The BEST Guide to POLAND
Unanswered  |  Archives 
 
 
User: Guest

Home / News  % width posts: 282

Poland A and Ukraine B. Compare how far Poland has advanced.


Harry
5 May 2011  #121
What makes Ukrainians proud? They have no achievements, no heritage, no nothing.

Even if that were true, which it is not, Ukrainians can be proud that their race has never spawned a creature as foul as you and that their government is sufficiently advanced to ensure that the likes of you are kept out of the country (which is more than can be said for Poland).
Maaarysia
5 May 2011  #122
as foul as you and that their government is sufficiently advanced to ensure that the likes of you are kept out of the country

Are you sure? What about all those Bandera nationalists?
Ironside 48 | 9,704
5 May 2011  #123
Torq is a realist patriot and you ironsir are an nationalist extremist. sokrates is beyond that, closeminded lunatic.

Torq is wishy-washy all be good friends, dreamer.
What do you mean by extremist? As for nationalist - no, not in the sense that word is used in the English language now.

Ukraine is unpredictable, what-more in their historiography (means they teach people that way) Poland is presented along with Russia as as a occupant of Ukraine, maybe a little milder then Russia but only just. Which is a nonsense.

There no political fraction who would want to build alliance with Poland.
They don't even want to be part of EU. Not to mention that EU ain't really interested in Ukraine because of Russia tentacles.

Poland should got what is hers - and which never was ukraine by the way - and that is that, only logical option., if difficult to implement :)

Harry go to your room !
Koala 1 | 332
5 May 2011  #124
Ukraine is unpredictable, what-more in their historiography (means they teach people that way) Poland is presented along with Russia as as a occupant of Ukraine, maybe a little milder then Russia but only just. Which is a nonsense.

Not really, since Poland was trying to "polonize" (is there a word for it in English? Firefox is making a red underline) the local Ukrainian folk (it's hard to speak of modern nation in XVIIth and XVIIIth centuries), were fighting back insurrections etc. etc. which is precisely what Russians did in Poland in XIXth century which we definitely consider a harsh occupation.

Poland should got what is hers - and which never was ukraine by the way - and that is that, only logical option., if difficult to implement :)

And Germany should regain ziemie odzyskane?
hubabuba - | 113
5 May 2011  #125
Poland did try to polonize Ukrainians but just for few years before outbreak of WWII, FEW YEARS!!!!!You talk about insurections which is nonsense, Cossacks did not fight against Poland but against magnats(even Chmielnicki called RP a mother), there was no plans for independent Ukraine

And Germany should regain ziemie odzyskane?

whatever, We lost more on the east than we gain on the West, and how many times does it have to be repeated that Germans started the war??loosing territory is normal if You lose the war
Ironside 48 | 9,704
5 May 2011  #126
And Germany should regain ziemie odzyskane?

Have Poland been aggressive and oppressive power during XIX century?Partition - rings any bells ? Did Poland started WWI and then WWII ethically cleansing conquered areas and exterminating millions of people ?

What Poland did to Ukrainians ? Was the Wolyn massacre done by Poles or by Ukrainians?
What is correlation between lands lost by Germany and lands lost by Poland - Stalin will.
Would Poland being a part of the victorious coalition incorporate some German lands - yes,though not necessary that much.
Ukraine even doesn't enter equation here, so let's not sidetrack.

since Poland was trying to "polonize" (is there a word for it in English? Firefox is making a red underline)

Nonsense,Poland had no infrastructure or capacity to do such a thing,and there no such a word, this word was made up in the 1930 by Ukrainian terrorist, or their central in Berlin.

were fighting back insurrections

You mean peasant revolts ? Hardly insurrection, even if Cossack element was present.

which is precisely what Russians did in Poland in XIXth century which we definitely consider a harsh occupation.

Really? If that is precisely what Russian did in Poland you will have no problem providing links to XVIII century Royal Act or decrees which prompted Ukrainian ? folk to revolt.
Harry
5 May 2011  #127
loosing territory is normal if You lose the war

Unless you are an ally of Poland, in which case you may find that your entire country has disappeared at the end of the war, your soldiers are now in Polish detention centres, the treaty you signed with Poland has been piissed all over and Poland has taken a hefty some in exchange for betraying you. Which country was it that that happened to? Oh yes, Ukraine.

And could you perhaps remind me what happened to the disputed territory which Poland lost the last time it lost a war? Didn't Poland sign international agreements accepting the new borders and then invade that land at the first opportunity?
gumishu 11 | 5,012
5 May 2011  #128
there was no plans for independent Ukraine

yes there was - Cossacks even resolved to be independant of Rzeczpospolita under the auspices of Turkey -
and the treatment of the Ukranian population of the revolted areas by the army of the Polish crown (not only magnates) were very cruel often - even including killing all inhabitants of villages, burning places to the ground and torture - it's enough to read about the lifes of some of Polish hetmans in detail (like Stanisław Koniecpolski or Stefan Czarniecki) - there's a book on Polish hetmans by Leszek Podhorodecki in Polish available (illegally I guess) from some sites on the web
Ironside 48 | 9,704
5 May 2011  #129
Unless you are an ally of Poland,

or Britain
Harry
5 May 2011  #130
ethically cleansing conquered areas

All the people who lived in the 'recovered territories' left entirely of their own free will, right?

Nonsense,Poland had no infrastructure or capacity to do such a thing and there no such a word,

Quite possibly the most pathetic lie you have ever told here.
gumishu 11 | 5,012
5 May 2011  #131
Unless you are an ally of Poland, in which case you may find that your entire country has disappeared at the end of the war, your soldiers are now in Polish detention centres, the treaty you signed with Poland has been piissed all over and Poland has taken a hefty some in exchange for betraying you. Which country was it that that happened to? Oh yes, Ukraine

oh well, and what was the size of that mighty Ukrainian army - 30 thousands - btw Harry many Ukranian officers joined Polish army after the treaty of Riga - for various reasons independent Ukraine was not sustainable after the treaty of Riga - perhaps Poland should have granted it solid autonomy within it's borders - but you can't turn the tide of time
Harry
5 May 2011  #132
or Britain

Could you perhaps quote the treaty in which Britain guaranteed Polish territorial integrity?

Oh, and you may wish to note that the revised borders of Poland were both supported by the Polish prime minister in exile and agreed to by the government of Poland after the war.
Koala 1 | 332
5 May 2011  #133
whatever, We lost more on the east than we gain on the West, and how many times does it have to be repeated that Germans started the war??loosing territory is normal if You lose the war

Poland might have had these eastern territories for centuries prior to World War 2. They are now ethnically Lithuanian/Belarussian/Ukrainian and restoring the old borders makes no sense today. It's a shame that Polish people were moved from there, given how deeply rooted Poles were there, but what is done is done and there's no sense going back to it.
delphiandomine 83 | 17,625
5 May 2011  #134
Nonsense,Poland had no infrastructure or capacity to do such a thing,and there no such a word, this word was made up in the 1930 by Ukrainian terrorist, or their central in Berlin.

You might want to brush up on the history of Ukrainian scouting if you want to see a good example of how the Polish behaved towards the Ukrainian minority.

and the treatment of the Ukranian population of the revolted areas by the army of the Polish crown (not only magnates) were very cruel often

It's sad - I simply cannot understand what drove Poles and Ukrainians to be so horrible towards each other. I can actually sort-of understand the tension between Poles and Jews - but between Poles and Ukrainians, people who are very similar and with a common enemy?

I just wonder how the hell Poland would pay to reconstruct Western Ukraine - Germany hasn't succeeded yet, in spite of the massive transfers from West to East - and Poles have nothing to give...
Ironside 48 | 9,704
5 May 2011  #135
and the treatment of the Ukranian population o

ukrianian folk - do not presume that they were a nation as fro treatment - wasn't that 400 years ago? France wiped out population of one of her province - why? - they revolted (Huguenots )

Wasn't Ireland colonised about the same time and their inhabitants killed on sight ?(Cromwell and all)
Wise up mishu !
Koala 1 | 332
5 May 2011  #136
No one is saying that Poland used to be the most imperialistic state out there, just that Ukrainians might see past Poland as oppressive towards their folk (but clearly it's not comparable to how Russia was treating Ukrainians, which was far worse to my knowledge).
gumishu 11 | 5,012
5 May 2011  #137
It's sad - I simply cannot understand what drove Poles and Ukrainians to be so horrible towards each other. I can actually sort-of understand the tension between Poles and Jews - but between Poles and Ukrainians, people who are very similar and with a common enemy?

well one of the reasons was that it was also a social conflict - the Cossacks and their followers were common folk (mostly) while the nobility was polonized or Polish (Polish nobility from the Crown lands aquired large land tracts in Ukraine especiallyin Kiev and Bratslav regions through various means) - some (if not most) hetmans were 'starosta' of lands in Ukraine and also owned large latyfundia there and they had personal interests in quashing Cossack rebellions
Ironside 48 | 9,704
5 May 2011  #138
Could you perhaps quote the treaty in which Britain guaranteed Polish territorial integrity?

Could perhaps point out how Poland could support financially, defend and govern Ukrainian Republic in Kiev, defending them at the same them against Red Army ?

Quite possibly the most pathetic lie you have ever told here.

No even comparable to your lies about Riga treaty money , which were promised as a recompense for lost culture goods,by Soviets, and which by the way they never delivered.

Would you enlighten me by what means XVIII century Poland could impose so called polonization ? on anybody?
gumishu 11 | 5,012
5 May 2011  #139
It's sad - I simply cannot understand what drove Poles and Ukrainians to be so horrible towards each other. I can actually sort-of understand the tension between Poles and Jews - but between Poles and Ukrainians, people who are very similar and with a common enemy?

then if you want to touch the times during and after I WW it was in part the policies of Austro-Hungary and Germany that antagonized the two nations (Austrians deliberately supported Ukrainian nationalism most of the time they were in possession of Galicja/Hałyczyna - even the choice of the name of the province during the partitions was purposeful) Austria-Hungary and Germany also pursued a project called Mitteleuropa which called for semi-independent Ukraine under their auspices - so after clashes for Lvov Ukranians most probably saw Poland as the main obstacle to their independence (at least those in Western Ukraine)
Harry
5 May 2011  #140
Could perhaps point out how Poland could support financially, defend and govern Ukrainian Republic in Kiev, defending them at the same them against Red Army ?

That would be Poland's problem: Poland was the one that chose to sign the treaties in question. Just as Poland was the one which decided to break the terms of the treaties with Ukraine, Lithuania and Czechoslovakia (twice) in a single 20-year period.

By the way, could you be so kind as to point to the part of the Treaty of Warsaw which says that the capital of the Ukrainian republic must be in Kiev rather than in territory controlled by alliance forces at the time a mutually agreed peace treaty was signed with the USSR. Thank you in advance.

No even comparable to your lies about Riga treaty money , which were promised as a recompense for lost culture goods,by Soviets,

Oh, I see, the millions which Poland demanded was recompense for lost culture goods. How cynical people would have to be to think that, given how some Poles whine about the west selling Poland to the USSR even though not a penny was sent to the west, those millions were actually the price for which Poland sold her Ukrainian allies to the USSR.
gumishu 11 | 5,012
5 May 2011  #141
That would be Poland's problem: Poland was the one that chose to sign the treaties in question. Just as Poland was the one which decided to break the terms of the treaties with Ukraine, Lithuania and Czechoslovakia (twice) in a single 20-year period.

yeah looks like Poland went on a serious conquest among it's neighbours :P - btw how many Czechs or Lithuanians ended up in Poland after the alleged conquests??

I think I will put Harry on ignore eventually cause his getting on my nerves
(by the way Harry could you please explain to me what would have been the point of keeping the whole Polish fleet in Baltic Sea in 1939 - could you for example elaborate on the fate of the part of the fleet that remained in Baltic Sea? - you should remember that infamous 'Pekin' operation)
Koala 1 | 332
5 May 2011  #142
That would be Poland's problem: Poland was the one that chose to sign the treaties in question. Just as Poland was the one which decided to break the terms of the treaties with Ukraine, Lithuania and Czechoslovakia (twice) in a single 20-year period.

Lithuania and Czech captured ethnically Polish territories when Poland was fighting on multiple fronts with Germans, Russians/Soviets and Ukrainians at the same time. They both got what they deserved, although allying with Germany to capture Zaolzie was extremely stupid.

Would you enlighten me by what means XVIII century Poland could impose so called polonization ? on anybody?

Requiring Polish language on all levels of administration and education could be one of such means (don't know if that was actually the case).
Ironside 48 | 9,704
5 May 2011  #143
Cossack

Cossack was kind of nomads on the wild plains of eastern and southern parts of edge-land of the Polish Kingdom.
So, called wild fields were for a most part uninhabited; on the River Dnieper islands all community of free warriors dwelt, warring with Tatars (Crimea) they Muslims alter-ego, and roaming Black Sea, pirating Ottomans ships and now and then villages and towns.

They had their owns laws, customs and traditions - not unlike pirates on some remote Caribbean island - except that Cossacks were more land bound.

They wanted to continue their entrepreneur of robbery(not unlike banks, nowadays), but Ottoman rules - the most powerful country(Muslim ) at this part of the world - said to Polish King - hey aren't those dogs living in your land ? Deal with them or I will look for you in Krakow, instead of chasing them in the bushes.

So, all this conflict was a result of Kings efforts to take Cossacks under control, those efforts were undermined by nobles, who were afraid of king tyranny if he was given in hand those ten of thousands Cossacks.

Kind in secret send his man, noble but respected all over edge-land (ukraine) of the Kingdom, to gather as many men as he can, then King would go to them and their would bow and give him a homage. Furthermore they would curb nobles, and Cossacks would be his Royal Hand in implementing a new order. King will be Ruler at last, not Servant of Parliament.

Chmielnicki did his part, but then King died, before he could go ahead with his plans.
And the rest is history.
gumishu 11 | 5,012
5 May 2011  #144
Requiring Polish language on all levels of administration and education could be one of such means (don't know if that was actually the case).

there was little to none state-run education in Poland at that time
Ironside 48 | 9,704
5 May 2011  #145
Oh, I see

Stop yapping ! Those lies get on my bits! Will care to provide us with a bill/recite for betraying Petlura? If not shut your trap!

That would be Poland's problem:

Sure, then Britain should go to war with Soviets as soon as they realised that Poland is not an independent state - means 1947-48!

hen if you want to touch the times during and after I WW it was in part the policies of Austro-Hungary and Germany that antagonized the two nations (Austrians deliberately supported Ukrainian nationalism

Ukrainians claim ownership the land which belonged to Poland continuously for centuries from 1367.;plus there wasn't ever Ukrainians independent state before 1990. Then the Wolyn massacre. What do you expect?

Requiring Polish language on all levels of administration and education could be one of such means

So, you don't know how Poland could implement polonization [i][/i]in XVIII century, yet you assume she did!!!!? Nice !
:D
hubabuba - | 113
5 May 2011  #146
Unless you are an ally of Poland, in which case you may find that your entire country has disappeared at the end of the war, your soldiers are now in Polish detention centres.

it is unfortunate, and I always believed that Poland should apologised for that( as opposed to Vistula action), the thing is Ukraine was useless, they didnt manage to do anything, and Piłsudski who signed the treaty was removed from power just after the war, Dmowskis conception of Poland and allies was totally different. As far as I know Piłsudski did apologise to Petluras soldiers, but he was just unable to do anything else. I agree with You on that- a bug shame.

And could you perhaps remind me what happened to the disputed territory which Poland lost the last time it lost a war? Didn't Poland sign international agreements accepting the new borders and then invade that land at the first opportunity?

what are You talking about?

yes there was - Cossacks even resolved to be independant of Rzeczpospolita under the auspices of Turkey -

i didnt really hear about such cooperation with Turkey, but I dont dismiss it, can You give some more details, links maybe?
It was not Pl vs Ukr, it was more of a class conflict than anything else. The magnats were ethnically Ruthenians, and many people on Ukr side were Polish szlachta,

Oh, and you may wish to note that the revised borders of Poland were both supported by the Polish prime minister in exile and agreed to by the government of Poland after the war.

now, i know that You are just joking here :]

Poland might have had these eastern territories for centuries prior to World War 2.

I agree, well almost:]exceptions would be Lwów and Grodno, It just saddens me because there is not much of Poland in Poland now, I mean the architecture,
delphiandomine 83 | 17,625
5 May 2011  #147
Requiring Polish language on all levels of administration and education could be one of such means (don't know if that was actually the case).

During the II RP (which I'm familiar with) - they essentially banned the use of Ukrainian after the Austrians had allowed a certain degree of use in public life. One such great example was the demand that professors at the L'viv university had to swear an oath of allegiance to Poland - which understandably upset the Ukrainian professors.
Harry
5 May 2011  #148
yeah looks like Poland went on a serious conquest among it's neighbours :P - btw how many Czechs or Lithuanians ended up in Poland after the alleged conquests??

Wilno Voivodship in 1931 had a population of 1,276,000 and (according to the Polish government) was 59.7% Polish. So it would seem that at least a thousand times more Czechs or Lithuanians ended up in Poland after their countries were invaded by Poland in contravention of international law than the number of Poles who fought in the Battle of Britain and we never stop hearing about that huge number.

by the way Harry could you please explain to me what would have been the point of keeping the whole Polish fleet in Baltic Sea in 1939 - could you for example elaborate on the fate of the part of the fleet that remained in Baltic Sea? - you should remember that infamous 'Pekin' operation

Not much really. I just find it somewhat amusing that the Polish fleet was sailing in one direction on 1 September and British ships were sailing in exactly the opposite direction but that so many Poles criticise Britain for not doing enough to help Poland.

Lithuania and Czech captured ethnically Polish territories when Poland was fighting on multiple fronts with Germans, Russians/Soviets and Ukrainians at the same time.

Not this old chestnut again. For the umpteenth time, Poland was fighting neither the Soviets nor the Russians nor the Germans at the time when the Czechoslovaks enforced the interim agreement which Poland and Czechoslovakia had agreed in 1918 (and which Polish forces had broken the very next day by invading territory which Poland had agreed to be part of Czechoslovakia at least until a final agreement was reached). I'll have to do a bit of research about your claims regarding Lithuania.

Sure, then Britain should go to war with Soviets as soon as they realised that Poland is not an independent state - means 1947-48!

Poor child, reduced to making such pathetic arguments! Firstly, the treaty in question did not apply to the USSR, only to Germany. And secondly, at that time Poland insisted that it was an independent state.
silent reader
5 May 2011  #149
L'viv university had to swear an oath of allegiance to Poland - which understandably upset the Ukrainian professors.

Doesn't British citizen have to be loyal to Great Britain regardless if he is Welsh, Scottish, Irish, English, Pakistanian, Indian, Jamaican etc?
So what did make them upset?

Could we talk for once about Ukrainian guilts towards Poles? I find this forum pretty unobjective. You like to discuss about Polish wrong deeds in history but nothing when the Poles fell victims. My family members died during so called Volhynia massacre. Why we talk so much about Vistula action and how the Ukrainians were treated before war but it seems that Ukrainian nationalist murdering Polish civilians are fully acepted and justified on this forum.

I have nothing against Ukrainians, I understand that there are no nations which have no dark pages in their history but it just make me angry when I see people (especially foreigners) who discuss Polish-Ukrainians issues so one-sided way.
gumishu 11 | 5,012
5 May 2011  #150
Wilno Voivodship in 1931 had a population of 1,276,000 and (according to the Polish government) was 59.7% Polish

and what was the percentage of Lithuanians there?

Zamieszkane było w większości przez Polaków (57,9%) i Białorusinów (25,7%) z niewielką domieszką Rosjan, Litwinów i Karaimów. W miastach (z wyjątkiem Wilna) przeważającą część ludności stanowili Żydzi (8,1%). Co do stosunków wyznaniowych 61,2% było wyznania rzymskokatolickiego, 26,9% prawosławnego, 9,4% mojżeszowego, 2,4% przypada na inne wyznania.

adding up the percentages of Poles, Belarusians and Jews you receive a figure of 91,7 - so there was about 8 per cent Lithuanians living there hardly forming a majority anywhere - you end up with a figure of about 100 000 Lithuanians in Wilno Voivodship then - according to Lithuanian sources the Wilno/Vilnius city itself had 3 per cent of Lithuanian population - and they wanted the city to be the capital of their country - btw there were no mass expulsions of Lithuanians from the area

Not much really. I just find it somewhat amusing that the Polish fleet was sailing in one direction on 1 September and British ships were sailing in exactly the opposite direction but that so many Poles criticise Britain for not doing enough to help Poland.

was British Navy supposed to enter the Baltic?? I don't think so - so the British Navy was not heading the opposite direction really

Home / News / Poland A and Ukraine B. Compare how far Poland has advanced.
Discussion is closed.