so, you helped huh? (Warsaw Uprising)

[Boroda]

Originally posted by bikekil
Boroda, don't get me wrong here... i hope you will see my point.

No problem

Originally posted by bikekil

For me (as a Pole) Soviets started WW2 the same way Hitler did - by attacking Poland. As there is an agreement on the fact that Poland was attacked by both, Germans and Soviets (with addition of the mysterious pact they made) the question could be - would we have the WW2 without Russian involvement?
Stalin played it nice... at first he started the was on the Hitler side (as the was was against Poland) - you can not disagree here. But the Stalin knwe that Western Allies really need him... and then he swithed sides.

WWII was a result of an opportunistic policy of Western powers, including Poland. Again: Poland took it's share of Czechoslovakia in 1938.

Stalin did all possible things to reach some kind of agreement with "allies", and after they refused (in a very improper impolite way) - USSR had no other option then to sign a pact with Germany.

I respect your patriotic feelings, but, as a half-Russian half-Ukrainian I think that Poland occupied our land in 1920 I hope you can understand that Stalin had to do what hi did ("invasion" on Sept. 17th), other wise he at best could loose space that turned out to be vital in 1941 or at least involve an unprepared country into a war for foreign interests Politics is a dirty business

Originally posted by bikekil
Now, maybe during that side switching he already have controll of Poland promised.. or maybe not... however at some point he had it promised.

Two points here:

1) could i say - Soviets put a great effort to end the war he started on a Hitler's side? (in the other way, Soviets worked well to clean the mess they did)

2) Western Allies (Allies of Poland) sold Poland to Stalin way before the uprising.. and during that, they already knwe what's going to happened with us? If so, is it cool to have a friend like this?

Just wanted to put some gasoline to the fire... but while i think of it, they questions are interestong imao

As usual - Russians cleaned the mess started by some wise guys in the West. USSR was the only country that offered assistance to Czechs in 1938 and opposed Munich treaty.

Originally posted by bikekil
Oh, forgot to add, if hitler got GB or got to Moscow, the world would be different today...
Now, without compering the losses and so on, truth is that Soviet soldierssuffered way more and was forced to fight on much more uncomfortable terms that Brits did. Of course Germans on the Eastern front suffered from the same things.

Napoleon got Moscow, did it help him when Russian army took Paris?

BTW, here is an interesting article for you: http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1277481,00.html

[Boroda]

Originally posted by Angus
British Victory at El-Alamein occurs in the time where the Germans are close to winning Stalingrad and are holding the center of the city.

When the Germans loose their southern flanks, the defenders there were romanian, - cavalry.


So, my point is:
The Germans would have won Stalingrad, had they not been tied up badly in N-Africa Their Force would have been roughly double.
Swap out that Romanian cavalry for Rommel, Von Arnim, 1000 tanks, 1000 Aircraft and 500.000 Axis troops and what outcome do you get?

Grrrrr. Again. Please tell me how many divisions were involved at El-Alamein from both sides.

Romanian cavalry in Africa - it's a joke of the month! You made my day!

[Nashwan]

Afrika Korp wasn’t receiving adequate supplies and after Torch the Germans were fighting delaying actions to tie up Allied forces.

This isn't actually true.

Rommel always whined about the amount of supplies he got, but Van Creveld points out that Rommel had as many trucks as any of the 3 Army Groups operating in Russia, and in general he recieved far more supplies than a similar sized force in Russia would.

[Angus]

Romanina cavalry on the Southern Flank of Stalingrad.

I don't know the exact strength of the Germans in N Africa, but based on the troops they lost there my estimate above could be quite true.

Tell me again if you think the USSR had won Stalingrad if the entire Axis African army had been there...

[bikekil]

so it's not that easy Boroda
the tricky part is - whooccupied who's lands.. and how we could tell who's land should fit where?
You see... after the WW2 Poland was moved to the west.. so befoire, we posessed the lands that then belonged to USSR. Of course you know how huge country we were once... and since the begining out easters and your wertern border lines were moving in one or the other way, depending on the powers... i'm not really sure we could tell who possessed whos lands...
but i can't see how can you say we started WW2 instead of Soviety's who attacked us?
I'd understand a "what if" Staling won't get along with Hitler and WW2 would never start.. maybe Poland would feel stronger with the time and finally we would attack soviets? that's probable... but never happened... and we had no plans to invade you
I can't see how WW2 was the mess we started not you guys

[Boroda]

Originally posted by bikekil
so it's not that easy Boroda
the tricky part is - whooccupied who's lands.. and how we could tell who's land should fit where?
You see... after the WW2 Poland was moved to the west.. so befoire, we posessed the lands that then belonged to USSR. Of course you know how huge country we were once... and since the begining out easters and your wertern border lines were moving in one or the other way, depending on the powers... i'm not really sure we could tell who possessed whos lands...
but i can't see how can you say we started WW2 instead of Soviety's who attacked us?
I'd understand a "what if" Staling won't get along with Hitler and WW2 would never start.. maybe Poland would feel stronger with the time and finally we would attack soviets? that's probable... but never happened... and we had no plans to invade you
I can't see how WW2 was the mess we started not you guys

Who's land is where is a stupid question if we talk about what happened centuries ago... Here I repeated things I have read in some books (pro-Soviet), but I think we need to check the Eastern border of Polish Kingdom in Russian Empire.

For me the main reason to WWII was the opportunist Western policy of "pacifying" Hitler, and refusal to do anything to stop him, in a hope that he will engage in a war with USSR... They were mistaken - so Hitler have eaten the Europe with ease. After "allies" refused to cooperate Stalin probably wanted to get the same thing with Pact, hoping that Hitler will get stuck and weakened in a WWI-like positional war with France, but France didn't survive long enough and Hitler only got stronger.

There is a good book I always recommend: Leonard Mosley, "On Borrowed Time. How World War Two Began". It can be biased against Poland, but I think that the overall picture is close to reality. Here is a link on Amazon.

[bikekil]

No no no

As i agree (and other folks in this thread said ity also that or another way) "Western" countries screwed the whole thing after the WW1 big time.

Poland, as a pretty weak country was a part of the Western Allience but our Powers were not good enought to defend ourselves... so you can';t say the war was our fault...
Leaving the fact that our allies screwed us -  with all of it "declaring a war" on the paper and with aq continous un abililty to help us anywhere and with anything during the WW2 (other then to let us form our units and die uinder them orders) then finally solding us - we can say, we were fools to follow that way... but prolly our goverment decided that that way is better... well.. if we could not be with russia or germany (you know why ) we had to be with someone else...

Now you say it's Allies fault that the mess started, and you say so, because Allies don't offered to Stalin the things he wanted (or they offended him with the things they offered in a unpolite way). Hmm... so please remind me, who attacked who?

Germany started with an attack on 01.09.1939 and 17 days later Soviets attacked from the other side. After thast two facts (in addition to no evidence that anyone woyuld strike Soviets on Germans, and their action was in "self defence") you say that this attacks were Allies fault and responsibility?
sorry, i can't agree.

As i can agree that Alliance Poland was a part of (oh my...) screwed the thing on a political way, i can't agree that the war was started by Allies.

It's like saying that if you don't give me a candy i have my right to hit you between the eyes.. and it's your responsibility sort of...

[Angus]

Boroda:
"For me the main reason to WWII was the opportunist Western policy of "pacifying" Hitler, and refusal to do anything to stop him, in a hope that he will engage in a war with USSR... "

Well, the western allies never went to bed with Hitler, but Stalin did.....
And....although some information has occured that Stalin actually had planned to start a war against Hitler, YOU have promptly denied that possibility.


Bikekil:

I still think you've got things a bit messed up. The Western allies entered WW2 when Hitler crossed the last line, - Poland. France reluctantly, Brits rather willingly, USA standing aside and keeping loyalty to their "Monroeism"

Fact remains, that the Brits and French might have stayed out of WW2 by dumping Poland and looking at Hitler and Stalin bite each other's heads off. I guess that they didn't really belive that one, and yet, not so sure....
Had they really belived what Boroda suggested, they should have stayed out......
Oh Bikekil, BTW, look at a map and tell me what's between Britain and Poland?

[bikekil]

and where was a great fleet of GB?
where were the numerous units of French army?
Finally where was the promised military help we had? Do you believe Hitler woudn't be stopped if got attacked by Allies? How many forces he had at the west while he attacked Poland?

Also, do you think, why Hitler and Stalin would bite each other if they got Poland? What the Alied "entering the war" by saying "we declare a war" changed? Hitler got Poland and got the time. They've shaked hand with Stalin and hitler moved towards the West... then few years later till the eastern offensife of Hitler, Germans and soviets lived pretty well with a joint border in the middle of Poland.. also Stalin wanted to avoid fighting with hitler pretty bad.. and gain some time to prepare. In 1939 Sovites were prepared to nothing more then invade Poland. I'm sure they would not risk fighting with the Allies.

[ramzey]

Originally posted by Boroda
No problem

 

WWII was a result of an opportunistic policy of Western powers, including Poland. Again: Poland took it's share of Czechoslovakia in 1938.

Stalin did all possible things to reach some kind of agreement with "allies", and after they refused (in a very improper impolite way) - USSR had no other option then to sign a pact with Germany.

I respect your patriotic feelings, but, as a half-Russian half-Ukrainian I think that Poland occupied our land in 1920 I hope you can understand that Stalin had to do what hi did ("invasion" on Sept. 17th), other wise he at best could loose space that turned out to be vital in 1941 or at least involve an unprepared country into a war for foreign interests Politics is a dirty business


 

As usual - Russians cleaned the mess started by some wise guys in the West. USSR was the only country that offered assistance to Czechs in 1938 and opposed Munich treaty.

 

Napoleon got Moscow, did it help him when Russian army took Paris?

BTW, here is an interesting article for you: http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1277481,00.html

Pavel, one little diference
i never even heard about poles taking czechs to prisons, never heard about czech officers and clerks killed by bullet in a head.
I never heard about czechs forced to move from their land.
I never heard about czechs fighting with polish troops

but i heard about polish POW murdered by nkwd, i did heard about hundred thausends polish "turists" forced to move to kazachstan, syberia (at last we form 2 armies from thos folks)
I heard about som fights on the border and later.

So if we start counting who was "worse" i doubt it will be poles

[anonymous]

Originally posted by bikekil
and where was a great fleet of GB?
where were the numerous units of French army?
Finally where was the promised military help we had? Do you believe Hitler woudn't be stopped if got attacked by Allies? How many forces he had at the west while he attacked Poland?

Also, do you think, why Hitler and Stalin would bite each other if they got Poland? What the Alied "entering the war" by saying "we declare a war" changed? Hitler got Poland and got the time. They've shaked hand with Stalin and hitler moved towards the West... then few years later till the eastern offensife of Hitler, Germans and soviets lived pretty well with a joint border in the middle of Poland.. also Stalin wanted to avoid fighting with hitler pretty bad.. and gain some time to prepare. In 1939 Sovites were prepared to nothing more then invade Poland. I'm sure they would not risk fighting with the Allies.

yes huge mistakes were apparently made. and everyone responsible for them is now in the grave. so move on with your damn life dude. are you saying that because uk and france were slow to act against nazis SIXTY years ago that they will always be this way if poland needs help? the civilized world is at war as you type this nonsense and youre busy trying to pin a guilt trip on a bunch of people that had nothing to do with the wrongs commited. grow up and move on. youre weeping over innocent people killed long ago by a lack of character on the part of a couple of national leaders. it isnt pretty but in the grand scheme of things its the nine hundreth time its happened in the history of the world. if it bothers you this much sixty years later enlist in polands military or become a politician and make sure it dont happen again. and while youre asking your rhetorical damning questions about the uk and the french well a bunch of the guys you are damning did way more and paid a way higher price to stop the nazis than you have ever done show some respect.

[Boroda]

Originally posted by ramzey
So if we start counting who was "worse" i doubt it will be poles

Sorry, I didn't mean that Poles were "worse". I only try to show you what politics of some countries aimed at immediate success was unwise when we see all the consequences. What if Poland opposed Munich agreements and offered assistance to Czechoslovakia instead of ripping it apart together with Hitler with the assistance of "superpowers" like UK and France? What if it agreed to let Soviet air force use Polish airfields? (I intentionally don't speak about letting Red Army ground troops operate from Polish territory).

It wasn't very wise IMHO to rely on "allies" who sold out Czechoslovakia just to "calm down" Hitler.

Unfortunately, Poland was a victim of the same policy to make Germans and Russians fight each other while gentlemen in the West could sit looking at it and get profits from selling arms to both sides...

[Angus]

You clots!
If western gentlemen had wanted to sit, wach, enjoy and profit, I very much doubt they had bothered to DECLARE WAR ON NAZI GERMANY.
While the Brits were Hitler's only foe, business was prospering between him and Stalin.
Germans bought oil and paid in a number of ways, i.e. with a heavy cruiser, Bismarck blueprints, etc, etc.
(Info from Boroda)

[Boroda]

Originally posted by Angus
You clots!
If western gentlemen had wanted to sit, wach, enjoy and profit, I very much doubt they had bothered to DECLARE WAR ON NAZI GERMANY.
 

Ask our Polish firends what do they think about "allied" assistance. Oh, sorry, they already said it...

[Angus]

I think there were some words about the Soviet assistance, which in the Warsaw uprising was near, but none.
At least the western allies tried, as you have seen on this thread.
But, as you agreed, the Nazis crushed an uprising lead by unwanted people, so why bother.