Poles burn Jews alive - Nazi's blamed.

[C0ckney]

[QUOTE] Originally posted by chegitz guevara

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:

...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.

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

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.

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.

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

[Ecthy]

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

[Ned]

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?

[chequita guevara]

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.

[Heresson]

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.

[Dr Strangelove]

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".

[Dr Strangelove]

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.

[Ned]

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?

[Ecthy]

How deep are he mineshafts in Poland, Dr Strangelove?

[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.

[Ecthy]

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

[Ned]

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

[Ecthy]

Yep.

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

[Dr Strangelove]

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.

[Dr Strangelove]

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.