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.


Sokrates 8 | 3,346
5 May 2011  #181
You brought numbers to show the claim Poland has on lost eastern territories...I did the same with the gained western territories.
Of course, where your math was met with widespread approval, my numbers were not...surprise, surprise!

Specify please, because if you're talking about Greater Poland these numbers are false (i had to double check).
gumishu 11 | 5,012
5 May 2011  #182
Harry:
And why did they do that? Because Poland was exercising sovereign rule in the disputed area despite having agreed not to.
Parliament election is hardly exercising sovereign rule. The bottom line of the 1919-20 affair is that Czechoslovakia robbed the regions where Poles were ethnical majority of the option to choose their preferred country. How is that OK for local people?

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)
Harry
5 May 2011  #183
Parliament election is hardly exercising sovereign rule.

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

The bottom line of the 1919-20 affair is that Czechoslovakia robbed the regions where Poles were ethnical majority of the option to choose their preferred country. How is that OK for local people?

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.

he once insisted Polish navy should have stayed in its whole in the Baltic

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 like Harry is prejudiced against things Polish ;) - let him be

Seems to me that you are a liar who is trying to be deliberately offensive.
gumishu 11 | 5,012
5 May 2011  #184
Parliament election is hardly exercising sovereign rule. The bottom line of the 1919-20 affair is that Czechoslovakia robbed the regions where Poles were ethnical majority of the option to choose their preferred country. How is that OK for local people?

but it was very OK for Czechoslovakia - they sort of badly needed that coal that the bloody Poles lived on top of
Bratwurst Boy 5 | 9,714
5 May 2011  #185
Specify please, because if you're talking about Greater Poland these numbers are false (i had to double check).

That was the census of 1905 Silesia...not Greater Poland I think...
gumishu 11 | 5,012
5 May 2011  #186
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.

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)
antheads 13 | 327
5 May 2011  #187
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.
Koala 1 | 332
5 May 2011  #188
Actually, yes it is. As was pointed out to Poland, before Czech troops went in.

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.

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.

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.
hubabuba - | 113
5 May 2011  #189
You brought numbers to show the claim Poland has on lost eastern territories...I did the same with the gained western territories.
Of course, where your math was met with widespread approval, my numbers were not...surprise, surprise!

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

Krakow is nice too, be happy about that!

To go to war about cities and lands was what brought so much catastrophes to our peoples. It's no use....

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
Harry
5 May 2011  #190
1. it was not an international treaty but a local agreement

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

2. Poland only decreed creation of parliamentary constituencies in the part of the region that was locally agreed to be Polish

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

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)

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).

The issue was later resolved peacefully and legally though (but circumstances of that were still dubious).

Well, resolved at least until Poland decided to join the Nazi invasion of Czechoslovakia.
antheads 13 | 327
5 May 2011  #191
You think that Poland is important enough for its history to be taught at schools anywhere other than Poland? Good joke!

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.

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

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.
gumishu 11 | 5,012
5 May 2011  #192
t was an agreement signed in written form between two nation states: therefore it was an international treaty (although an interim one).

give a link

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

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
Koala 1 | 332
5 May 2011  #193
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.
silent reader
5 May 2011  #194
Happy to ignore you

Why?
According to you is it good that Ukrainian nationalists were killing Poles?
gumishu 11 | 5,012
5 May 2011  #195
The Russians waited 8 days before they invaded poland

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
antheads 13 | 327
5 May 2011  #196
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?
gumishu 11 | 5,012
5 May 2011  #197
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.

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.
antheads 13 | 327
5 May 2011  #198
the Russians waited two weeks actually - remember 17th of September

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
gumishu 11 | 5,012
5 May 2011  #199
he germans lost over 50 thousand men

only about 10 thousand of these were killed as far as I know
Sokrates 8 | 3,346
5 May 2011  #200
That was the census of 1905 Silesia...not Greater Poland I think...

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

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

Armies list wounded as losses.
Koala 1 | 332
5 May 2011  #201
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?

It's a Lithuanian city now. It was not one in 1920, though.
gumishu 11 | 5,012
5 May 2011  #202
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.

c'mon Harry wake up :P

I surmise you have lost an arguement Harry
Harry
5 May 2011  #203
First constitution in europe

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.

I doubt you would have the guts to make that statement in polish company if you ever emerge from your expat bubble.

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.

give a link

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

the Czechs decided to conquer most of the area - so they have violated the 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).

if britian and france had actually lived up to their treaty agreements russia would not have invaded poland.

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

But of course the poles did not expect the french and brits to betray them.

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.

and ? did those British ships engage any Germans?

Yes actually, once war had been declared.

Coincidently that was the time agreed between the polish and the french/british. The poles would hold the germans at bay for 2 weeks

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

the french/poms

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

We killed more german soldiers and destroyed more german equipment in 1939 than the french/brittish would in 1940.

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]

I surmise you have lost an arguement Harry

Oh look: you're wrong yet again!

BTW regional Polish beer is superb. Do forgive me for enjoying it before replying to you.[/edit]
gumishu 11 | 5,012
5 May 2011  #204
You claim a treaty signed between two nation-states was a local agreement: you prove it was a local agreement.

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

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

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)

gumishu:
and ? did those British ships engage any Germans?

Yes actually, once war had been declared.

well, so BÅ‚yskawica, 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

gumishu:
the Czechs decided to conquer most of the area - so they have violated the 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).

please do link it here :)
Nathan 18 | 1,363
5 May 2011  #205
What about all those Bandera nationalists?

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.

oh and he claims Polish troops were running from Germans in 1939

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

"At dawn we crosses the border...There was virtually no resistance...There were rumors of sharpshooters and partisans, but I never saw or heard anything of them, except for the occasional sound of a shot in the distance...The Poles seemed to be completely apathetic, and there were so many prisoners that nobody bothered to guard them or even tell them where to go".

Hmm...

After you booted Poles and settled Germans there, i'm sorry if i do not recognize a majority forcefully settled there, so if i invade Berlin, kick Germans out and settle in Poles thats a polish city then?

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

A large number of Polish colonists were encouraged by the Polish government to resettle in majority-Ukrainian territories. This number was estimated at 300,000 in both Galicia and Volhynia by Ukrainian sources and less than 100,000 by Polish sources (see osadnik) [12] Although the majority of the local population was Ukrainian, virtually all government official positions were assigned to Poles. Land reform designed to favour the Poles[13] brought further alienation of the Ukrainian population.[8]

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

The territorial split on Silesia was supposed to be decided by poll

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 bottom line of the 1919-20 affair is that Czechoslovakia robbed the regions where Poles were ethnical majority of the option to choose their preferred country.

The following fact seemingly didn't bother Poles:

In Eastern Galicia, Ukrainians made up approximately 65% of the population while Poles made up 22% of the population.[1]

East Galicia

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?

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

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.

it is unfortunate, and I always believed that Poland should apologised for that

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

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

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

Nathan, looking at Your recent history You shouldnt really talk about courage

Can you elaborate on this one?

btw, I read that genetically West Ukraine has very simlar DNA to Polish one:]

Are you calling me a moron?

wouldnt it be better to come back to old ways of slavic multiculturalism??some union maybe:]]]]

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

2. Support Ukraine's entrance to EU and NATO (even if we have to pull them by their ears.)

Ouch! No need, though. We will be there when we are ready and accepted by more persuasive voices :)
southern 75 | 7,097
5 May 2011  #206
Could you perhaps go into detail as to what more Britain could have done to keep to her treaty obligations to Poland?

You could try to invade Germany.
Maaarysia
5 May 2011  #207
I know. Well, Bandera showed you what it is like and I hope this taught you somethin

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.
Sokrates 8 | 3,346
5 May 2011  #208
So killing women and kids is a way of teaching?

Nope thats ukrainians fighting! When its soldiers ukrainians generally run.
Ironside 48 | 9,704
5 May 2011  #209
All these lands had 65% Ukrainian majority.

Again talking out of your ass ? The lands in question had been created by Austrian Kaiser in 1849 to create such artificial majority.
Harry
5 May 2011  #210
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

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

so was France, Belgium, Norway, Holland, Yugoslavia, Greece, Danmark

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.

it would be the same story with the UK had it not the defence of the English Channel

Prove it.

well, so BÅ‚yskawica, 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

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

Polish ships by-passing the British patrol

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'.

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