Quote:
Originally Posted by Pannonian
By the time the Germans invaded in 1939, you had already got yourself into a position where nothing could have saved you.
Interesting...
Quote:
Your last chance of salvation was in 1938, when the Soviets offered a strong 2-front coalition guaranteeing action should Czechoslovakia be violated. That would have meant, in the event of a German invasion of Czechoslovakia, Soviet troops moving through Poland to attack Germany from the east while the British and French attacked from the west - Germany would have been squashed without a chance in the middle.
Ohhh THAT ???:laugh4: Sorry, but you are assuming that France and the UK actually ATTACK. That would be PERFECTLY enough in 1939 without NY NEED for some imagined Soviet assistance. IN 1938 German army was even weaker and Czechoslovak force + Polish on one side and French and British on the other sde = total defeat of Germany.
Quote:
Perhaps the Russians would have stayed after the invasion instead of withdrawing, but at least the British and French would have been in a position to dispute Poland with them, instead of having been bled dry as was the case in the OTL.
Perhaps ? For sure they would stay !
Anyway I don't get your point - anyone would tell you that it was ENOUGH if the French army moved and attacked, no need for imagined assistance of Soviet 'allies'.
Quote:
But you rejected that, so don't blame us for being powerless to do anything to help. You rejected any chance of allowing us to help, and it's not as if we didn't try (we lost an empire in the attempt). Imagine a Kuwait appealing to the US for help in ejecting the Iraqis in 1990, but rejecting all help that might involve relations with Saudi. For all the good intentions in the world, they would be imposing conditions that made their demand impossible. That was the position Poland had placed itself in in 1939.
RUBBISH. The entire point of your post is to blame Poland. Everyone with at least BASIC knowledge of strategy will tell you that only assistance of ONE country mattered i.e. of France but I guess it is always better to blame the Poles for not letting the Soviets to peacefully annex their own country.:smash:
Now prove me wrong that Soviet Union was NECESSARY to defeat Germany in 1939 or 1938 - I AM WAITING.:whip:
Husar
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by cegorach
Of course NOT. On personal level I have no problem with that, but this is history and we must learn from it.
And you obviously didn't. One thing we can learn from history is that people and entire nations can change, might also have to do with the fact that governments change. you however are saying the French and British were unreliable today just because they were more than 60 years ago. and concerning Germans and WW2,
Geopolitics DON'T. I assume that our neighbours and the USA can be the only real allies we could have. Polish strategy in 1939 was based on help from the UK and France too much, hard to find any other possibility actually at that time, but now it is simply safer to assume that such countries, far away or without much interest here cannot be trusted to the same degree.
Quote:
I'm sorry "we" ever did that, but I don't personally feel guilty or think I owe anyone anything. That's why I also don't like nationalism based on the great deeds of ancestors, quite simply, the great deeds of you ancestors might make them great, but greatness is not genetical so they don't make you great. It's the same with football/soccer/any sport, people try to stick to a team and think it somehow makes them better/greater if the team wins even theough their own participation was limited to sitting passively in front of a TV screen.
Or in other words, just because Bismarck was a great German(IMO), doesn't mean that Hitler was a great German as well, despite him thinking so. Even worse, he thought Germans were great because of the middle ages and created one of the biggest wars ever on that.
Yeah, I have a habit to avoid sticking to a group that creates outsiders because I usually like the other people as well. I know that makes me great, but it has nothing to do with my ancestors.
And what this little declaration has to do with anything here ?
Brenus
Quote:
No need to argue with Cegorach. He read in history want he wants, ignoring the politico-military facts:
It is always your chooice to listen or to ignore.
Quote:
“In September 1939 the Bomber Command consisted of 55 squadrons (920 aircraft). However, only about 350 of these were suitable for long-range operations. Fighter Command had 39 squadrons (600 aircraft) but the RAF only had 96 reconnaissance aircraft. The performance of the RAF was considered disappointing during Germany's offensive in 1940. It emerged that daylight bombing against German targets was highly costly against modern fighter planes. By the end of the campaign the RAF had lost more than 900 aircraft.
ONE. Poland was PROMISED assistance and build its defensive plan accordingly.
If you cannot deliver hellp DON'T promise it.
TWO. In 1939 German airforce was fighting in Poland - only a small token force was left in the west.
Quote:
In terms of equipment, the French Air Force was also inferior to the Luftwaffe, in both quantity and quality. The French Air Force entered the 1940 Campaign with only 1,200 aircraft against the German total of 3,200 aircraft. Moreover, the bulk of France’s aircraft was obsolete equipment, accumulated from the 1920s and early 1930s, and was inferior in both speed and range to those manufactured in Germany. Unlike the German aircraft, the bulk of the French aircraft were not equipped with radio communication.
AGAIN. In 1939 only a token airforce was left in the west, mostly to guard coastal areas.
Virtually WHOLE Luftwaffe was fighting in Poland and first units were sloly relocated from the second week of the campaign, NO SOONER.
If British and French airforces had even 50 aircrafts it would BE PROBABLY more than the Germans had THE West.
Besides if the Allies were not able to do anythin in 1939 they should NOT promise so much and OPENLY LIE about the help.
Military plans are BASED on such statements.
Not a single German soldier in September 1939 was relocated to the west due to Allied pressure, NOT A one, despite OPEN, NUMEROUS AND REPEATED PROMISES AND CLAIMS.
Quote:
And I did enjoy seeing the Polish Troops for the 14th of July… And the Germans, and the British, and the Slovenes, Slovaks, Spanish, all EU countries which fought happily each others during centuries celebrating one other National Day, like the French and the Spanish Fleet being present in Trafalgar Celebration…
Don't you dare. I know the trick - me/us open and forgiving and polite and friendly vs. you selfish/bitter/whatever - bad anyway.
For international parades you can have 11th November (Our independence day) or 3rd May (our national holiday), but celebrations of the battle for warsaw and the day of our military is for those who deserve it.
Quote:
All that wasn’t really the subject, but I am sure that our friends Cegorach will explain that whatever, our Grand-fathers (French and English) should have charge anyway, and we should apologised because they didn’t
You have it above - plain and simple.
Promises, empty promises and lies - none told you to misinform Polish general staff about 'massive offensive on its way' at that time when no such action was planned, MORE it was decided in May 1939 it will NOT happen.
But that would be too simple wouldn't be ?
Louis VI the Fat
Quote:
Just to be sure: my 'madness' referred to belligerent nationalism, not to any parade or anything anybody posted here.
OK.
Quote:
Hence an alliance with France alone could not secure Polands integrity against the designs of these two nations.
It wasn't supposed to. It was perfectly enough if the promises dto do something against Germany were delivered at least a little.
Quote:
It couldn't. Never mind against the two of them together
Find me a place where I said it WAS supposed to. Soviet attack actually suprised everyone, so no bother there, however THE ENTIRE POlish strategy was based on French and British promies that help will be delivered QUICKLY, those claims were repeated long after both states were quite sure thay cannot organise anything and were repeated in September 1939.
More French general staff (mis-)INFORMED the POlish counterparts that 'the offensive is on it way', that 'the bulk of our forces is fighting', that 'me engaged numerous German divisions' - sadly Germany somehow didn't notice such massive attack, smae with large scale British bomber raids this country promised.
There is a moment when realpolitic doesn't justify such lies - especially when the fighting is already started and expectation of a relief is growing with every day.
Quote:
, not to mention: the integrity of an authoritarian and itself underdeveloped Poland.
I guess you had to be industralised and fully democratic like Czechoslovakia to get French assistance ?
...Hey... wait...:inquisitive:
Quote:
What would you have us do? March to Berlin? I knew I could count on Brenus to give you the numbers. Tell Poland to mobilize in 1939? Maybe we should have, but let's not let myth get in the way of a sense of realism here: a fully mobilised Poland would still have been crushed within three weeks.
Not tell to not mobilise, that would save the defeat of reserve army "Prusy" which led to outflanking of both southern and central front and crossing Vistula.
Actually the misinformation would mean the Polish plan of defence would be much different - if the relief had to come in time of for example two months the general staff would deploy the defenders on the prepared positions they were never able to take during the campaign because it was decided to engage the Germans as soon as possible in order to make the French to launch the attack they promised after 'two weeks of fighting'.
Quote:
As for empathy for 1920 - why? For not supporting a Poland that installed a petty dictator and had designs against Germany, the Ukraine and Russia?
??? :inquisitive: I suggest to read something about the subject. Virtually every single word in that sentense wouldn't be there if you did.
From 1918 Poland was social-democratic country in every area, sadly the constitution was based on the French one (as in many other 'new' european states') which led to squabbling in mid 1920s and centrist coup of Józef Pilsudski.
And designs against Germany ? You mean Versailles or local uprisings of Polish majority in areas which mostly where in Poland 123 earlier (or even much later like Greater Poland which was a part of the Duchy of Warsaw and had guaranteed autonomy after Vienna in 1815 0 abolished after rebellion of 1848).
Against Ukraine ? The war was to CREATE independent Ukraine - allied to Poland, true, but that was different to others which had no desire for independent Ukraine at all.
Against Russia ? Good joke. The entire contested area had mixed population with large groups of Poles especially in Wilno area and which was a part of Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth a century earlier + joined both uprisings in 1831 and 1863 - in any way though it wasn't Russian...:wall:
In other words Poland was 'bad' because it didn't allow the region to get under Soviet control ??:inquisitive:
True the politics were hardly what entente wanted - they had some desire for reborn tzarist Russia 9which wouldn't enven recognise indeppendent Poland, but don't bother...) and nothing else. Poland by trying to create Miedzymorze (inter-sea) federation clearly had other ideas so it was not convenient...
But never mind - France didn't do anything AGAINST Poland at that time, the UK DID - but British plans were not even in any sense related to that idea - Lloyd George was interested in 'stability' in the region and he didn't really care if Poland is of that or another size as long as it doesn't take 'german' Silesia and doesn't fight the Soviets even if it becomes their puppet (the peace proposal he supported).
Besides I didn't even mention France here in negative sense - ON THE CONTRARY.
Quote:
You know, we always disagree on this forum, but I actually love Poland, believe it or not. I've been there twice. Great place, Cracow is gorgeous, there are friendly people everywhere
And I like French culture, Russian literature, English language and Brtish culture, but that is NOT the point.
Quote:
. Then I read the newspaper, or posts here by Polish members, and I don't see where Polands insecure nationalism is coming from.
It is a different topic, but I am happy to deal with that.
THERE ARE ACTUALLY TWO different stances.
One is:
Quote:
That weird brew of extreme nationalism, of mistrust and xenophobia
That is sometimes expressed by nationalist-right here and certain more conservative people. It is totally based on this sense of BETRAYAL and spite bordering paranoia.
Quote:
, that hurt tone, historical fixation.
Historical 'fixation' is common in the entire region, especially in Poland because of persecution and those three (at least) attempts to eradicate us utterly as people, as culture and as a phrase in language (yes I mean the word 'Poland' and related) - this is always present somewhere, in subconsciousness always somewhere as evil spirit telling 'I told you so they will never change'.
The 'hurt tone' is the direct consequence of this 'Western betrayal' complex which is sadly feeded by the other side.
Simply it is quite hard not to believe in trust if you were abandoned and that betrayal is not only not admitted, but DEFENDED to the point of utter absurd.
This approach is present virtually everywhere here, in everyone who doesn't follow the first stance.
I am a liberal after all.
Quote:
Why? It is so counter-productive. Poland is a great country with a very promising future.
Only if it is the first stance. Second one assumes that the future is very important, but the past CANNOT be forgotten and SHOULD be discussed, EXPLAINED until RECONCILLIATION is achived - see our relations with Ukraine - those were TERRIBLE only 40 years ago and now are almost perfect - Poland supports Ukrinian attempts to jon the western organisations, was the first country to recognise its independence and now we will prepare Euro 2012...
The problem I find disturbing in contacts with some western mambers is that they long time ago assumed that history is to be forgotten or is not worth a discussion. That + the stable, virtually fossilized vision of the past, of 'known' facts which become myths means that EVERYONE who tries to undermine that is seen as a nationalist, troublemaker or someone who cannot be treated seriously.
Add that to the ignorance about Poland which you mentioned some time ago in a PM and you have the problem.
Because the very myths and legends about this part of Europe are under assault some people react by attacking the people who question them. An undestandable reaction to be sure, but too often it is simply assumed that past is past and it cannot/shouln't be discussed...
The problem is that from my point you cannot have stable, honest relationship if you cannot reach an agreement in areas which ARE DIFFICULT.
This western betrayal is like cancer and without some gestures from the other side this ' weird brew of extreme nationalism, of mistrust and xenophobia' is only supported and will resurface every time someone in France or the Uk does/says something stupid - every freaking time....
Quote:
Poland reminds me of what plagued the Republic of Ireland for so long - forever suffering not from too much history, but from too much historical awareness. My prediction is that Poland will follow Irelands path: Poland will continue its current annual growth rates of seven percent for fifteen years, and by then nobody will be interested anymore in building Polands national identity on some half-mythological wrongdoings of the past.
The Irish have it more or less admitted by the other side - I would be happy to see a movie made by someone from Fance or the UK about the topic just like directors from the UK deal with Ireland nowadays.
It reminds me too, but remember that the whole problem is far more complex and far more larger - after all the Irish had (many still have - I have seen it first hand living there for some time and doing research in Irish nationalism for years ) problems almost only limited to the UK - we have issues with France, the UK, Germany, Russia, Ukraine, Czech Republic, Belorus, Lithuania and the USA...
Notice that reconciliation with Ukraine is faring very well, it is getting from good to better with Lithuania ( they had cerain 'colonial' complex towards Poland), similar with Czechs, it is really good with Americans and it is very well with Germany - even this 'bastard' government of us and their 'expelled' organisations won't spoil it anyway - besides at least our part of the quarrel ends this October ( early elections).
Belorus will have to wait for a change of government obviously (though we have gret progress with their opposition) so only the UK and France are left.
Only about one decade earlier if you were English ( not Scottish or Welsh) you could got beaten only because of your nationality here in less civilised and drunk company - now you can only expect severe words acting as imagined razor sharp bledes to trash the 'trator'.
The French have comparably easier - only because strong cultural bonds, Napoleon and the fact they are seen as almost proverbial losers - so only if people like J.Chirac say something about 'staying silent' the old accusations of betrayal reappear.
About the Russians I won't speak - their present government has no desire for any form of reconcilliation which even makes Yeltsin era comparably better. Currently if you don't praise 'Soviet liberation' you got accused for fascism out there and every difficult subject is duly removed from schoolbooks.
Still at least we are not at war and that is a huge progress.
KafirChobee
Quote:
Going against tanks with cavalry was heroic, but not very practical. Regardless, the Poles fought with courage and bravery against insurmountable odds - and lost. As others have noted, how could it have gone better? Sad, but there really was nothing to be done.
That charge never happened...:wall: I have no idea how many times I have said so, though. This time I will advise to chech the Wikipedia or any other source.
About inability to deliver help. It is a little different than about empty promises and open lies and misinformation - but I already said that above so I am not going to repeat it.
