10-07-2002 21:06									#61
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara [quote]Cockney, the article seems to lay the fault of the war on Pilsudski, who wanted to recreate greater Poland.

It says no such thing. It says the Poles wanted a free and independent state and that the Russians wanted to make them a puppet state.

From the article:

quote: ...This history made the Poles see Russia both as an oppressor and, in 1919-20, as the key threat to their independence. The Bolsheviks, for their part, proclaimed the principle of self-determination - but in fact followed a policy of uniting the former Russian western provinces with Soviet Russia. To this end, they established communist governments and tried to take over the territories in question. The Poles saw this as resurgent Russian imperialism.

quote: ...Pilsudski saw Soviet expansion into the borderlands as a resurgence of Russian imperialism, and thus a threat to Polish independence.

quote: Contrary to the view prevalent in the West and in Russia , Pilsudski did not want to annex the eastern territories held by Poland before the first partition of 1772.In fact , since the late 1890s he had advocated a Polish-Belorussian- Ukrainian-Lithuanian federation, designed to weaken Russia and thus provide security for Poland.

quote: When Polish-Soviet talks began in Minsk, in early August, the Soviet delegation demanded that Poland abolish its army in favor of a "workers' militia;" abolish all arms production; and agree to Red Army passage through Polish lands any time the Soviet government demanded it. Acceptance of these terms would have made Poland a Soviet republic subject to Moscow.

I think you should also remember that in 1919 the Poles didn't invade Russia, they attacked the Bolsheviks in Belarus and overthrew the communist government in Wilno (which had a mostly Polish population), where they were welcome by the populace.

The Soviets then built up a force and had plans to invade Poland, the Poles struck at the Ukraine first to stop them, Pilsudski supported an independent Ukraine.

quote: The part about Lenin trying to export the Revolution to Poland is true. Once Poland started the war, Lenin felt they should try and conquer it and spread the Revolution. It's entirely lilely that had Warsaw fallen and Poland become socialist, there would have been a successful German Revolution. The causes of Stalinism would have been abolished long before he could have taken over, and we'd live in a true communist world today. So, I'll forgive the adventurism on Lenin's part once the Poles had been rebuffed.

"Export the revolution" doublespeak anyone

Although I don't agree that Western Europe would have become communist, if what you say is true, then thank christ for the Poles, they may have saved us all

	10-07-2002 21:21									#62
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

it's an internationally recognised fact that Poland is the fake country of car thefts

	10-07-2002 23:13									#63
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

If my understanding of history is correct, in 1939 both Germany and the Soviet Union had territorial demands on Poland, Germany from the point of view of lands lost to Poland from the Versailles Treaty and the Soviet Union due to the war between Poland and the USSR and early 20s. It also seems that Poland only want to fight the Germans and not the Russians and are perhaps even looking for Soviet support against the German invasion of 1939. The seems that Poland was willing to give back to Russia land it took from Russia int the 20s; but was unwilling to similarly give back the land it took from Germany and the end of World War I.

Why is this?

I also think is very interesting that France and England declared war only on Germany and not on the Soviet Union when both invaded Poland. Was as dictated by the Polish government's "cooperative" attitude with the Soviet Union?

Last edited by Ned on 10-07-2002 at 23:54

	10-07-2002 23:16									#64
	Full PM-box? Change here!

I think it had more to do with Britain and France not wanting to take on more than they could handle. Churchil wanted to decalre war on the USSR during the Winter War, but was not allowed to do so because it would have more or less been suicide.

	10-07-2002 23:33									#65
	Increase the size of your Attachments

No no no Poland was completely unwilling to hand over any territories to USSR. Soviet-western pacts of the war are something like Polish Munich. We weren't asked, for Higher Reasons (but I agree with them though they didn't have to give USSR a half of our before-the-war territory and make us
by 1/3 - compared to present times- or 1/4 - compared to before the war smaller than we were. Poles didn't want to accept territotial loses at the west and rather wanted to get
only eastern Prussia a bit of Pomerania and Upper Silesia
- ethnically Polish in bigger or smaller extent territories-
to not give USSR a reason to demand Polish cities of the west. Still, Poland was-after Germany - the worst treated
country. We lost two of three our most important cities.

	10-07-2002 23:46									#66
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara Yes, the USSR did almost take Warsaw, after driving the Poles out from the initial invasion. If Stalin hadn't disobeyed orders and tried to go for his own glory, the Soviets might have been able to smash the invaders. As it was, Stalin's treachery allowed the Poles to concentrate first on one army and then Stalin's. The USSR surrendered to Poland after this and gave up the territory that they would later reoccupy in 1939. Poland started the war, no the USSR. The USSR was already fighting 13 other coutrnies and six White Armies. They weren't looking for yet another enemy. In other words, Poland

Most of the areas Poland gained were ethnically Polish. The province of Poland in Czarist Russia consisted of areas of Poland originally ceded to Austria and Prussia at the 3rd partition of Poland, then formed into the Grand Duchy of Warsaw by Napoleon, and finally given to Russia after Napoleon's defeat. When Poland succeeded from Russia it consisted of less than half the then current Polish speaking peoples. The Soviet Union ought to have offered those areas to Poland since they were acquired by the "bourgeoise".

	11-07-2002 00:09									#67
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara During the occupation, the Poles gleefully participated in the persecution of the Jews, turning them over to the Nazis, murdering them themselves, working at the death camps, stealing Jewish property. Even when they did help the Jews, they did so in such a way as to tqake advantage of them, gouging them for food and taking bribes not to turn them in. After the war, when a scant 60,000 of the original three million Jews were left and tried to return home, they were met with violence and pogroms. Only 9,000 Jews remained in Poland for the longest time, though I undertand there's about 25,000 Jews in Poland now. Yes, Poland was so nice to the Jews.

But this was true ALL OVER EUROPE! The centuies old tradition of anti-semitism in Europe, so additionally inflamed over the 50+ years after the publication of the phony "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" did not melt away on V-E day. They didn't disappear when the awful truth about the Nazis final solution was made public either. Most of the Jewish survivors of WW2 had nowhere safe to go after the war, so they went to Israel. Initially Europeans were supportive of Israel because sending the proof of their complicity in the crime of the century to another continent seemed the ideal solution to their quandry. Besides, the Jews didn't really belong in Europe anyway. Now their former countrymen are fighting for their lives, and the fighting is getting dirty, but don't expect the people who puit the Jews back in Israel to feel the slightest moral compulsion to help their old victims in their current plight.

	11-07-2002 00:16									#68
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Then, if Poland had no intention of cooperating with the Russians, the German-Russian invasion of Sept. '39 was either "equally" wrong or "equally" somewhat justified - if reacquiring land lost due to a war is "justified."

Looking back, the sudden hardening of British and French attitudes to the German invasion of Poland was just a bit amusing. Germany had for several years been undoing the Versailles Treaty with the tacit consent of Britain and France. Why should they now, at this late stage, attempt to stop Germany?

Given the disastrous results of the British-French declaration of war, what, if anything can we learn from this?

	11-07-2002 00:28									#69
	Put an end to popups!

How deep are he mineshafts in Poland, Dr Strangelove?

	11-07-2002 00:29									#70
	Suffering from ads?

Dr. Strangelove, The Minneapolis Airport is name Lindberg Field - Charles Lindberg, the pilot who first flew across the Atlantic. Well this same Lindberg was quoted in 1941 as blaming the Jews for the growing anti-German feelings in the US - they were war mongers in this view.

In retrospect, Lindberg's position seems somewhat laughable. However, it also reflects a very cavalier attitude about the Jews from a leading American. That anyone of such stature could make such statements is today simply unbelievable.

Perhaps American anti-Semitism was less virulent than European anti-Semitism at the time, but it did exist.

But, taking this into account, I could fully understand Lindberg's point of view. To us in the US, this looked like just another European War that George Washington long ago advised us to stay out of.

I also believe our attitudes change dramatically when the Germans invaded the USSR. Suddenly, it no longer looked like German aims were simply to undo the results of the Versailles Treaty. It looked rather, as if world conquest was on their agenda.

Last edited by Ned on 11-07-2002 at 01:02

	11-07-2002 00:33									#71
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Nope, it looked like we had the same enemies as you, but you never helped us wiping out the coms.

	11-07-2002 01:05									#72
	Got spare money?

Well, Ecthelion, how ironic is it that Stalin presided over war crimes trials for Germans for "aggression" when Stalin himself co-invaded Poland.

	11-07-2002 01:07									#73
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Yep.

Why didn't the US annex all of Europe after conquering it?

	11-07-2002 01:13									#74
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by Ned Dr. Strangelove, The Minneapolis Airport is name Lindberg Field - Charles Lindberg, the pilot who first flew across the Atlantic. Well this same Lindberg was quoted in 1941 as blaming the Jews for the growing anti-German feelings in the US - they were war mongers in this view. In retrospect, Lindberg's position seems somewhat laughable. However, it also reflects a very cavalier attitude about the Jews from a leading American. That anyone of such stature could make such statements is today simply unbelievable. Perhaps American anti-Semitism was less virulent than European anti-Semitism at the time, but it did exist. But, taking this into account, I could fully understand Lindberg's point of view. To us in the US, this looked like just another European War that George Washington long ago advised us to stay out of. I also believe our attitudes change dramatically when the Germans invaded the USSR. Suddenly, it no longer looked like German aims were simply to undo the results of the Versailles Treaty. It looked rather, as if world conquest was on their agenda.

Lindberg was tolerated because of national sympathy over the kidnapping-murder of his child. Also consider that he was a celebrity, not a member of the goverment.

Yes, there has been anti-semitism in America, but more along the lines of not letting them join country clubs. The only definite incident of anti-semitic violence that I know of in American history was the lynching of a Jewish man accused of raping and killing a white girl at the turn of the century.

American attitudes began to change first with the fall of Poland and then with the fall of France and the beginning of the Battle of Britain. Edward R. Murrow's broadcasts were quite influential in helping bench sitters make up their minds.

	11-07-2002 01:16									#75
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Ecthelion Nope, it looked like we had the same enemies as you, but you never helped us wiping out the coms.

And this has exactly what to do with the persecution of the Jews? Are you linking the Jews with Soviet communism? Explain to me exactly how the struggle against Soviet communism excuses the genocide of Jews.

	11-07-2002 01:17									#76
	Support Apolyton

since it isn't connected to it, I have no obligation to explain you anything

	11-07-2002 01:38									#77
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Ecthelion since it isn't connected to it, I have no obligation to explain you anything

Well, apparently in the minds of the people who ordered both the "Final Solution" and "Operation Barbarossa" there was a link. The link was the philosophy outlined in "Mein Kampf", so it wasn't about protecting Europe from Bolshevism, but rather it was about constructing the bright shining stinking Nazis future world.

	11-07-2002 01:41									#78
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Of course there was a link. Everyone knows us commies are drones of a Jewish conspiracy. Even we know it.

	11-07-2002 01:44									#79
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

Doc, Ecth was never talking about the Final Solution. He was simply wondering why the US didn't see fit to ally itself with Germany against Soviet Russia, as the Communists were common enemies.

Neither the United States, nor Great Britain, nor any other country in the war fought it help the Jews. Most didn't know what was happening, and those that did seemed to not care. Since the purpose in the Allies fighting the war wasn't about the Jews, then your first post to Ecth is rather a moot point.

	11-07-2002 01:50									#80
	Remove this text

The West found Hitler as a necessary bulwark against Communism, but that didn't mean they wanted to be associated with it. Rather, they hoped that the Nazis would crush the Bolshies without involving them in it. The Nazis, however, kept thumbing the West's noses, making and breaking agreements. Czechoslovakia was a recipient of massive amounts of French investment. When the Nazis seized it, it was rather like taking a French colony. Britain and Poland had a similar relationship. The two imperialist powers hated the Commies, yes, but their Eastern European empires were at stake. That's why the West went to war.

	11-07-2002 02:36									#81
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Some more info.
Perhaps You don't know it, but Polish participants
(40 men) of those atrocities were in fact sentenced
in the fourties, and by that Poland in fact admitted
that Poles were involved in killing jedwabnian Jews.
On the monument in the village there was written however that it's German thing (and that there were 1600 victims while there are some 330-440), and Polish participance wasn't discussed though the case was known in Israel and it was sometimes brought back to
life. The question was German role. they were present there, and organised the mass-murder, but though they were convincing Poles to kill Jews, probably they didn't give an order. But remember that local citizens
generally didn't participate in the murder, they were "neutral" (some tried to save some of the Jews, some time ago a case of one women that was keeping the Jews and was beaten almost to death by one of the murderers
was published as an article) probably afraid -rather of the men involved in the crime than the Germans, though.

" Neither the United States, nor Great Britain, nor any other country in the war fought it help the Jews. Most didn't know what was happening, and those that did seemed to not care. Since the purpose in the Allies fighting the war wasn't about the Jews, then your first post to Ecth is rather a moot point."

It were Poles to first inform Allied forces of what is happening to Jews in fact.
But if my memory isn't failing me, even Jewish ministry by Polish gouverment dfidn't believe that. When he got to know it is true, he commited suicide.

	11-07-2002 02:48									#82
	Full PM-box? Change here!

Dr. Strangelove, What was Murrow saying to get American’s so excited about joining the fight against Germany? On what side of that war, circa 1940, was “truth, justice and the American Way?” IIRC, in 1918 Germany surrendered conditionally based on Wilson's 14 points, below. None of these, save one, included territorial concessions. However at the settlement conference, Britain and France imposed somewhat different conditions including territorial concessions to which Germany (and Austria) had not agreed. The United States Never agreed to these conditions but rather were concerned that they were unfair. We never signed the Treaty. Thus when Germany began to undo the Treaty in the ‘30s, many here in the United States were probably sympathetic -- so much so that entering the war on the side of Britain and France would be to associate America with the unfair Treaty of Versailles.

Thus in 1939, it was far from clear that Britain and France were on the right side of this conflict.

America’s attitude began to change, I believe when Germany signed the German/Japan/Italian Axis agreement in 1940, and then when it invade Russia in 1941. The former placed it in alliance with the fascist regime in Italy that had been aggressively invading other countries, and with Japan, who had attacked China and committed the outrage in Nanking.

quote: 1. No secret treaties 2. Free access to the sea in peace time and war time 3. Free trade between countries 4. Disarmament 5. Colonies to have a say in their future 6. German troops to leave Russia 7. Independence for Belgium 8. France to regain Alsace-Lourraine 9. Frontier between Austria and Italy to be adjusted 10. Self determination for the people of eastern Europe 11. Serbia to have access to the sea 12. Self determination for the people in the Turkish Empire 13. Poland to become an independent state with access to the sea 14. League of Nations to be set up

	11-07-2002 02:59									#83
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Ned Dr. Strangelove, What was Murrow saying to get American’s so excited about joining the fight against Germany? One what side of that war, circa 1940, was “truth, justice and the American Way?” IIRC, in 1918 Germany surrendered conditionally based on Wilson's 14 points, below. None of these, save one, included territorial concessions. However at the settlement conference, Britain and France imposed somewhat different conditions including territorial concessions to which Germany (and Austria) had not agreed. The United States Never agreed to these conditions but rather were concerned that they were unfair. We never signed the Treaty. Thus when Germany began to undo the Treaty in the ‘30s, many here in the United States were probably sympathetic -- so much so that entering the war on the side of Britain and France would be to associate America with the unfair Treaty of Versailles. Thus in 1939, it was far from clear that Britain and France were on the right side of this conflict. America’s attitude began to change, I believe when Germany signed the German/Japan/Italian Axis agreement in 1940, and then when it invade Russia in 1941. The former placed it in alliance with the fascist regime in Italy that had been aggressively invading other countries, and with Japan, who had attacked China and committed the outrage in Nanking.

Murrow gave live radio broadcasts from London during the blitz. His depiction of British heroism in the face of a seemingly vastly superior enemy wgose attacks appeared to be centered on unarmed civilians swung the sympathy of many Americans. I believe that his broadcasts were the first use of real time broadcasts from a war zone.

	11-07-2002 03:05									#84
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

Dr. Strangelove, Unarmed civilians! This is what caused America to enter the war against Germany in 1917. It seems that the Germans never really understood why we got pissed at them in the first WW.

Last edited by Ned on 11-07-2002 at 03:15

	11-07-2002 03:10									#85
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Boris Godunov Doc, Ecth was never talking about the Final Solution. He was simply wondering why the US didn't see fit to ally itself with Germany against Soviet Russia, as the Communists were common enemies.

Yes, but the fact that it was Hitler's Nazis Germany leading the way definitely had a lot to do with why these countries wanted no part of a german led anti-Soviet war.

Most Americans knew that the Germans were persecuting the Jews before the US entered the war. In 1943 photographic evidence about the genocide of the Jews was made available to the US, but John Dulles surpressed it. FDR eventually found out about it and put Morgenthau, the only Jew on his cabinet in charge of disseminating the information. By that time the US was doing all it could to prosecute the war against Hitler, but the US goverment came to an agreement with the other allies that they would no longer turn away Jewish refugees.

The governments of postwar Europe could have put a great deal more effort towards providing for the safety of European Jews.

	11-07-2002 03:19									#86
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Why in the bleeping world would Dulles try to suppress such information? Such outrages would seem to have only increased America's support of the war effort.

	11-07-2002 03:43									#87
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Dulles was a closet anti-semite. He thought that the evidence was forged by whiney Jews!

	11-07-2002 03:54									#88
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

Could this also be a reason the Pope did not act? Suspicion that the evidence was fabricated by the "whiney" Jews?

	11-07-2002 04:25									#89
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

There was lots of belief that the "evidence" was manufactured by the Soviets in order to rush an American invasion of France. I'd like to see some sources on the Morgenthau info, because my understanding is most Americans were unprepared for what they discovered at Bergen-Belsen.

One of my high school teachers was in the first squad to enter Bergen-Belsen.

	11-07-2002 11:13									#90
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by Heresson Hitler wouldn't have attacked if He didn't have Moscow's approval (Ribbentrop-Mo?otow...)

Why you are so sure?
Destruction of Bolshevicks and occupation of Russia were his goals from the beggining.

quote: SU could have helped Poland in their fight against Germans. It didn't.

Why SU should help to former enemy (Poland) who captured a part of its territory in its war against new enemy (Germany)?

quote: It also declared that it's in eastern Poland to protect Byelorussians and Ukrainians, caring not for Poles giving as a snap for Hiler, and Poles in the east were being systematically either sent to Kazakhstan or deep Russia, or murdered. And SU wasn't national state and it's aim wasn't to care about nations of its own, was it.

May be I didn't understand something but, first you said- "It also declared that it's in eastern Poland to protect Byelorussians and Ukrainians", it means that SU did care about nations of its own, then you said-"SU wasn't national state and it's aim wasn't to care about nations of its own, was it.". Explain please what do you really mean.

quote: Soviet Union started the war.

No. Poland started it. SU was aready under attack of another 13 foreign countries and have a civil war. Only a madman will start another war in this situation.

quote: It is fight for independance. Not only ours. Pilsudzki fought for independant Ukraine too.

If this is fight for independance (wich is really unlikely, becouse you were already independant from Russia, independant before the war), then fight this war on your territory. You sended your army into territory of another country, which means that this is an intervention.

quote: It is funny in fact. Under tzarate, though it didn't admit there are any Poles in Byelorussia, Poles f.e. were majority of representatives of Mi?sk gubern, though they were wuite small minority there (7 Poles on 10 people there I think). but SU did what tzarate wasn't able to do through all those years; get rid of Poles and rusificate Byeloruthenians.

Blah, you are protray this as Byelorussia were under Poland control before SU, or something like this. In fact both Poland and Beylorussia were parts of Russian Empire and Byelorussia was part of RE since very, very long time.

quote: Byelorussians and Poles are.

You are running away from an answer. You said: "How USSR treated Poles can be seen in simple comparison; until Stalin got to power, there were 351 Polish school in EASTERN Byelorussia itself. Today, in entire Byelorussia there is one Polish school, built recently for Polish money."
So, I ask again: How many Byelorussian schools were in Poland in Stalin's times and how many Byelorussian schools in Poland now? I wounder if ever was a single such school in Poland.

quote: Russians are our big old bad ugly naughty cousin that molests us both.

At least we are relatives.
(But, someday you'll pay for this "ugly" word.)

quote: NOW. And anyway, why should it be?

Always was and always be. Because of the Constitution of republic Byelorus.

quote: I know... ZBIR... he he he

ZBIR??? WTF is this?

quote: You know the same well as I do that the way of destroying Byelorussia goes through gate of union with Russia.

Prove it. For more then 70 years 15 national republics lived in one country known as Soviet Union. Before this time the same nations lived in Russian Empire. But they didn't lost their uniqe cultures, languages or traditions during all those years.

quote: In Poland, Byeloruthenian language is alive, while in Byelorussia, it is dieing because of long rusification process that ?ukaszenka, though he should, isn't trying to stop. He'd rather make his country a province of Russia (and union between R and B must end up in this. It's like a marriage bewteen a snake and a frog), in order to become important Russian politician. Poland tried to be nice to Byelorussia -it ended up in ?ukaszenko pointing out Poles of Grodno as National Enemies. ?ukaszenka is a dictator and You, Russia know it, but it doesn't make You change your politics.

You know, dictators usally don't dream to make its country a province of foreign country. It's against the idea of dictatorship, the idea of absolute power.

quote: Byeloruthenians had no sense of their nationality and their language was not used as literature language. Literature language of Byelorussians of that time was still Polish. There were some 22 Byelorussian schools in Poland. Byelorussian language was persecuted first as dialect of Polish one, later as a separate language by Russians who wanted to make Byeloruthenians Russians (and Byeloruthenian Poles Byeloruthenians) and Russians are to blame for the pathethic state of Byelorussian culture in those times. Under the tzarate and (except the time until Stalin) SU, Russians, clearing out Polish influence that's grown during the past centuries (peacefully) replaced it with influence of their own. Some 25% of Byelorussians speak their nationla language now.

Why you just can't face it: BEYLORUSSIANS DON"T WANT TO LIVE WITH YOU IN ONE COUNTRY. THEY WANT TO LIVE IN ONE COUNTRY WITH US. And this is not the wish of only their president, but wish of entire Byelorussian people. The polls in Byelorussia and in Russia shows that absolutely majority of people in Byelorussia and Russia want to live in united country. Case is closed. Byelorussian people feel that they more tied with Russia then with Poland.

quote: And in Smole?sk area that once was Byelorussian, only 3%.

Little comment: Smolensk is one of the oldest RUSSIAN cities.