Poles furious after Russia blames them for starting WWII

a reply to: introvert

Yes the usual, uneducated or ignorant. Here's another label for you...SPIN.

Yes, Hitler did have an admiration for the Brits. His actions at Dunkirk seem to back that sentiment up. More likely, he thought the U.K. would sue for peace after his "largess". The man was an idiot.

That doesn't translate into the U.K. 'preparing for war' under Chamberlain. Contingency plans by the military? Of course! That's their bloody job. ( Despite incompetent leadership)

The splitting of Poland between Russia and Germany had nothing to do with the U.K.. If anything, it likely would have occurred in any event. Securing the east was a strategic move. If Hitler in fact didn't want England in on the festivities invading Poland was the last thing he would do.

What this sounds like is some communist sympathizer...hint, hint. promulgated this idea hoping to further degrade the west in their usual propaganda machine.

Nothing but spin , sir. You are disingenuous.

I find it amusing how some members here claim to know the truth about history when we are witnessing first hand today how "history" is written with media lies and political propaganda.

Yes, I too remember the mystery substitute teacher im the 4th grade telling our class that that brown eyes were inferior to blue eyes - or at least that is how Hitler saw it. I also remember how the for the first time we looked at the colour of each others eyes and passed judgement. She wasnt telling us blue eyes were superior, she said that is what Hitler thought. Quite clever if you asked me...

a reply to: introvert

On your premise Britain wanted war with Nazi Germany ?

Answer this one question. If Britain was preparing to go to war, then why did it not build it's war machine to be ready for war ?

Nazi Germany had been building it's military war machine for years with the sole purpose of European domination.
When war broke out, Britain was years behind with it's military capability. Hence we had to buy what we needed from The U.S. through lend-lease agreement.

Can you see what utter nonsense your assumption is?

originally posted by: introvert


It's only revisionist history according to those that are uneducated or ignorant on the topic.

Oh the irony.....

originally posted by: introvert
Helmuth Wohlthat made it very clear to the British that Hitler did not want to go to war with them, even after years of military buildup leading to WWII by the British for the sole purpose of war with Germany.

And what was Germany demanding from Poland? They wanted Danzig and a land corridor and Poland refused.. A lesson Germany failed to learn in WWI.

originally posted by: introvert
Poland, being very anti-German, and still is today, played a role in all of that.

Gee I wonder why Poland has issues with Nazi Germany... Gee I wonder why Poland has issues with the USSR and now Russia.

Did you forget Nazi Germany staged the incident they used to justify their invasion of Poland? Did you forget Nazi soldiers dressed as Polish military in order to blame Poland? Did you forget about the Anschluss? The Sudetenland? The remaining annexation of what was left of Czechoslovakia? The fact the USSR helped Nazi Germany invade Poland?

Did you forget about the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact between Nazi Germany and Stalin's USSR that divided up not only Poland, but the Baltics and S. East Europe?

Take your revisionist history back to Moscow and leave it there since they are the only tools who actually believe they did nothing wrong during WWII.

a reply to: nwtrucker

Like the Elites of today couldn't or wouldn't cut the throat of those that wouldn't go along with the gang .Putin today makes a good example of the Hitler of yesteryears .Putin seems to be much smarter the Hitler was and has some history to reflect on to put his ducks in order . Like or unlike the 2nd world war it is going to be much harder to draw Putin into the trap the Bankers have decided it should go .

a reply to: MALBOSIA

You are very observant and did you notice that the ones calming to have A's on their history got it from the same propaganda machine turning it out today .

a reply to: introvert

Anyone living in that time knows your full of it. Why exactly would Poland need to sit and talk with anyone? I can see it now. Hitler and Stalin sitting at the table with smirks on their faces. Give us part of your country or die. Uhhhhh who in their right mind would even believe this dribble you're trying to push. No talks would have done them any good. The leader would have faced a coup right then and there had he given them anything. People don't want a weak leader.

HERE is an interesting read on the subject.

Although I don't see the mention of the US offering to back Poland militarily...as I first said.

(Maybe I was mistaken and that it was the UK and not the US that promised to back Poland against Germany)

As we all know, the British government under Chamberlain gave Poland the guarantee that England would come to its aid if Poland should be attacked. This was on March 31st, 1939. Its purpose was to incite Poland to escalate its endeavors for war against Germany. It happened as planned: England declared war on Germany on September 3rd, 1939,

a reply to: the2ofusr1

Prime Minister Ewa Kopacz also expressed displeasure with the ambassador. "The role of an ambassador accredited in a country should be to build to build harmony and friendly relations between countries," Kopacz said.

Perhaps we could return to the news item posted. My point in posting this news article had to do with a high level diplomatic failure by Russia.

a reply to: Crumbles

Gee ...you want and do put it into a simple compartment that says that guy bad and us guys good . Think about it for a bit .Time claimed Hitler the Man of the year . Who decided to to that and Why . There is a pattern in history that if you dont hook onto will leave you wondering some day ow you could have believed such a thing . consider the 911 official I repeat the OFFICIAL story and think about the kids not born yet that will be forced to drink that poison

a reply to: alldaylong

It is childishly naive and also unfair to suggest to a nation in a position like Poland, to compromise its relations with such a strong neighbour as Germany and to expose the world to the catastrophe of war, for no other reason than to pander to the wishes of Chamberlain's domestic policies. It would be even more naive to assume that the Polish government did not understand the true purpose of this manoeuver and its consequences.

Jules Lukasiewicz from Bolko Frhr v. Richthofen

In Germany's Economic Preparations for War, a book by a Jewish American Professor named Dr. Burton Klein he said this:

"Germany produced butter as well as 'cannons', and much more butter and much fewer cannons than was generally assumed

The overall state of the German war economy ... was not that of a nation geared towards total war, but rather that of a national economy mobilized at first only for small and locally restricted wars and which only later succumbed to the pressure of military necessity after it had become an incontrovertible fact. For instance, in the fall of 1939 the German preparations for provision with steel, oil and other important raw materials were anything but adequate for an intense engagement with the Great Powers.

There is a lot more to this than the simplistic point of view you are taking on this. Read a book and do some research before you try to lecture me on what happened. I don't take this position because it's popular or provocative. In fact, it's very unpopular, but it's the damn truth.

a reply to: machineintelligence

OK and all I have to offer is Bones man Kerry .We could go a bit higher up and mention Clinton but what does it matter now ......Not all diplomats are created equal and sometimes they say things that may be true but ought not to have been said .

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: machineintelligence

You have to look in to the history of that period to find that it was, in fact, Poland and the British that pushed Germany to invade in 1939. Germany had taken many steps to be diplomatic, but they Poles were not willing to sit at a table and converse with the Germans.

There's a lot more to history that what we are told.

Let's get some primary sources in on this, okay?

a reply to: DJW001

Primary sources? I'd love to provide them but I do not have the means to scan copies of my books, and many of the sources online can be "questionable".

a reply to: introvert

Hitler broke the Treaty Of Versailles thus:-

Some significant violations (or avoidances) of the provisions of the Treaty were:
In 1919, the dissolution of the General Staff appeared to happen; however, the core of the General Staff was reestablished and hidden in the Truppenamt
In March 1935, under the government of Adolf Hitler, Germany violated the Treaty of Versailles by introducing compulsory military conscription in Germany and rebuilding the armed forces.
In March 1936, Germany violated the treaty by reoccupying the demilitarized zone in the Rhineland.
In March 1938, Germany violated the treaty by annexing Austria in the Anschluss

en.wikipedia.org...

The only person responsible for WW II in Europe was Adolf Hitler.