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

Specify please, because if you're talking about Greater Poland these numbers are false (i had to double check).

talking to Harry is often very diifficult - he once insisted Polish navy should have stayed in its whole in the Baltic (and then most probably end up like those unfortunate ORP 'Wicher' and ORP 'Gryf' and most of Polish submarines) - seems to me like Harry is prejudiced against things Polish ;) - let him be

oh and he claims Polish troops were running from Germans in 1939 (if I understood that correctly) - yeah sure - they kept on fleeing Germans for three days at Mokra - so disorganized they were :P (and the poor Westerplatte guys who could not swim and escape to Sweden had no choice but to fight :P - they were so scared of the Germans they kept on fighting for 7 days)

Actually, yes it is. As was pointed out to Poland, before Czech troops went in.


When one breaks an international treaty, one loses the right to whine about the effects of that action. And let's not forget that Poland first broke the interim agreement the very day after it was signed.


Could you be so kind as to quote the post in which I did that? Oh sorry, the search engine here shows that you are a liar. I said, as I have always said, that the bulk of the Polish navy ran away days before the first shots were fired and that they sailed straight past British vessels which were going the other way in order to take on the same Germans that the Polish navy was running from. Those are the historical facts and those are the facts about my posts.


Seems to me that you are a liar who is trying to be deliberately offensive.

but it was very OK for Czechoslovakia - they sort of badly needed that coal that the bloody Poles lived on top of

That was the census of 1905 Silesia...not Greater Poland I think...

1. it was not an international treaty but a local agreement
2. Poland only decreed creation of parliamentary constituencies in the part of the region that was locally agreed to be Polish
3. a final demarkation was supposed to be agreed by central governments - however Czechoslovakia decided it needed the area badly and resolved to conquer it (january 1919)

The upheavel of people to the new post war reality has already happened. Each nation, poland, czech and ukraine has comfortable majority of people who identify with that country within its borders. These countries, 70 years ago bitter enemies, are now strong allies and are experiencing a common journey into european integration as slavic brothers and sisters. What happaned in the past has become as irrelevant as a scot talking about reclaiming vengeance from england. Just some of the nationalists on this board have not relised it because yes the scars of war are still fresh on families and the cultural psyche. Within a decade such talk of regaining lwow as our land will be relegated to the dustbin of history. Of course minority rights must be respected and the process of reconciliation for ww1/ww2 sins followed through.

I don't think so, those people might have chosen deputees to Polish parliament but could have wound up within Czech Republic anyway. The effect was only psychological, of no real importance outside of that.


The issue was later resolved peacefully and legally though (but circumstances of that were still dubious). Luckily Poles and Czechs live there together in agreement and mutual respect to this day (unlike eg. Slovakians and Hungarians), so nothing bad happened in the long run.

i wouldnt call it widespread approval, You brought Silesia and the case for me doesnt look as it does to You- so the next arguments starts, now over Silesia, this way we will never get anywher


I am not talking about a war, neither I think it will happen, nor I want it. I am just very sentimental, and architecture is my hobby so every time i am in Lwow it gives me a real heartache, and that is it. Besides Poles should not forget about it and let history to be rewritten

It was an agreement signed in written form between two nation states: therefore it was an international treaty (although an interim one).


So they exercised sovereign rule in territory in which they had agreed not to.


And if the Polish government had just said "OK, we'll stick to the treaty as you request.", what would the Czechoslovaks have done? Perhaps they could have followed the behaviour of Poland on the very day after the international interim treaty was signed and just invaded the disputed land. Or maybe they could have sent 'rebel' troops as part of a 'mutiny' (as Poland did).


Well, resolved at least until Poland decided to join the Nazi invasion of Czechoslovakia.

First constitution in europe, saved europe from the muslims in vienna just for starters, made possible the cracking of the enigma cypher for starters. Oh and the only place you can get away with the running away from germans crap is on the interet. I doubt you would have the guts to make that statement in polish company if you ever emerge from your expat bubble.


yes that is one way of looking at it. Another would be that they were reinforced their defences before the inevitable invasion. But of course the poles did not expect the french and brits to betray them. The russians waited 8 days before they invaded poland , if britian and france had actually lived up to their treaty agreements russia would not have invaded poland.

give a link


I think you don't understand my point - there was an interim local agreement as for the demarcation in Silesia - the Czechs decided to conquer most of the area - so they have violated the local agreement

Wilno was only Lithuanian in 1920 because Soviets handed it over to Lithuania after they lost in August. They did it only to stirr up a conflict between Poland and Lithuania and succeeded in that goal. In 1919 Wilno was in Polish hands. As quoted earlier, little to none Lithuanians lived in that area - they had pretty much no claims for that territory other than some abstract XIIIth century traditions.

I find it mindboggling that so many people are against a newly formed country unifying all people of the same nationality within its borders.

Why?
According to you is it good that Ukrainian nationalists were killing Poles?

the Russians waited two weeks actually - remember 17th of September (the rhyme's coincidental) - but signing Ribbentrop-Molotov they must have already known Franco-British guarantees to Poland would remain on paper - they could have been just cautious

yes but what is the percentage of polish people now in wilno? and if you want it to becoem part of poland what do u do with the lithuianians?

and ? did those British ships engage any Germans?

(edit: they could not engage Germans on September 1- why???)

btw the three Polish destroyers met two British warships and a couple of British sailors boarded the Polish ships (edit was here ;)(including wireless operators)

and well how do you Harry imagine the three ships becoming inter operational with the British Navy within hours ???

On 31 August, the ships were spotted and followed by German reconnaissance seaplanes, and the group changed course towards Norway in order to shake off the pursuit during the night, when they returned to their original course towards the UK. The ships entered the North Sea, and at 0925 on 1 September learned about the German invasion of Poland. At 1258, they encountered the Royal Navy destroyers HMS Wanderer and Wallace and received a liaison officer. At 1737, they docked in Leith, the port of Edinburgh.

Yes you are correct. Coincidently that was the time agreed between the polish and the french/british. The poles would hold the germans at bay for 2 weeks and then the french/poms were sopoused to throw everything at them. Despite the overwhelming strength of the germans the polish managed to bog them down for 3 weeks even when attacked on both fronts. We killed more german soldiers and destroyed more german equipment in 1939 than the french/brittish would in 1940. the germans lost over 50 thousand men and more than 900 tanks/armoured cars in attacking poland.

A far cry from the bs from harry of poles running away

only about 10 thousand of these were killed as far as I know

Ah thats different, western Silesia was at the time mostly german, its eastern part though was predominantly polish.


Armies list wounded as losses.

It's a Lithuanian city now. It was not one in 1920, though.

c'mon Harry wake up :P

I surmise you have lost an arguement Harry

Provided one ignores both the Magna Carta and the 1689 Bill of Rights in, well, I'll let you fill in the name of the country.


Actually I rather enjoy comparing to Poles their 40 to one (with the one being in heavily fortified bunkers) heroic loss to the British 50+ to one (with the one being being walls made of sacks of grain) heroic victory.


You claim a treaty signed between two nation-states was a local agreement: you prove it was a local agreement.


Got any proof? There's internationally-witnessed documentary proof that the Czechs actually asked Poland to keep to the terms of the international interim treaty and Poland refused. And anyway, Poland had already broken the treaty (the day after it was signed).


Somewhat unlikely, given that the Anglo-Polish treaty specifically excluded an attack by the USSR.


Could you perhaps go into detail as to what more Britain could have done to keep to her treaty obligations to Poland? I have asked this question numerous times of Poles and not even a single Pole (plastic or otherwise) has ever answered.


Yes actually, once war had been declared.


Do feel free to quote the part of the Anglo-Polish treaty which supports that statement. Oh, sorry, you can't.


Ah, racist abuse: always a sign that somebody knows that they have just lost a debate.


Even if that claim was true (which it is not), it still doesn't change one fact: the entire country was captured in less than three months. Good work by the nation which you disgrace by claiming to be a member of.

[start edit]


Oh look: you're wrong yet again!

BTW regional Polish beer is superb. Do forgive me for enjoying it before replying to you.[/edit]

as it was a international treaty you should be alright finding the right info on the wikipedia - don't you think - so go on - you show me yours then I'll show you mine :P


so was France, Belgium, Norway, Holland, Yugoslavia, Greece, Danmark - it would be the same story with the UK had it not the defence of the English Channel ( it probably would be the same story with the Soviet Union had not Hitler raged about lowly Yugoslavia)


well, so Błyskawica, Grom i Burza could not possibly have joined the British on the 1st September to fight the Germans because the British simply were not fighting anyone - and behold they could not have been on the way to engage the Germans at the time (for the same reason) - this solves your mistery about Polish ships by-passing the British patrol (as I have mentioned they met and received sailors form the British)

btw the English wikipedia article on Plan Peking (Operation Peking) clearly states it was created and advanced by the British admiralty and agreed upon by the Polish military leadership


please do link it here :)

What about them? You don't like Bandera? What about Bereza Kartuska Concentration camp? Do you like it? Policies of Sanation and Pacification? Destruction of churches and libraries by Poles? Exclusion of the autochtone population from politics, education, offices? That is what you like. I know. Well, Bandera showed you what it is like and I hope this taught you something.


There is an interesting eye-witness testimony by lieutenant von Bogenhardt (about Aug.1, 1939). Here is an excerpt:


Hmm...


This is what Poles where doing in occupied Vilnius and Lviv. I am not though sorry that I don't recognize that artificial majority.


Note-worthy is the fact that this forceful occupation was especially severe in Volyn' region. It led to some consequences.


And how was it decided in Lithuania, Ukraine and Czech republic? Also by poll? Or by sending the army all over the place ;) and then crying that "we were attacked by everyone". Poor creatures, I really pity you.


The following fact seemingly didn't bother Poles:




All these lands had 65% Ukrainian majority. There were cities like Sanok, Jaroslaw, Cieszanow, Brzozow, Peremyshel..., which are now in Poland. So, you robbed us of all these lands! Did you ask the majority where they want to be? Nope. It is only when Poles are majority the voting counts, right?


Your hobby is not architecture. You just like being a ridiculous, that's all. Lovers of architecture travel the world, enjoy and study the works of the past and present. Find a man and let him giving you a heartbreak.


You don't need to apologize. Nobody gives a damn about your apology.


So, was it basically Poles led by hetman Khmelnicky fighting against Ukrainian magnats? Interesting.


Can you elaborate on this one?


Are you calling me a moron?


And what is there now? Monoculturalism?! Union? With whom? ;) Who needs you?


Ouch! No need, though. We will be there when we are ready and accepted by more persuasive voices :)

You could try to invade Germany.

So killing women and kids is a way of teaching? I show this comment to my friends, let them know what an Ukrainian say about killing Poles.

You don't have to reply, actually better don't. You have already taught me something today about Ukrainians.

Nope thats ukrainians fighting! When its soldiers ukrainians generally run.

Again talking out of your ass ? The lands in question had been created by Austrian Kaiser in 1849 to create such artificial majority.

You are claiming that a treaty between two nations was a 'local agreement': prove it.


I've never heard a person from any of those countries (or pretending to be from them) boasting about what a kicking they gave the invading Nazis.


Prove it.


So, simply because Britain wasn't fighting, Poland couldn't? Pathetic.


Each of them could have turned round and joined the fight: how many of them did? Oh yes, none: but keep on whining about the 'British betrayal'.