", as in "free of foreign control".
Sire Brenshar
28 Sep 2011
History / Are Poles grateful to the Russians for winning the war? [120]
Your running us in circles mate. Its been understood. The difference was that the Soviets weren't intent on ending Polish existence, or at the very least, didn't mean to do it by slaughtering them.
I can only say this, since there really isn't all that much to discuss here:
Poland would be better off after the Soviets drove the Germans out. That does not mean Poland was in a good state, but was simply that, better off. No longer in danger of becoming extinct, if you like. The situation had stabilized for Poles.
yeah, only to be controlled by the Soviets. Just like the Soviets "liberated" the Nazi camps only to reopen (some) them right after the war and kept there their political opponents (mainly Poles).
Your running us in circles mate. Its been understood. The difference was that the Soviets weren't intent on ending Polish existence, or at the very least, didn't mean to do it by slaughtering them.
I can only say this, since there really isn't all that much to discuss here:
Poland would be better off after the Soviets drove the Germans out. That does not mean Poland was in a good state, but was simply that, better off. No longer in danger of becoming extinct, if you like. The situation had stabilized for Poles.
Sire Brenshar
30 Sep 2011
History / Are Poles grateful to the Russians for winning the war? [120]
Which period? Source?
What do you mean to convey by saying that? Of the Red Army, how many were Poles, do you know?
Very true.
Because the Red Army consisted in 88% of Russians and NKVD in 94% you troll:))))
Which period? Source?
What do you mean to convey by saying that? Of the Red Army, how many were Poles, do you know?
Gratitude is one of the most lacking traits here, I've discovered.
Very true.
Sire Brenshar
30 Sep 2011
History / Are Poles grateful to the Russians for winning the war? [120]
Actually, it seems to be that you are unable of rational thought. Stop being so dogmatic, its possible to hate the Soviets and also accept that if it wasn't for them Poland would just be another dead, and ultimately forgotten country of history
You seem to be pretty sure about anything that depicts Soviets as big heroes. What are you, a Soviet/Russian or just some kind of Soviets admirer?
Actually, it seems to be that you are unable of rational thought. Stop being so dogmatic, its possible to hate the Soviets and also accept that if it wasn't for them Poland would just be another dead, and ultimately forgotten country of history