Why didn't the allies declare war on the USSR?
Printed From: History Community ~ All Empires
Category: Regional History or Period History
Forum Name: Modern History
Forum Discription: World History from 1918 to the 21st century.
URL: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=27451
Printed Date: 16-Apr-2024 at 16:34
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Why didn't the allies declare war on the USSR?
Posted By: AL_C0
Subject: Why didn't the allies declare war on the USSR?
Date Posted: 18-Jul-2009 at 14:35
|
If the U.K and France were obliged to protect Poland, why did they only declare war on Germany and not the USSR when they attacked Poland? |
Replies:
Posted By: cavalry4ever
Date Posted: 19-Jul-2009 at 13:29
|
Soviet Union attacked later (17 September 1939), when they were sure Polish Army was defeated by Nazi. Chamberlain was an appeaser and could not decide to fight Hitler, it would be hard to imagine he would like to fight Soviet Union. Daladier could not do too much without Chamberlain's support. There was a strong push to negotiate for peace with Germany in 1940. Surprisingly there was Franco-British plan to help Finland in 1940 against Soviet invasion. You have to understand atmosphere in Western Europe. With the communist scare, lots of politician look at Hitler as god sent to fight the "red tide". British were cursed during that war. One leader was Hitler's puppet and other one (Churchill) became Stalin's puppet. As we get better understanding of what transpired at Teheran and Yalta conferences, Churchill and Roosevelt look pretty tarnished as well.
|
Posted By: Pytheus
Date Posted: 19-Jul-2009 at 15:40
Sorry but this is utter nonsense, did you even study WWII before you posted this. Give me a single piece of evidence in support of your claims.
|
Posted By: cavalry4ever
Date Posted: 20-Jul-2009 at 12:41
|
The best case of naivete from both Churchill and Roosevelt was at Teheran conference. They were invited to stay at Soviet Embassy. All their private conversations were monitored by KGB. Before each negotiating session Stalin would get transcript. Churchill was wondering why negotaiations were so hard. I think a person with an average IQ would get idea. Roosevelt had an excuse, he was fairly sick.
My other favorite story is when Churchill gave Stalin a piece of paper showing division of Europe between Allies and Soviets (eyewitness accounts). I would say fools like this were god sent gifts to Stalin. The amount of damage they did in Europe was amazing. If you would like to read more you can look up articles and books on "Secret Provisions Of Yalta Protocol" and articles on Teheran Conference. |
Posted By: Cryptic
Date Posted: 20-Jul-2009 at 15:53
I think he is right. Any decision making by Britian had to balance several questions that were constantly changing:
-Treaty obligations aside, was Britain truly ready for war with Germany and the Soviet Union and possibly Japan?
- Was Nazism or Communism the main threat to Britain? The answer was not always clear as the upper classes of Western Europe were deathly afraid of communism.
-What was the will power and if needed, the negotiating abilities of the decision maker? Do they truly understand who it is that they are negotiating with?.
Matching wills and negotiating with extreme sociopaths who also happen to be highly intelligent (Stalin) is difficult even in controlled environments where the negotiator has direct authority. Then factor in that at Yalta, Stalin's power and confidence were increasing and you can see how things can go down hill fast. Descnet men like Churchill and Roosevelt were not ready for Stalin. Mao, however, did understand Stalin. Too bad they did not take him along for guidiance on dealing with men like Stalin
 . |
Posted By: cavalry4ever
Date Posted: 20-Jul-2009 at 20:17
|
I think another problem with Churchill was his arrogance. He was looking down on Stalin (uncle Joe) and because of this it never occurred to him that he was dealing with someone with intelligence superior to his. Problem with Hitler and Stalin, both had enablers in the West. A firm stand at some point could prevent some of human catastrophes later. Not attacking Germany in 1939 when German army was not really that strong and reservists were guarding Germany's west border while almost whole army was engaged in Poland. Credit should be given here to Daladier and Chamberlain. The stupid slogan "the peace in our time" while giving away fortified part of Czechoslovak border to Nazi. Here enabling credit goes to Chamberlain. European march toward war could have been stopped many times. Stalin's grab of more than half of Europe could have been stopped too. US and England moved when it was obvious that Paris may get "liberated" by wrong army or Stalin and Hitler may reach agreement again. This is interesting question: Who is more responsible for an ensuing catastrophe - enablers or perpetrators.
|
Posted By: Cryptic
Date Posted: 21-Jul-2009 at 09:26
|
I think that Hitler was more enabled than Stalin. Though a stronger hand could have limited Stalin, by 1943 / 1944 he was very strong and only getting stronger. The only actions able to limit him may have been an early D-Day or a seperate peace with Germany. Both seem to have been pretty unlikely.
I like your point about Churchill badly underestimating Stalin's intelligence. Another WWII era leader whom constantly out thougt his rivals and friends was Franco.
|
Posted By: cavalry4ever
Date Posted: 21-Jul-2009 at 09:51
|
Good point about Franco. He was a survivor. My favorite story was how he got rid of ultra-fascists which, it is hard to believe, were more right wing than him and wanted to force him to enter war. He packaged them into Division Azul. Not too many came back from the eastern front to bother him. He should have been forced to step down, but because of cold war, US decided he was useful. There were guerillas fighting him trough the war and they did feel betrayed. Dieppe landing could have succeeded, if there was a bit more planning involved and if Canadians used Sherman tanks instead of useless Churchills that got bogged down on the gravel beach. I think this is a fascinating subject, but it deviates a bit from original topic. I am going to open a topic on enablers and perpetrators just so we can continue with this.
|
Posted By: kurtusanami
Date Posted: 20-Aug-2009 at 16:59
| I don't see how Churchill and Rooesvelt lost at the conference in Yalta. Europe had been devided and so had been Germany. The Russians had to take Berlin and pay with blood for that. They lost more people in Berlin than anewhere lese. Had the US been forced to take Berlin, the american blood would have to be spilled, not the Russian. Sure, Germany, and mayby some of poland and chech republick would have become democratic countries, but was it worth it, for those who had to be killed to make it happen. The us didn't have to wave its flag from Reichstag, and soldiers didn't have to be killed. the russians had no choice beacuse it was they who had been attcked. |
Posted By: cavalry4ever
Date Posted: 21-Aug-2009 at 10:52
If Cold War ever became hot war, they made Western Europe indefensible. The soviet army was stationed in the center of Europe. By time NATO would organize, the war would be over.
|
Posted By: MERN
Date Posted: 07-Nov-2009 at 21:19
|
"If the U.K and France were obliged to protect Poland, why did they only
declare war on Germany and not the USSR when they attacked Poland?" I tend to think the British saw Germany as the bigger threat to their Empire and naval power. |
Posted By: Peteratwar
Date Posted: 09-Nov-2009 at 06:39
|
Neither Churchill nor Rooseveldt were Stalin's puppets. Roosevelt may have been fooled by Stalin unfortunately. However, Churchill was always aware of the ussian menace as was most of Europe at the time. Having declared war on Germany, Chamberlain certainly wasn't going to declare war on Russia as well. In any event he wasn't technically obliged to. The guarantee to Poland was against Germany
At that time Germany wasn't a particular naval threat BTW apart from the submarines.
Besides which consider the practicalities of the time when mentioning woulds and shoulds.
Yes the Iron Curtain clanged down and the cold war developed. There is no reason to expect NATO to have just folded up. If the Russians had been preparing an assault do you think this would have gone unnoticed. It may have taken many long years but the communist threat finally vanished though the steadfastness of America and its allies
Politics is often the art of what is possible
|
Posted By: fano
Date Posted: 27-Nov-2009 at 19:56
|
As far as appeasement is concerned, we just talked about this in my history class, and the thing was that the Treaty of Versailles left Germany in really REALLY bad shape, with no army, and no economic stability, as well as having a bunch of land taken from it. Many of the European nations likely thought that Germany growing it's own internal illegal army, and taking back the Ruhr were things that Germany should be allowed to do, because they all realized that it really wasn't fair what Germany got stuck with. Why should Germany be the only country without an army, and why shouldn't it be allowed to take back the Ruhr from the French? Now, I don't know about a lot of the other instances, but I think that's the kind of mindset that a lot of Europe was in at that time. That combined with the fact that Hitler was harshly opposing Stalin and Communism. |
Posted By: cavalry4ever
Date Posted: 28-Nov-2009 at 08:03
This can explain things up to 1936. After that it is appeasement or misguided idea of using Germany to fight Bolshevism. And we should remember that fascist sympathisers were very strong in both France and Britain.
|
Posted By: opuslola
Date Posted: 28-Nov-2009 at 14:33
Actually sir, I would respectfully disagree with you and a few other posters concerning this period of time! It seems to me that the Western allies, full well were ready for the Communists and Nazis to fight it out till both were spent! Remember that Uncle Joe and Uncle Adolph did not really have to worry much about politics! Certainly the secret police, hist squads, and firing squads, etc., settled most political squabbles in both Germany and Russia during this period, whereas Chruchill and Rooseveldt both had to please a voting public! It even makes it good sense to delay the Western offensive as long as possible, since it would further weaken the Germans and the Russians would be taking most of the bullets, rather than Americans, Australians, Canadians, Free French and Brits, etc. HItler's biggest blunder may well have been his stubborness to take Stalingrad, rather than continue into the oil fields, where were, at one time, the ultimate object of his armies in the area. Oil became the largest enemy of Germany in the last three years of the war, since they had to try and rely upon synthetic oil for their supply. That is one reason that German tanks in the latter part of the war, were operating upon bronze bushings, rather than ball bearings, thus creating the "creak, squeek, clank" sounds made by their tanks. But, back to the main point, I do not think that Rooseveldt or Churchill gave a "tinker's damn" about the millions of lives being lost by the Russians since they were saving the lives of the Western Allies. Certainly US, and allied transports were delivering almost everything of material and supplies to assist Russia's manufacturing proceses, as well as ammunition, food, aircraft, etc. As regards the Western allies movement into Western Europe and Germany in particular, it seems that either by agreement or by other means, the Western powers, tried to ensure the Soviet attack upon Berlin, by itself! Probably Stalin had demanded such an agreement? But, in reality, could we really expect the German High Command to really fight as it did against the Soviet, if they had been expected to do against the Americans, Brits, and French forces? As it was, it seems to me, that except for one certain event (IE, the Battle of the Bulge") that the Western forces mostly fought the eldest and youngest of the German Army, etc., since the real "flower of German warpower" was directed towards the East and the Russians! The "high German command, knew that they could expect "no quarter" from Stalin, but I feel they expected to be treated as fellow soldiers by the Western officer corps, etc. Thus, it seems an almost open highway to Berlin was offered to the Western Allies, but it seems politics, as always, also stabbed them in the back, when the Western Allies, actually stopped their advance, to let the Soviet surround and take Berlin! In my memory it seems that the Soviets lost 100,000 men in the Battle of Berlin only! The number of German troops and civilians lost is mostly not able to be determined. The question remains, "if the Western allied armies had been given the leeway to take Berlin, just how grimly defended would it have been? Regards, ------------- http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/ |
Posted By: Tazjet
Date Posted: 21-May-2010 at 18:03
http://orientalreview.org/2010/04/22/britain-planned-to-attack-ussr/ - http://orientalreview.org/2010/04/22/britain-planned-to-attack-ussr/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franco-British_plans_for_intervention_in_the_Winter_War - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franco-British_plans_for_intervention_in_the_Winter_War http://www.histdoc.net/history/greatpower1939.html - http://www.histdoc.net/history/greatpower1939.html Early in 1940 there was an act of Parliament passed in Whitehall authorising the raising of a mercenary force from the british military and to supply british armaments to Finland in support of their war against Russia. Seperately there was also a proposal to attack the Soviet oil fields in the Caucus by overflight of Turkey. UK was also trying to buy loyalty from Mussolini by offers of coal deals and arms supplies in order to woe Italy away from Hitler. Roosevelt however was more outraged by Soviet occupation of the Baltic states and Stalin's refusal to allow American trade access to soviet markets. Roosevelt was determined that Stalin and not Hitler were the enemy. Roosevelt sent his emmisary Sumner Welles to Europe in a round of shuttle diplomacy to propose to the leaders of Europe a "New World Order" in which Western powers would co-exist and sort out their squabbles, yet unite together behind Germany to smash the bolsheviks. This proposal crumbled in April 1940 with the invasion of Denmark and Norway. Hitler had become spooked by Anglo french interest in using a railway line from the port of Narvik to Finland which threatened Germany's sole source of iron ore. This was the tipping point of WW2. |
Posted By: Patryk
Date Posted: 16-Nov-2010 at 02:15
|
Indeed, in early 1940, it was unclear whether there would be war against Russia or Germany or both. This of course changed when Hitler moved into the Low Countries in May 1940 and later attacked Russia in 1941.
I have long thought that this was one of Hitler's greatest strategic blunders. He could have used anti-Russian feelings in the West to actually get the UK and France to help him attack Russia or at least encourage those two to fight thus weakening both. Hitler's aim was always Ukrainian Lebensraum and never war with England and France just for the sake of war. Hitler could have used the Winter War to his advantage against Russia. Alas, Hitler was never a great a thinker. He was deeply conservative and never innovative (though he liked taking credit for other people's innovations). From the start he showed himself wedded to the idea of simply re-fighting WWI.
Indeed, Hitler's total lack of strategic vision during the Winter War could be seen the war's REAL "turning point."
|
Posted By: Mosquito
Date Posted: 16-Nov-2010 at 06:33
Thats actually not truth. France was always Hitler's target #1. Germany and especially Hitler wanted the revange for WW1 and Versailles treaty. One of the goals was to regain the disupted territory that Germany lost after WW1. ------------- "I am a pure-blooded Polish nobleman, without a single drop of bad blood, certainly not German blood" - Friedrich Nietzsche |
Posted By: Patryk
Date Posted: 16-Nov-2010 at 06:55
I will not dispute this. Certainly, Hitler wanted to bring all Germans "home" to the Reich and that included Germans in Alsass and Loraine as much as Germans in Danzig and Bohemia. But in the long term, Hitler sought Lebensraum in the East NOT in the North, South, or West.
If Hitler could have gained his Lebensraum in the East without war with France, but if Hitler chose war with France anyway because he harboured hatred against France stemming from his time as a Frontkampfer, the Hitler really was WAS irrational from the start.
I would really need to study the diplomatic history of the Winter War more to know if Hitler every entertained the idea forming an alliance with France against Russia rather than simply trying to re-run the Schlieffen Plan.
That being said, Hitler didn't care about ALL terrirtory lost in 1919. Hitler showed little interest or concern for Germans in Southwest Africa and the old German East Africa not to mention territory in the Pacific. Those territories he effectively wrote-off.
|
Posted By: Mosquito
Date Posted: 16-Nov-2010 at 07:43
|
In 1938 after Czechoslovakia, Hitler offered Poland an alliance. His proposals were:
1. Poland will resign from rights to Gdansk/Danzig and agree for building exterritorial highway.
2. Poland will stay idle in case of German war against France.
3. Poland will join Germany in invasion against Soviet Union.
4. Poland will adopt the anti - jewish policy similar to that in Germany.
In exchange Poland would recive territorry on Ukraine and eventually resign from corridor except for the city of Gdynia where was newly built Polish seaport. On the Ukraine Hitler offered Poland the Odessa city and sea port. (Germans said that Black Sea is a sea as well).
Those proposals were refused by Polish goverment and since the refusal Hitler diecided to invade Poland first. Before it he wanted to invade France first. ------------- "I am a pure-blooded Polish nobleman, without a single drop of bad blood, certainly not German blood" - Friedrich Nietzsche |
Posted By: TheGreatSimba
Date Posted: 16-Nov-2010 at 12:16
|
Hitler always wanted to attack and conquer France. The German-French rivalry had at that point been going on for almost 100 years. Hitler, however, did not want to completely defeat Britain, he did prefer to have them as an ally. With regards to the Poland alliance proposal, I'd never heard of such a thing before...source? ------------- I use CAPS for emphasis, not yelling. Just don't want to have to click the bold button every time. |
Posted By: Mosquito
Date Posted: 16-Nov-2010 at 12:51
Reports of Polish ministry of foreign affairs from years 1937-1939.
From:
http://www.enotes.com/topic/Adolf_Hitler - http://www.enotes.com/topic/Adolf_Hitler
"In May 1933, Hitler met with /topic/Herbert_von_Dirksen - Herbert von Dirksen , the German Ambassador in Moscow. Dirksen advised the Führer that he was allowing relations with the Soviet Union to deteriorate to a unacceptable extent, and advised to take immediate steps to repair relations with the Soviets. #cite_note-84 - [85] Much to Dirksen's intense disappointment, Hitler informed that he wished for an anti-Soviet understanding with Poland...."
"A more successful initiative in foreign policy occurred with relations with Poland. In spite of intense opposition from the military and the Auswärtiges Amt who preferred closer ties with the /topic/Soviet_Union - Soviet Union , Hitler, in the fall of 1933 opened secret talks with Poland that were to lead to the /topic/German%E2%80%93Polish_Non-Aggression_Pact - German–Polish Non-Aggression Pact of January 1934."
"In August 1935, Hitler told Goebbels his foreign policy vision as: "With England eternal alliance. Good relationship with Poland . . . Expansion to the East. The Baltic belongs to us . . . Conflicts Italy-Abyssinia-England, then Japan-Russia imminent.""
"At the time of the signing of the Anti-Comintern Pact, invitations were sent out for Britain, China, Italy and Poland to adhere; of the invited powers only the Italians were to sign the pact, in November 1937."
#cite_note-Kershaw-580-110 -
"Hitler saw as his would-be allies in the form of Italy, Japan, Poland and Hungary that they would not fight on behalf of Germany; and very visible signs that the majority of Germans were not enthusiastic about the prospect of war."
"As part of the anti-British course, it was deemed necessary by Hitler to have Poland either a satellite state or otherwise neutralized. Hitler believed this necessary both on strategic grounds as a way of securing the Reich's eastern flank and on economic grounds as a way of evading the effects of a British blockade. #cite_note-228 - [229] Initially, the German hope was to transform Poland into a satellite state, but by March 1939 the German demands had been rejected by the Poles three times, which led Hitler to decide upon the destruction of Poland as the main German foreign policy goal of 1939."
And check in this book page 575
http://books.google.pl/books?id=qnnlUEDZZIAC&pg=PA575&lpg=PA575&dq=Hitler+offer+alliance+for+poland&source=bl&ots=Y4oplQLGSr&sig=r-0jA_Q41h0c_3MhxO77xIUC3CY&hl=pl&ei=fcriTN7ZApG4hAfj36jODA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAzgU#v=onepage&q=Hitler%20offer%20alliance%20for%20poland&f=false - http://books.google.pl/books?id=qnnlUEDZZIAC&pg=PA575&lpg=PA575&dq=Hitler+offer+alliance+for+poland&source=bl&ots=Y4oplQLGSr&sig=r-0jA_Q41h0c_3MhxO77xIUC3CY&hl=pl&ei=fcriTN7ZApG4hAfj36jODA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAzgU#v=onepage&q=Hitler%20offer%20alliance%20for%20poland&f=false
------------- "I am a pure-blooded Polish nobleman, without a single drop of bad blood, certainly not German blood" - Friedrich Nietzsche |
Posted By: cavalry4ever
Date Posted: 16-Nov-2010 at 17:07
|
There is also an interesting fact worth adding here. France had such strong fascist faction at the onset of WWII that large part of its guerilla fight was really a civill war between left, center and fascists. ------------- "Loyalty to petrified opinion never yet broke a chain or freed a human soul." Mark Twain |
Posted By: opuslola
Date Posted: 16-Nov-2010 at 18:10
|
America and its leadership during WW-II, were just as Socialist as the Soviet Union! FDR, and most of his advisors were long time Socialists / progressives!
Or do you not agree? ------------- http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/ |
Posted By: Mosquito
Date Posted: 16-Nov-2010 at 18:35
------------- "I am a pure-blooded Polish nobleman, without a single drop of bad blood, certainly not German blood" - Friedrich Nietzsche |
Posted By: opuslola
Date Posted: 16-Nov-2010 at 18:42
|
Mosquito wrote above;
"I would rather say that some of FDR's advisors were rather the secret agents of Moscow" It is necessary for me to exhibit that Mosquito is a very shy person! His word "rather" is more of a PC answer than anything else! After all, his uncle Teddy was one of the original "progressives!" But, I could well be wrong to speak for him? ------------- http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/ |
Posted By: Mosquito
Date Posted: 16-Nov-2010 at 19:18
|
Ill give one name ;)
For example Alger Hiss was a soviet spy and had influence on FDR, was together with him in Yalta. ------------- "I am a pure-blooded Polish nobleman, without a single drop of bad blood, certainly not German blood" - Friedrich Nietzsche |
Posted By: opuslola
Date Posted: 16-Nov-2010 at 22:00
|
Yes, of course Alger and his wife!
But have you ever read the book written by J. Egare Hoover? Or at least "None dare call it treason?" ------------- http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/ |
Posted By: Mosquito
Date Posted: 17-Nov-2010 at 12:21
Dont know these books. However I do realise that Soviet spies around FDR had large influence on the results of Yalta and Potsdam conferences. ------------- "I am a pure-blooded Polish nobleman, without a single drop of bad blood, certainly not German blood" - Friedrich Nietzsche |
Posted By: cavalry4ever
Date Posted: 17-Nov-2010 at 13:19
You really do not know what you are talking about. Soviet Union was a communist country based on a very totalitarian ideology. This is not to be confused with social democracy, based on a mixed economy (government/capitalist) as it can be observed in all industrial countries, since WWII. ------------- "Loyalty to petrified opinion never yet broke a chain or freed a human soul." Mark Twain |
Posted By: opuslola
Date Posted: 17-Nov-2010 at 14:40
|
Sorry Mosquito, I gave you the wrong book title above, the book written by John Edgar Hoover (FBI) was entitled "Masters of Deceit";
http://books.google.com/books?id=U503AAAAIAAJ&q=&hl=en "None Dare Call It Treason" was written by Mr. Stormer! Both are very good reads! ------------- http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/ |
Posted By: cavalry4ever
Date Posted: 17-Nov-2010 at 21:41
You seem to be more certain that most of historians that studied this case. What are your sources? Anything that came from McCarthy hearings is highly suspect and there is no reliable evidence.
------------- "Loyalty to petrified opinion never yet broke a chain or freed a human soul." Mark Twain |
Posted By: opuslola
Date Posted: 17-Nov-2010 at 23:07
|
From the last evidence I have heard, it seems the case is more solid than ever!
Perhaps I can find the sources? And some people think that Joe was more correct than you do! I think her name is? She is blond and beautiful and wrote a book on Joe, etc.! ------------- http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/ |
Posted By: Mosquito
Date Posted: 18-Nov-2010 at 07:31
Senator McCarthy and his activity was the best thing that ever happend to USA during the cold war. ------------- "I am a pure-blooded Polish nobleman, without a single drop of bad blood, certainly not German blood" - Friedrich Nietzsche |
Posted By: red clay
Date Posted: 18-Nov-2010 at 07:41
|
It's never been officially confirmed. All evidence against them produced since the downfall of the Soviet Union is highly questionable.
Prosecuting Alger Hiss made Dick Nixon. I don't think it much mattered to Nixon if Hiss was guilty or not.
Joe MacCarthy was an alchoholic, opportunistic nutcase. The blonde your alluding to is just as whacked.  ------------- "Arguing with someone who hates you or your ideas, is like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter what move you make, your opponent will walk all over the board and scramble the pieces". Unknown. |
Posted By: red clay
Date Posted: 18-Nov-2010 at 07:49
McCarthy's fear mongering was one of the worst things that happened. It destroyed the lives of many good people. McCarthy's Red Menace thing did absolutely nothing as far as the spread of communism was concerned. I agree 100% with C4E, anything that came out of the McCarthy hearings should be looked at, then forgotten. ------------- "Arguing with someone who hates you or your ideas, is like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter what move you make, your opponent will walk all over the board and scramble the pieces". Unknown. |
Posted By: Mosquito
Date Posted: 18-Nov-2010 at 07:52
This is truth, he wasnt an angel, but he did awesome job cleaning many institutions from communists who would be spying for USSR. All those ppl were idealists and unfortunatelly, idealists are ready to commit any crime, including high treason. ------------- "I am a pure-blooded Polish nobleman, without a single drop of bad blood, certainly not German blood" - Friedrich Nietzsche |
Posted By: red clay
Date Posted: 18-Nov-2010 at 08:09
No he didn't. That's the point. The people he investigated weren't anything other than ordinary American citizens. All he really did was make it impossible for some of the finest scientific minds we had at the time, to make a living as scientists or as college professors. None of those folks were communists. Some, were certainly socialist in their views, but please don't make the mistake of lumping socialists with communists, that's basically what McCarthy did.
His stupidity deprived the US of much needed scientists, engineers etc. at a time when we really needed them.
There are many books written on this, but the easiest way to find out how ridiculous it was is to research the final results. How many real communists did they find, how many were imprisoned etc.
------------- "Arguing with someone who hates you or your ideas, is like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter what move you make, your opponent will walk all over the board and scramble the pieces". Unknown. |
Posted By: cavalry4ever
Date Posted: 18-Nov-2010 at 09:29
You must be kidding. His hearings were as un-American as can be imagined. Only stuff that came close to this were some activities during Bush era. Just to put in the perspective the Communist witch hunting from McCarthy era. The worse breach of security in the history of US came from a religious zealot, opus dei member - Hanssen. Serious spying in US was not done by communists. The fact that you equate communists with spies is flawed also. Sorry Mosquito, I hit accidentally edit instead of quote button and messed up your post. ------------- "Loyalty to petrified opinion never yet broke a chain or freed a human soul." Mark Twain |
Posted By: opuslola
Date Posted: 18-Nov-2010 at 10:28
|
Since there are two un-reconcilible views concerning Communist and McCarthy, etc., then I would suggest that we get back to the topic itself!
But, to suggest such is the job of a moderator and not me! Sorry! I would suggest that it was the attitude of the citizens of America, and GB, etc., that prevented such an attack! That, and the friendly attitude shown towards the USSR by the Rooseveldt administration! If the war had been continued, then it would have resulted in a large vote against any politician who supported it, and a total change in the governments of all of the Allies, other than those who did not permit free elections like the USSR and China! Regards, ------------- http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/ |
Posted By: red clay
Date Posted: 18-Nov-2010 at 16:35
|
Why? did you just now realize what a minefield the subject of McCarthy is? Sweet Ann is far worse.
The "friendly" attitude toward the Soviet Union shown by the FDR Admin was an artificial one created to give an outside appearence of solidarity in the Allied camp.
Later in the war it has been suggested that FDR was not in full control of his facultys when he met with Churchill and Stalin the last time. FDR made overtures to Stalin that were completely forgotten by Truman.
------------- "Arguing with someone who hates you or your ideas, is like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter what move you make, your opponent will walk all over the board and scramble the pieces". Unknown. |
Posted By: cavalry4ever
Date Posted: 18-Nov-2010 at 17:03
|
"You are entitled to your opinion, but not to your own facts" ------------- "Loyalty to petrified opinion never yet broke a chain or freed a human soul." Mark Twain |
Posted By: opuslola
Date Posted: 18-Nov-2010 at 17:22
|
And C4E, just what "facts" do you perceive that I own? Please give me the "facts" that are only mine?
Trying to be "smart" does not make you look better, it can just lower the esteem that others might have for you! So, with respect, I merely ask you to clarify your statement above? BTY, did either of you Red or you, even read my answer above where I wrote, actually concerning the topic of this thread!; "I would suggest that it was the attitude of the citizens of America, and GB, etc., that prevented such an attack! That, and the friendly attitude shown towards the USSR by the Rooseveldt administration! If the war had been continued, then it would have resulted in a large vote against any politician who supported it, and a total change in the governments of all of the Allies, other than those who did not permit free elections like the USSR and China!" So, is my answer wrong? I like your quote above, may I use it also? "Loyalty to petrified opinion never yet broke a chain or freed a human soul." Mark Twain ------------- http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/ |
Posted By: cavalry4ever
Date Posted: 18-Nov-2010 at 17:28
|
You are welcome to the Twain quote. What I said is you should not make up facts. Opinions are fine. Coulter and Glenn Beck are good examples of people making up facts as they go. ------------- "Loyalty to petrified opinion never yet broke a chain or freed a human soul." Mark Twain |
Posted By: cavalry4ever
Date Posted: 18-Nov-2010 at 19:29
|
Beck's latest teaching is just reheating of Birch Society's "Blue Book". These are the same people (John birch Society) that believe fluoride in water is used to control minds of US citizens! Beck and his followers also believe that on can be communist, socialist, liberal and fascist all at the same time. These are people that late William Buckley would keep away from conservative mainstream and would refer to to as "vulgarians". opusiola - you are following great minds, I recommend you join (if you did not already) Beck's "University". ------------- "Loyalty to petrified opinion never yet broke a chain or freed a human soul." Mark Twain |
Posted By: Mosquito
Date Posted: 18-Nov-2010 at 22:24
I think that you have actually deleted one lol :) But ok as you are the begining mod I have a lot of patience ;) However I think that mods should be especially patient too as to them apply higher standarts than to regular members.
But actually I think that we have hijacked this thread and all discuss somthing off topic.
And please guys calm down, no reason for the bad feelings towards each other. ------------- "I am a pure-blooded Polish nobleman, without a single drop of bad blood, certainly not German blood" - Friedrich Nietzsche |
Posted By: TheGreatSimba
Date Posted: 19-Nov-2010 at 14:13
|
Why do you guys think people like Opuslola tend to repeat history so much? Its because they make up an imaginary past in their minds. They are also the number 1 violaters of the US constitution. McCarthyism violated citizens' constitutional rights and it i simply persecuting people for having their own opinion. With regards to the allies not declaring war on the USSR: by the end of WWII europe was in shambles, economies were ruined, tens of millions were dead. Only the insane would want to continue such a war, especially against a power such as the Soviet Union at the time, which had millions of troops under arms. Although there were skirmished between allied and soviet troops a couple times. ------------- I use CAPS for emphasis, not yelling. Just don't want to have to click the bold button every time. |
Posted By: Cryptic
Date Posted: 19-Nov-2010 at 15:16
Patton was one of the insane. Unlike other skilled generals who fought wars because they had to, Patton truly enjoyed warfare and thought he was some kind of re-incarnated "eternal warrior / leader"
Even before his death in the traffic accident, Patton was making very belligerant comments about the Soviets and had ordered his staff to make contingency plans based on a "hypothetical" war with the Soviet Union in Germany.
|
Posted By: TheGreatSimba
Date Posted: 19-Nov-2010 at 15:32
|
I'm not even sure if the allies would have won a land war against the Soviet Union. Western Europe would surely have been overrun.
------------- I use CAPS for emphasis, not yelling. Just don't want to have to click the bold button every time. |
Posted By: opuslola
Date Posted: 19-Nov-2010 at 18:10
|
TGS, what ever it is, wrote;
"I'm not even sure if the allies would have won a land war against the Soviet Union. Western Europe would surely have been overrun." Again, it seems you do not understand that the Soviet Army literally ran upon supplies sent by the USA! There air forces were certainly inferior to the aircraft of the allies, and they still had very basic radio communications! If indeed the allies had forced the start of hostilities, then the supply lines of the Soviets would have been almost instantly cut, and their armies would have died a few days later! Both literally and, etc.! Let me go a bit further! Suppose that the Soviets had a 30 day supply of materials to force a counter attack against the Allied forces that stood against them? Could they really expect to suffer the devestation of Allied air power, and know that the only supplies they were to receive could only be exracted from the Allied supply dumps, could they have really pushed to the English Channel? Q.E.D.! ------------- http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/ |
Posted By: cavalry4ever
Date Posted: 19-Nov-2010 at 20:49
|
Maybe Allies lost interest tinkering with Soviet union after being hammered in their earlier intervention in the russian civil war? How about previous experiments? Very few countries fought Russia or Soviet Union and felt like talking about it later. ------------- "Loyalty to petrified opinion never yet broke a chain or freed a human soul." Mark Twain |
Posted By: Mosquito
Date Posted: 19-Nov-2010 at 20:50
Was it Patton's insanity or rather unlike most of people in the USA including US goverment, he did realise what and how Soviets really are?
Also, was leaving one of the allies and brothers in arms in the hands of Soviets, was it just and right? Thats how the Americans do?
Not to mention the fact that Soviets after taking Berlin were really exhausted and their forces that were combat were ready not as big as some ppl present. Not to mention the fact that in the conflict against USSR the Allies would have full air superiority. ------------- "I am a pure-blooded Polish nobleman, without a single drop of bad blood, certainly not German blood" - Friedrich Nietzsche |
Posted By: Cryptic
Date Posted: 21-Nov-2010 at 08:59
Patton was right about the Soviets, but for the wrong reasons. Patton simply wanted another worthy opponent be the target of his aggression. It did not matter whether they were Sovets, zulus or moslems.
Subjectively, what happened to Poland was wrong. Realistically, the U.S. was a democracy and not a dictatorship like the Soviet Union and Germany. The American public did not want to fight a war, and especially not an offensive war, with the Soviets after Germany was defeated.
As a side note, When Polish Jews fought in Warsaw, how much help did they receive from the Home Army or the White Eagles? Is that what Poles do? Or were the reasons for not helping the Polish Jews complex?
Also, how much more suffering would there have been in Poland if the Soviets were driven out city by city and village by village?
True, they were tired, but the Soviets were also not the mindless, human wave army that many people think they were. Beating the Germans took soviet skill and soviet numbers. The Soviet Army in 1945 was a pretty lethal machine. As you mentioned, air supereority would have won, but it would not have been easy.
In addition, the Soviets were not the only ones with a lack of enthusiasm for more war. As victory over Germany got closer, many "ordinary conscript" American divisions were thinking of home and performing reluctantly. By late 1944, even the gentle General Eishenhower noted a pattern of ordinary U.S. Divisions only attacking with overwheliming advantages and moderate German resistance leading to long delays etc.
|
Posted By: Mosquito
Date Posted: 21-Nov-2010 at 17:54
An American have no right to say somthing like that. The Jews recived as much help as was possible under German occupation, tens thousands of people risked their lifes to help the Jews, also during uprising in Warsaw Ghetto. You should have talked with the Marek Edelman - the surviving leader of Getto uprising - but unfortunatelly he died last year.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marek_Edelman - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marek_Edelman
What was possible, was done for the Jews. Or one can even say that more than possible was done but it were Americans and British who refused to help Jews, not Poles. When Polish couriers were reporting to US goverment about holocaust, FDR asked about condition of horses!!!!!!
From Wikipedia
Jan Karski (24 June 1914 – 13 July 2000) was a /wiki/Poland - Polish /wiki/World_War_II - World War II /wiki/Polish_resistance_movement_in_World_War_II - resistance movement fighter and later /wiki/Scholar - scholar at /wiki/Georgetown_University - Georgetown University . In 1942 and 1943 Karski reported to the /wiki/Polish_government_in_exile - Polish government in exile and the /wiki/Western_Allies - Western Allies on the situation in /wiki/Occupation_of_Poland_%281939%E2%80%931945%29 - German-occupied Poland , especially the destruction of the /wiki/Warsaw_Ghetto - Warsaw Ghetto , and the secretive Nazi /wiki/Extermination_camps - extermination camps . In 1942 Karski was selected by /wiki/Cyryl_Ratajski - Cyryl Ratajski , the /wiki/Polish_Government_Delegates_Office_at_Home - Polish Government's Delegate at Home , to perform a secret mission to prime minister /wiki/W%C5%82adys%C5%82aw_Sikorski - Władysław Sikorski in London. Karski was to contact Sikorski as well as various other Polish politicians and inform them about Nazi atrocities in occupied Poland. In order to gather evidence, Karski was twice smuggled by Jewish underground leaders into the Warsaw Ghetto for the purpose of showing him firsthand what was happening to the Polish Jews. Also, disguised as a Ukrainian camp guard, he visited what he thought was /wiki/Be%C5%82%C5%BCec_death_camp - Bełżec death camp . #cite_note-note2-2 - [3] In 1942 Karski reported to the Polish, British and U.S. governments on the situation in Poland, especially the destruction of the Warsaw Ghetto and the /wiki/The_Holocaust_in_Poland - Holocaust of the Jews . He had also carried from Poland a microfilm with further informations from the Underground Movement on the extermination of European Jews in German occupied Poland. The Polish Foreign Minister, Count /wiki/Edward_Raczynski - Edward Raczynski , provided on this basis the Allies with one of the earliest and most accurate accounts of the Holocaust. A note by Foreign Minister Edward Raczynski entitled The mass extermination of Jews in German occupied Poland, addressed to the Governments of the United Nations on 10 December 1942, would be published later along with other documents in a widely distributed leaflet. #cite_note-3 - [4] Karski met with Polish politicians in exile including the prime minister, as well as members of political parties such as the /wiki/Polska_Partia_Socjalistyczna - PPS , /wiki/Stronnictwo_Narodowe - SN , /wiki/Stronnictwo_Pracy - SP , /wiki/Stronnictwo_Ludowe - SL , /wiki/General_Jewish_Labour_Bund_in_Poland - Jewish Bund and /wiki/Poalei_Zion - Poalei Zion . He also spoke to /wiki/Anthony_Eden - Anthony Eden , the British foreign secretary, and included a detailed statement on what he had seen in Warsaw and Bełżec. In 1943 in London he met the then much known journalist /wiki/Arthur_Koestler - Arthur Koestler . He then traveled to the United States and reported to President /wiki/Franklin_D._Roosevelt - Franklin D. Roosevelt . His report was a major factor in prompting the West. In July 1943, Karski again personally reported to Roosevelt about the situation in Poland. During their meeting Roosevelt suddenly interrupted his report and asked about the condition of horses in occupied Poland. #cite_note-W-P-4 - [5] #cite_note-5 - [6] #cite_note-6 - [7] Karski met with many other government and civic leaders in the United States, including /wiki/Felix_Frankfurter - Felix Frankfurter , /wiki/Cordell_Hull - Cordell Hull , /wiki/William_Joseph_Donovan - William Joseph Donovan , and /wiki/Stephen_Samuel_Wise - Stephen Wise . Frankfurter, skeptical of Karski's report, said later "I did not say that he was lying, I said that I could not believe him. There is a difference." #cite_note-7 - [8] Karski presented his report to media, bishops of various denominations (including Cardinal /wiki/Samuel_Stritch - Samuel Stritch ), members of the /wiki/Hollywood - Hollywood film industry and artists, but without success. http://www.mishalov.com/Karski.html - http://www.mishalov.com/Karski.html
....America, where Karski went in July 1943, was worse. His report seemed to upset everyone's agenda. Roosevelt, with whom he had a long private interview, was only interested in the arcana of underground conspiracy. The Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter, a Jew, spent an hour listening to Karski's story, then told him: "I am unable to believe you." Other prominent Jewish leaders accused him of lying. Faced repeatedly with incredulity or cynicism, Karski went into a form of denial and stopped talking of the scenes he had witnessed. Jan Karski reported in the USA also this:
There were five points that the two men in the Ghetto asked Mr. Karski to pass on to the Allied leaders: * Preventing the extermination of the Jews should be declared an official goal of the Allies fighting Hitler. * Allied propaganda should be used to inform the German people of the war crimes taking place and to publicize the names of German officials taking part. * The Allies should appeal to the German people to bring pressure on Hitler's regime to stop the slaughter. * The Allies should declare that if the genocide continued and the German masses did not rise to stop it, the German people would be held collectively responsible. * Finally, if nothing else worked, the Allies should carry out reprisals by bombing German cultural sites and executing Germans in Allied hands who still professed loyalty to Hitler. Mr. Karski later said that the Jews' proposals were "bitter and unrealistic," as if they knew such a program could not and would not be carried out, and that he had told them their five points went beyond international law. For the rest of his life he remembered the response of the man accompanying Mr. Feiner: "We don't know what is realistic, or not realistic. We are dying here! Say it!" Mr. Karski asked what he should say to Jewish leaders abroad. Unhesitatingly his hosts told him that such leaders should consider hunger strikes, fasting to death if necessary, to shake the conscience of the world.
Not much than already was. People were still fighting after Soviets took over Poland. The last soldier of anti communist resistance in Poland was KIA in 1963. They were called "Cursed Soldiers" and most of them fought to the begining of 50ties. ------------- "I am a pure-blooded Polish nobleman, without a single drop of bad blood, certainly not German blood" - Friedrich Nietzsche |
Posted By: Cryptic
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2010 at 10:59
|
What, no anti semitism in Poland?
During the Warsaw Ghetto uprising, the Polish Home Army actually charged the Jews for the few weapons (about 20 rifles and pistols) and ammuniton that they provided. Most of the small number of Polish fighters that fought with the Jews in Warsaw were from communist groups.
|
Posted By: Mosquito
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2010 at 12:10
source please!
And you think that Polish underground was equipped with what? Panzer divisions and diving bombers squadrons? When Warsaw Uprising was started Polish underground had ammo for 48 hours of fight. Do you also think that it was easy to smuggle large amounts of arms to Ghetto?
Damn I can see Holy Cryptic in such situation risking his and his family life everyday, transporting full wagons of arms and smuggling tanks to Ghetto. It is so easy for some to talk about others and blame them... while your own goverment did nothing, didnt even want to belive the man who risked his life to gather infromations about genocide and who travelled to USA only to inform about atrocities.
Marek Edelman, one of the leaders of uprising who was saved by Polish underground would probably call you an idiot or even slap you, as he was use to do with the americans who were visiting him and saying such nuissences.
And as for anti semitism, well, there were Jews, who were calling Marek Edelman an antisemite too, inspite of the fact that he was Jewish freedom fighter.
About antisemitism in Poland you should ask Jews from Poland, not those from USA. Even the founders of Israel were Polish Jews, but why were they offering jobs in their army to those antisemite Polish officers who couldnt come back to Poland after WW2? ------------- "I am a pure-blooded Polish nobleman, without a single drop of bad blood, certainly not German blood" - Friedrich Nietzsche |
Posted By: Cryptic
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2010 at 09:21
Strange ranting.... I said that there were complex reasons for Poles not helping Jews, Any chance that antisemitism was one of them?:
The bizarre ranting aside, your point is valid. Continuing the line of thought: No doubt uhmm... holy Mosquito leaves home frequently to fight new wars with powerful nations over countries that he has never been to and whose language he does not speak and whose situation is not a vital concern to him.  You can believe whatever revisionist history you want regarding Poland and antisemitism. Or you could start with this incident following the German surrender in 1945 and realize that Polish Jewish relations were complex. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kielce_pogrom - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kielce_pogrom v |
Posted By: TheGreatSimba
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2010 at 11:09
|
anti-semitism was prevalent throughout Europe, in the East and in the West, and many Polish citizns collaborated with the Nazis.
------------- I use CAPS for emphasis, not yelling. Just don't want to have to click the bold button every time. |
Posted By: Mosquito
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2010 at 12:05
Actually you choosed very difficult example, because there is a lot of things which are not clear about this event, especially there is possibility that it was Soviet inspired action. The case is very famous but noone really knows what happend and why. There were present officers of Soviet and Polish communist secret police and intelligence.
Probably much less in Poland than for example in France. Those who were collaborating with Germans and especially those who were denouncing Jews to Germans, were reciving death sentence's from the courts of undergound state, which sentences were usually executed.
It is also worth to mention that Poland was the only country in occupied Europe, where for hiding Jews people were being imidatelly executed by Germans. Germans were killing not only those who were hiding Jew but also all the people who were living in the same building. There were cases of Polish paesants who were burned together with their famillies and Jews that they were hiding.
In Poland hiding a Jew was more risky than anywhere else. Thousands of Poles were murdered for helping Jews. Some of them were famouse anti-semites who before the war were spreading anti-semite propaganda but during the war sacrified their life's to help the Jews. One of them was for example Jan Mosdorf.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Mosdorf - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Mosdorf ------------- "I am a pure-blooded Polish nobleman, without a single drop of bad blood, certainly not German blood" - Friedrich Nietzsche |
Posted By: Mosquito
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2010 at 12:24
|
However it must be also said that some Jews were not saints and in Soviet occupied Poland, since 1939 were cooperating with Soviet secret police and intelligence against Poles, denouncing them to Soviets or even murdering. This is fact, not anti-semite propaganda. ------------- "I am a pure-blooded Polish nobleman, without a single drop of bad blood, certainly not German blood" - Friedrich Nietzsche |
Posted By: Mosquito
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2010 at 12:38
|
Somthing to compare:
In Norway noone was punished for helping Jews.
In Denmark 1 person named Heiteren was killed for helping Jews.
In Holand people who were caught while helping Jews were being sent to concentration camps.
In Belgium thousands of Jews were hidden by non Jews but noone was arrested for it.
In France few catholic priests and one non priest were arrested for helping Jews.
In Italy noone has recived death sentence for hiding Jew.
In Poland: at least 2500 people were shot, hanged, burned or tortured to death for helping Jews.
Not to mention the fact that Vichy goverment in France activelly cooperated with Germans in finding Jews and transporting them to death camps. And started doing it before even recived German orders. ------------- "I am a pure-blooded Polish nobleman, without a single drop of bad blood, certainly not German blood" - Friedrich Nietzsche |
Posted By: opuslola
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2010 at 14:07
|
I have deliberately avoided posting here because of the explosive nature of such discussion! But, I must take a side with Mosquito now!
It is certainly true that in Europe both East and West, it was normal for Soviet Communism to be spread and controlled at times, by European Jewery! This certainly started in the earliest days of the rise of Communism, both in Russia and in the rest of Europe! International Jewery was always connected via mail and person to person access! They were a "close" people, especially in the intelligensia, or the educated classes, because of both Religion but because the educated also shared a "mostly secret language"! I don't think that my words above can be really challenged? Thus in the period of massive and underground revolts and Union actions within all of Europe, it seems that many Jews were drawn to the struggle on the side of the Communists! In the choice of the rest of the people of Europe who were mostly either Catholic or Protestant (in the greatest parts) it became an easy choice to side with either the Jews (the killers of Christ) and the Agnostics and Atheists, on one side, or with the other side, with other co-Christians! To (too!) many Christians the choice became rather obvious! End of my ranting! Regards, ------------- http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/ |
Posted By: Mosquito
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2010 at 16:35
|
I would like also to quote this account of a Jewish survivor:
"In the small houses of Warsaw Zoliborz district inhabitatted mostly by Polish intelligetnsia there were hidden many Jews who had escaped from ghetto. I was in such a home which belonged to a prewar Endek (member of Polish nationalist party). Having learned that he was sheltering two Jewesses I asked with surprise: You who before the war were an anti- Semite are now harboring Jews in his home? He replied: "We have a common enemy and I am fighting in my way. They are Polish citisens and I have to help them".
------------- "I am a pure-blooded Polish nobleman, without a single drop of bad blood, certainly not German blood" - Friedrich Nietzsche |
Posted By: TheGreatSimba
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2010 at 19:19
Yup, Jews were always behind everything, werent they?...  ------------- I use CAPS for emphasis, not yelling. Just don't want to have to click the bold button every time. |
Posted By: Mosquito
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2010 at 19:53
Just check how many Jews played key role in the bolshevik revolution. ------------- "I am a pure-blooded Polish nobleman, without a single drop of bad blood, certainly not German blood" - Friedrich Nietzsche |
Posted By: cavalry4ever
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2010 at 20:08
|
How many Poles played role in the Bolshevik revolution? This is the problem with meaningless generalizations. ------------- "Loyalty to petrified opinion never yet broke a chain or freed a human soul." Mark Twain |
Posted By: Mosquito
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2010 at 20:20
With great shame I have to admitt that there were some with Feliks Dzierżyński (Felix Edmundovich Dzerzhinsky), nicknamed "Iron Felix" as the most important one. But he was and is considered as villain in the history of my country. And he was the only one that played an important role. ------------- "I am a pure-blooded Polish nobleman, without a single drop of bad blood, certainly not German blood" - Friedrich Nietzsche |
Posted By: cavalry4ever
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2010 at 21:16
So, each nationality had its scoundrels and heroes, this is why we have to be careful projecting characters of scoundrels at any national groups. The fact that many Bolsheviks were murderers and may have been Polish, Jewish or Georgian does not mean that Polish, Jews or Georgians are all Bolsheviks or murderers. Mosquito, your comment above is not very thoughtful or objective. The same applies to opuslola. ------------- "Loyalty to petrified opinion never yet broke a chain or freed a human soul." Mark Twain |
Posted By: opuslola
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2010 at 23:47
|
My dear "cav4ever", I would respectfully suggest that your response was "Not very thoughtful or objective!"
One must first stand in front of a mirror to really see how others see one! You, have sir, acted as a cad! And as it so happens to be, at least to me, you have sir, what can only be called a, "petrified opinion!" You actually have a source within Poland, and you merely disreagard his opinion because it does not match yours! Ron, from a family that had to leave Virginia because of the lack of freedom found there! ------------- http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/ |
Posted By: Mosquito
Date Posted: 24-Nov-2010 at 07:23
Its hard to call the Poles - Bolshevik's as we had stopped the Red Army advance into Europe in 1920 and that Polish aristocrate Felix Dzierzynski who was the boss of soviet terror machine had raised hand against his own homeland.
As for the Jews it must be said that after 1945 their numbers in Polish puppet goverment was large, especially in the secret police that was torturing and murdering people. The head of stalinist terror in Poland was Jakub Berman - a Polish Jew and another one also responsible for terror was Hilary Minc also a Jew. In fact they were ruling Poland till the death of Stalin.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jakub_Berman - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jakub_Berman
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hilary_Minc - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hilary_Minc
------------- "I am a pure-blooded Polish nobleman, without a single drop of bad blood, certainly not German blood" - Friedrich Nietzsche |
Posted By: Cryptic
Date Posted: 24-Nov-2010 at 08:59
I see the conspiracy theory now: the judeo-bolshevicks murdered each other to slander Poland's reputation.
Yes, first they created the capitalist banking system and then they released Bolshevism on an unsuspecting world. Next they.... 
And what secret plotting language was this? Hebrew, a dead language used for religious purposes only? Or Yiddish, a "secret" language related to German that most Jews did not speak? |
Posted By: cavalry4ever
Date Posted: 24-Nov-2010 at 08:59
|
Pilsudski was afraid of having too many communist sympathisers in Poland during the war. The reality vs. fiction is much more ambiguous. Also Pilsudski is an idealized, right wing dictator that won the war and started as a Socialist himself. Polish communist government had Poles in it. The fact that some had Jewish roots was irrelevant. As the fact that some of Poles in Solidarity had Jewish roots as well. When you start dividing a nation on pseudo-religious ground you have problem. Probably saying that most of Poland's communist government was dominated by atheist would be more accurate and as much absurd. ------------- "Loyalty to petrified opinion never yet broke a chain or freed a human soul." Mark Twain |
Posted By: Mosquito
Date Posted: 24-Nov-2010 at 09:23
Facts are facts, there were present officers of Soviet NKVD and communist secret police and were assisiting during the pogrm, not stopping it. ------------- "I am a pure-blooded Polish nobleman, without a single drop of bad blood, certainly not German blood" - Friedrich Nietzsche |
Posted By: Mosquito
Date Posted: 24-Nov-2010 at 09:47
What are you talking about? During which war? Pilsudski died in 1934. As for Polish communists in prewar period most of them was killed by Soviets. Stalin called them to Moscow and executed. The only who were not killed were those imprisoned in Poland.
And your evil Pilsudski had full support of Jewish minority in Poland.
"The years 1926–35, and Piłsudski himself, were favorably viewed by many http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_Jews - Polish Jews whose situation improved especially under Piłsudski-appointed Prime Minister http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kazimierz_Bartel - Kazimierz Bartel . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C3%B3zef_Pi%C5%82sudski#cite_note-Cieplinski-138 - [139] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C3%B3zef_Pi%C5%82sudski#cite_note-139 - [140] Many Jews saw Piłsudski as their only hope for restraining antisemitic currents in Poland and for maintaining public order; he was seen as a guarantor of stability and a friend of the Jewish people, who voted for him and actively participated in his political bloc."
Who talks about the religion? Most of the Jewish communists were atheists, being Jewish or not was the matter of ethnicity, not religion. And yes there were Poles too but most of the communist terror machine were Jews, some of them like Berman and Mins, personally picked by Stalin. However I must admitt that they were also persecuating non communist Jews. ------------- "I am a pure-blooded Polish nobleman, without a single drop of bad blood, certainly not German blood" - Friedrich Nietzsche |
Posted By: TheGreatSimba
Date Posted: 24-Nov-2010 at 10:31
|
This is ridiculous, these are the facts: There were Poles who sympathized with and collaborated with the Nazis (even today there are Polish Nazi's, for example, and the neo-Nazi movement is flourishing in post-Communist Poland) There were Poles who sympathized with and were part of the Communist Party To claim otherwise is simply delusional. As for the Jewish conspiracy that Opuslola is so fond of, its simply ridiculous and had nothing to do with the Jewish faith. If Jews participating in the Communist revolution, it wasnt because they were Jewish or because there was a Jewish conspiracy. ------------- I use CAPS for emphasis, not yelling. Just don't want to have to click the bold button every time. |
Posted By: Cryptic
Date Posted: 25-Nov-2010 at 08:44
|
Posts discussing Neo Nazism in Poland moved to: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=28890 - http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=28890 |
Posted By: medenaywe
Date Posted: 18-Mar-2011 at 19:21
|
Will redefine question again:Was USSR and communism on east and rest of the world,part of some secret unknown("Conspiracy") plan?Who were people victims of the war?Who did come,instead population cleaned with invasion in Russia,on living places that were inhabited by them?What do happens in the rest of World?We now know that lot of Nazi members were incorporated inside countries of Alliance. |
Posted By: Patrick230
Date Posted: 25-May-2016 at 13:22
| From your very first sentence it's clear you don't know what you are talking about. The soviet invasion of Poland had nothing to do with "waiting until Poland had no armies left". The Soviets invaded on the date that was agreed to I. The secret protocols of the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact. These protocols described the partitioning of Eastern Europe into spheres of influence, with eastern Poland falling in the soviet sphere and western Poland going to the Germans. Chamberlain being an appeaser (while certainly true) also has nothing whatsoever to do with this. You shouldn't post answers unless you actually know what you're talking about. I could go on with further analysis of your mistakes but I think these examples speak for themselves. |
Posted By: Patrick230
Date Posted: 25-May-2016 at 14:06
|
This is a great question with no single answer. There are many reasons why the western allies did what they did in regards to Poland. Here are a few of the main ones:
First, you have to look at the situation from the English perspective. By the time Germany invaded Poland and started WW2, several things were known (or at least believed) by Britain. First, they believed that Hitler could not be appeased and would continue to take as much territory as he could. Diplomacy was no longer believed to be an option. England had good reason to take this view, as Hitler had reneged on many prior agreements. Next, simple geography was a factor. Located in north-central Europe, the Third Reich's location made the possibility of complete German domination of continental Europe a real possibility. That, along with the perception of Germany as a technological juggernaut, Hitler's obvious territorial ambitions and many other smaller factors, led to Germany being perceived as a much bigger threat than the USSR. Also, my personal opinion is that the Soviets were smarter in how they went about getting what they wanted. Note that the German was invasion of Western Poland occurred a full 16 days before the Soviets invaded from the east. Although both nations had the same goals (and were in fact cooperating under the secret protocols of the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact with regards to the partition of Poland into seperate Nazi and Soviet "spheres of influence") of taking part of Poland for themselves, the Germans ended up looking like the aggressors while the Soviets appeared to be attempting to secure their borders and create a buffer between themselves and the Nazi regime. Obviously, some of this perception is because the western allies WANTED it to look this way. As declaring war on both Germany and Russia would have been totally unworkable, the bigger threat had to be targeted. One of the real losers in this "propaganda war" was Finland. The Fins became the only democracy to join the axis not out of any common belief, but simply to counter soviet aggression. Finally, Poland was a victim of politics. Though freeing Poland, a nation which was a member of the allies from the beginning, was the reason for the declarations of war that began world war 2, poland was never actually freed even after the capitulation of Germany. They were simply occupied by the USSR, despite the pleas for help from Poland's government in exile. Eventually they were turned into a puppet of the communist bloc. So, in my long winded way, I'm basically saying that the answer to your question is complex, but breaks down to a few simple answers: politics, logistics, and fear. Hope this helps. |
Posted By: Mijal
Date Posted: 14-Aug-2016 at 03:12
At this stage USSR wasn't seen as an aggressor. When they 'invaded' Poland it was to check the Nazi's from further advance into Belarus + Ukraine. Prior to the advance Molotov contacted, or at least tried to contact, whatever was left of the Polish government and informed them that in sight of the Nazi advance and the Polish government abdicating they must move their armies in to secure their borders. As a matter of fact before Molotov made this communication to the Poles he was contacted by a Nazi ambassador that if no one claims these lands that have been abandoned then there may rise up 'other nations' as a consequence. Therefore to prevent the Nazi's from potentially setting up fascist puppet states in Ukraine and Belarus they entered Poland's eastern provinces. Winston Churchill announced through radio on October 1: The Soviets have stopped the Nazi's in Eastern Poland; I only wish they were doing it as our allies Minister Chamberlain announced in the House of Commons: It has been necessary for the Red Army to occupy part of Poland as protection against Germany. |
Posted By: Centrix Vigilis
Date Posted: 15-Aug-2016 at 13:05
|
http://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2011/06/world-war-ii-the-invasion-of-poland-and-the-winter-war/100094/ ------------- "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" S. T. Friedman Pilger's law: 'If it's been officially denied, then it's probably true' |
Posted By: Mijal
Date Posted: 18-Aug-2016 at 23:17
Feliks Dzierżyński (co-creator of the Cheka) Stanisław Redens (brother-in-law to Stalin, held high positions in the Cheka, during dekulakization and the repressions (purges)). Stanisław Kosior (First secretary of the Communist party in Ukraine) Karl Radek (Polish/Jewish Marxist) Wiaczesław (Wacław) Mężyński (People's comissar for finance/ Chairman of the OGPU (Cheka)) Henryk (Genrikh) Jagoda (Head of the NKVD; this one can go both ways, although born in Russia he spoke fluent Polish and the region he was born in used to be Polish 'Kresy', Bobrujsk) Mieczysław Gil (Lenin's bodyguard and driver) Gleb Krzyżanowski (one of Lenin's closest friends; played a leading role in 'electrifying' the USSR (GOERLO plan), First chief of Gosplan. He also wrote the Russian text for the Polish revolutionary song, "warszawianka") Wacław Worowski (One of the first Soviet diplomats: diplomatic representative to scandinavia) Aleksandra Kołłątaj (Also a soviet diplomat; first ever female in government) Jakub Hanecki ( Chief of the central Soviet bank 1918-1920; he also helped Lenin move around in Poland before the revolution) Józef Unszlicht ( another co-founder and worker of the Cheka) Andrzej Wyszyński (General procurator of the USSR 1935-1939) Konstantin Rokossowski (Marshal of the Soviet Union, Marshal of People's Republic of Poland; led the victory parade alongside Zhukov. Played a big part in the Defense of Moscow and in Stalingrad, where he accepted Von Paulus' surrender) Jan (Ivan) Czernichowski ( two-time hero of the Soviet Union ) Jan (Ivan) Jakubowski ( decorated Soviet Marshal ) Wanda Wasilewska ( Novelist and political activist; her father was a close associate to Piłsudski; she was and advocate of having Poland become a member state of the Soviet Union.) I missed some, but these are the big ones. I didn't even mention the 'Khrushchev version' of Stalin's ancestry...  |