The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewLinh Dinh Archive
Poland Looking West
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

In 1985, Czeslaw Milosz said in an interview, “The importance of the movement in Poland, of Solidarity, is that it is not just a Polish phenomenon. It exemplifies a basic issue of the twentieth century. Namely, resistance to the withering away of society and its domination by the state. In the Poland of Solidarity, owing to some historical forces, there was a kind of resurgence, or renaissance, of the society against the state.

Quite contrary to the predictions of Marx, this is the basic issue of the twentieth century. Instead of the withering away of the state, the state, like a crab, has eaten up all the substance of society. Destroying society, as a matter of fact. As a workers’ movement, Solidarity resisted this. Whether various societies that have been conquered by the state will awaken in the future, I don’t know. The movement in Poland presents a hopeful pattern.”

Communism was the ultimate expression of state power, and it ate away and destroyed society, observed Milosz, but this sinister process also “exemplifies a basic issue of the twentieth century,” meaning to one degree or another, it was a universal problem. It still is. With increased surveillance from the state, and its power to micromanage or interfere with nearly all aspects of our lives, we’re entirely at the state’s mercy. In the US, the government can prevent us from flying without explanation, and it can even summarily disappear or kill us. Typing a word, we must look over our shoulder.

Culture, cuisine or crime, society is whatever evolves naturally from the people, and the state is the uber structure over all that vitality. The more infantile a population, the more it thinks it needs a paternal state, but free men will always rage and rebel against an all-intrusive government. In each Communist country, many did just that, though even the slightest dissent was met with the most barbaric punishment. Innocents were also round up by the paranoid state.

Thirty-one years after Milosz’ statement, is Poland still a promising bellwether? Seems like it traded one empire for another. Instead of being a Russian thorn against the West, it has become NATO’s point man against Russia. It is lobbying to have foreign troops in its territory to deter against “Russian expansionism,” though that would only increase the likelihood of such an aggression. To its disappointment, its effort to host American missiles fell through. It lost 74 soldiers in the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, fourth highest among Uncle Sam’s vassals.

Clothing Store in Luban, Poland.

Clothing Store in Luban, Poland.

On a recent, brief visit to three Polish towns near the German border, I saw quite a few signs of Poland’s infatuation with the USA. In Luban, there’s an Uncle Sam’s Ice Cream, with the depicted vanilla and chocolate soft serve looking strangely like long screws. A clothing store displays a large image of Manhattan with a dozen taxis. There’s a Manhattan Bistro. Luban’s many one-room casinos also evoke that land of MTV and Hollywood fantasies, with Café Vegas showing a freeway and skyscrapers of… Los Angeles. “JACK HOT,” “HOT FUN,” “LUCKY SEVEN,” “LUCKY SLOTS,” “VIP ROOM,” all these Polish casinos have American names. It’s as if luck and America are the same, though of course you nearly always lose in these joints.

Bar Kalifornia in Zgorzelec, Poland.

Bar Kalifornia in Zgorzelec, Poland.

In Zgorzelec, Bar Kalifornia features the Statue of Liberty superimposed over Manhattan and the American flag. In a window, a small manikin sports a red, white and blue outfit with stars and stripes. In tiny Wignielec, population 3,072, a boy’s bomber jacket outside a store has American flag patches. Everywhere I went, I heard American pop music. On one station, the announcers even spoke English between songs. Needless to say, everything Russian has been purged from the landscape. On some menus, there is the pierogi ruskie. Filled with mashed potato, it’s as sexy as mashed potato.

Decades of Communist destruction of society has left its marks in Poland. East Germany had the West to help it recover, but Poles had to catch up by themselves. As of 2014, its GNI per capita of $24,710 was roughly the same as Russia’s and Hungary’s, but behind the Czech Republic’s $28,020 and just over half of Germany’s $46,850. Crossing from Gorlitz into Zgorzelec, I could immediately see the differences between the two nations. The Polish buildings were in poorer shape, the shops were homelier and there were many fewer places to eat and drink. Almost none had a menu outside to attract clients. Even the service was different.

Spotting an inviting restaurant, I walked in to find a lady at a table. Since she barely looked up, I assumed she was a customer. I went to the counter to pick up a menu then peered into the kitchen to see an old woman, whom I waved at. I sat down. After about two minutes, the first lady stood up, turned around and said to me, “Sprechen Sie Deutsch?” It turned out she was the waitress and cashier.

The place was more bar than restaurant. Middle aged men would walk in, order a tall draft of Okocim then drink at a table mostly in silence, though they all seemed to know each other. Sauntering in, a guy said hello to everyone and shook their hands. Seeing me, he shook my hand also. I had a plate of soothing pierogi filled with a pork paste for just $2.20. An honest bowl of tripe soup with bits of ham and vegetables set me back $1.90. The decors flaunted plastic chandeliers and velvet curtains with tassels and frills. On the walls were postcard-sized, mass-produced paintings of rustic scenes. It was kitschy all over, but worn and faded, like an old, affable whore. I like you, too. Dipping half a pierogi into sour cream, I felt very at home and comforted. On TV, there was a Turkish soap opera that was dubbed by a single male voice. Everyone sounded the same.

ORDER IT NOW

Along with Hungary, the Czech Republic and Slovakia, Poland is rejecting the European Union’s mandate to accept thousands of Muslim refugees. With recent memories of having their societies deformed and suffocated by Soviet Russia, these central European nations know only too bitterly how precarious national identity and autonomy is. In 1985, Milan Kundera pointed out, “When it comes to the misfortune of nations, we must not forget the dimension of time. In a fascist, dictatorial state, everyone knows that it will end one day. Everyone looks to the end of the tunnel. In the empire to the east, the tunnel is without end. Without end, at least, from the point of view of a human life. This is why I don’t like it when people compare Poland with, say, Chile. Yes, the torture, the suffering are the same. But the tunnels are of very different lengths. And this changes everything.”

Citing this difference, Kundera reminded us that Communist European nations were subjugated by Russia, and that’s why they couldn’t terminate their misery organically, from the ground up. When the masses rebelled against dictatorship, like the East Germans did in 1953, the Hungarians in 1956 or the Czechs in 1968, the Russians brought in the tanks. Kundera also asserted, “For a thousand years, Czechoslovakia was part of the West. Today, it is part of the empire to the east.” Like the Poles, their fellow Slavs, Czechs also see an affinity and allegiance with the West, not Russia.

Bar Orientalny Restauracja in Poland.

Bar Orientalny Restauracja in Poland.

Having regained their identities, these nations won’t allow Brussels to tamper with them. They will certainly stay in the European Union, however, since this association allows their citizens to work in many wealthier countries. They want to export, not import, immigrants. Crossing into Poland, I noticed that the Turkish and Vietnamese food joints practically disappeared. I did run into Bar Orientalny Restauracja, however.

Its owner is one of only two Vietnamese in town. Tran has lived in Europe for 30 years, with the first three in the Czech Republic, where he met his first Polish wife. Following her back to Zgorzelec, he survived by selling black market cigarettes, then clothes, and was locked up several times. Tran started cooking 20 years ago, and now has a spacious restaurant. On the wall was a common New Year’s greeting. It translates as, “MUCH WEALTH MUCH LUCK.”

Working seven days a week, Tran leaves the house at 7AM and doesn’t return until 10PM. Married to his second Polish wife, he has six kids altogether, with three grown ones working in Leipzig, Germany. His 20-year-old has a job across the river, since German wages, averaging €2,183, are three times higher. Tran has two Polish employees.

“I’d rather hire a Pole than a Vietnamese, to tell you the truth. If it’s too busy, a Vietnamese wants a raise. If it’s too slow, she wants a raise. That woman has worked for me for nearly eight years.” Tran nodded towards the waitress and cashier. Square-jawed and assured without being pushy, he exuded a resilience that had allowed him to survive, and his relaxed charm was also evident. As a newcomer, you need to muster up all assets.

Tran never had enough money to fly back to Vietnam before 2010, but now returns annually for a month to see his aging mother, and to take the extended family to the beach. I’m sure he also gives quite a few people money. It’s expected. By a miraculous coincidence, we come from the same block in Saigon, though he got there just after I had left. Tran has no desire to retire in Vietnam. “Everyone knows me here. I’m at home here.”

“Don’t you miss the food? Like a really great bowl of pho?”

“I can make it better myself.”

A few Zgorzelec restaurants have German and English menus, but Orientalny Restauracja even boasts a Japanese one. “There’s a Toyota plant not too far away, and their Japanese employees sometimes come in here. I also get a few Americans. They’re on the basketball team.”

Playing at a 3,500 seat arena, Turów Zgorzelec has two American players, Cameron Tatum and Kirk Archibeque. Tatum averaged 8.1 points a game during his last year at the University of Tennessee. He majored in Africana Studies. Archibeque averaged 13.1 points during his third season, his best, at Northern Colorado. Though not immigrants, these men have found a way to survive outside their native land. It beats becoming a mercenary.

Tran on how accommodating Poles can be, “If you ask for directions, they won’t just show you but may walk you there. If there’s an argument between a Pole and a foreigner, they will side with the foreigner, but it depends on which foreigner.”

Last November 15th, Poland’s Independence Day, a young priest, Jacek Miedlar, bellowed out a fierce speech to a flag waving crowd in Warsaw. Miedlar began, “Dearly beloved, the enemies of the homeland and the enemies of the Church are furious today because they see a huge, enormous army of patriots, army of nationalists, and army of supporters who have ‘God, Honor, and Fatherland’ in their hearts and are ready to give their lives for them. But I am more than convinced that leftist propaganda is trying its best to destroy us, to destroy the Church, to destroy the Polish nation. We cannot let them do it. We are the Church Militant. We are the warriors of Great Poland. They aren’t even aware that the more they attack us, the more our pride grows!”

Is this paranoia? How besieged is Poland, really? It seems to me that what threatens Poland also endangers many other countries, and that’s the subjugation of local needs to a master scheme cooked up far away by an elite that owe no allegiance to any nation. Going after immediate benefits, Poland risks long term damage. To avert disaster, it will need to stop supporting Uncle Sam’s belligerence, appeasing Brussels and antagonizing the Kremlin.

Though the narrative that Russia invaded Ukraine is absurd, most Poles buy into it, such is their hatred of their long time nemesis. At least ten thousand Poles have even joined militias to prepare for an invasion. Clinging to that dangerously flailing zombie that’s Uncle Sam, Poles might just see their worst fear realized.

Linh Dinh is the author of two books of stories, five of poems, and a novel, Love Like Hate. He’s tracking our deteriorating socialscape through his frequently updated photo blog, Postcards from the End of America.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: Poland 
Hide 137 CommentsLeave a Comment
137 Comments to "Poland Looking West"
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. I’ve been annoyed by some of Linh Dinh’s previous articles, but this one is actually not bad, quite interesting in a way. I disagree with Linh about Russia, I think Polish apprehensions and fears about Russian imperialism are understandable and to some degree pefectly rational. But of course US cultural influence and the EU are also grave dangers to Polish sovereignty and nationhood. I wish Poland well, hopefully they and the other Eastern Europeans can stand up to foreign pressure and create a viable alternative both to Russia’s system and to the Western globalist nation-wreckers.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    I wish Poland well, hopefully they and the other Eastern Europeans can stand up to foreign pressure and create a viable alternative both to Russia’s system and to the Western globalist nation-wreckers.
     
    The consensus among Poland's elite is that Ukraine's post-Russian success is, if not necessary, certainly very important for this project to work. They are correct.
    , @Simon in London
    Yeah, Russia is an historic threat and it makes sense to maintain a martial tradition to deter aggression. Of course the current threat is western cultural Marxism - but the same militia that might one day deter Russian meddling can also deter Arab rape gangs and other signs of cultural Marxist societal collapse.

    It makes sense not to trust Russia - but don't make the mistake of trusting the USA or EU instead. The priest has the right idea.

    , @Astuteobservor II
    what I find to be funny is that, instead of trying to find and read thought provoking articles, you are just looking for confirmation to your views :P

    are you that scare of differing/opposing views?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. OutWest says:

    The rationale for the U.S. presence in Europe –and elsewhere- is getting very thin as are any favorable results. Poland and other countries would do better with more local alliances rather expecting the U.S. to continue policies 25 years out of date. Of course the U.S. government will continue to see emergencies and dire threats but the populace is reverting to a more isolationist stance behind oceans and a more concentrated and less costly defense.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  3. Poles basically run my building here in NYC. I like them, they show up for work, are handy with plumbers’ putty, don’t expect exorbitant tips and like America. If only we had more Poles and fewer Linh Dinhs.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous
    Linh Dinh is one of the consistently insightful contributors published here. But he seems to annoy many of us. Even those who comment positively seem compelled to qualify their praise. You cite nothing in this article with which you find fault, but take a needless swipe at him in telling us that you like Polish people with whom you're acquainted.

    I'm curious why Americans (other than gulled flag-wavers) aren't glad that he's here. I hope that his Vietnamese origin isn't a trigger for some of the hostility, but I've wondered about that.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. I appreciate L.D.’s sad assessment, “decades of communist destruction of society has left its mark on Poland… and having to catch up by themselves.”

    Twenty years ago, I read Ambassador Arthur Bliss Lane’s blistering “I saw Poland betrayed,” (1948), and afterward, I learned that contemporary right & left wing embryonic US globalists considered Mr. Lane’s viewpoints annoying, a back slider.

    Goes to show how readers can gain knowledge by standing up to pressures foreign, within, and
    those heavily advertised & endorsed by “nation wreckers” disguised in fashionable occidental sheep clothing?

    Naz drowie, Linh!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  5. schmenz says:

    A very informative article. I admit I do not understand Poland’s fear of today’s Russia, and I do know they are unfortunately susceptible to US propaganda, but it does seem their actions of inviting in US weapons and keeping the hatred of Russia alive is rather like shooting yourself in the foot.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    I admit I do not understand Poland’s fear of today’s Russia, and I do know they are unfortunately susceptible to US propaganda,
     
    I don't know enough about you to make this comment about you, but in general it's somewhat patronizing of certain Russia-friendly Westerners to believe that they understand better what happens in Eastern Europe than Eastern Europeans themselves do. Poles (and Ukrainians) know much more about Russia's relationship with their own country than you do, even though you've been reading Russia Insider or watching Russia Today or whatever. And hostility towards Russia in these countries is not the result of US propaganda.
    , @Jim
    If you knew more about Poland's history you would better be able to understand their feelings toward Russia.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Bragadocious
    Poles basically run my building here in NYC. I like them, they show up for work, are handy with plumbers' putty, don't expect exorbitant tips and like America. If only we had more Poles and fewer Linh Dinhs.

    Linh Dinh is one of the consistently insightful contributors published here. But he seems to annoy many of us. Even those who comment positively seem compelled to qualify their praise. You cite nothing in this article with which you find fault, but take a needless swipe at him in telling us that you like Polish people with whom you’re acquainted.

    I’m curious why Americans (other than gulled flag-wavers) aren’t glad that he’s here. I hope that his Vietnamese origin isn’t a trigger for some of the hostility, but I’ve wondered about that.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bragadocious
    He's not really insightful at all, sorry to burst your bubble. To take one example from this story. He starts out by saying Poland is in open defiance of EU mandates to take refugees. Then towards the end he writes that Poland needs to stop "appeasing Brussels." A total contradiction from what he wrote earlier. I could go on, but it's too boring.
    , @Maj. Kong
    Dinh more or less has an Anti-American perspective, much like Enoch Powell. There are usually two types of the immigrant mindset. The first is a sort of uber-patriotism, the second is a demand for the host society to bend over. Dinh holds the host society in contempt, but doesn't want to have it accommodate him. It's a bit unusual, neither de Tocqueville or Said.

    I like his columns, most of the writers are good except for Gustavo and Giraldi.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. “Yes, the torture, the suffering are the same.”

    No they weren’t. Jaruzelski and Gomułka were nowhere near as brutal as Pinochet.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  8. Thirdeye says:

    Grievance-driven revanchism has been part of eastern European nationalist movements since they emerged in various corners of the empires of the Nineteenth Century. Poland has simply carried it forward. They feel cheated that they never became the great power between the Baltic and the Black seas. Pilsudski sought to right that great historical wrong by leveraging support from Britain and France. Now NATO is the the tool Poland sees as their key to national greatness. IMO that’s a dangerous situation, as Erdogan’s attempt to enlist NATO support for his neo-Ottoman ambitions in Syria shows. Erdogan was refused. But might a Polish attempt to do the same meet with more favor with some more jingoistic fanatically anti-Russian fool occupying the White House and lending a sympathetic ear?

    Poland’s attitude towards the Ukraine is decidedly ambivalent. They strongly side with Kiev against the Russian bogey, but there is also a sense that the western Ukraine has been stolen from them. Ukrainians are just below Russians on the Polish shit-list. Relations between Poles and Ukrainians were downright vicious during the interwar occupation of the western Ukraine by Poland, and during the German occupation of the Ukraine. Ukrainians were expelled from Poland at the end of the war. Partitioning Ukraine is a meme that has gained some currency in Poland. Sikorsky floated the idea as a trial balloon after meeting with Putin, alleging that Putin suggested it. That was vigorously denied by Putin. The Polish dream of reclaiming “our great city of Lvov” has one big fly in the ointment: Lvov is full of Ukrainians.

    To avert disaster, [Poland] will need to stop supporting Uncle Sam’s belligerence, appeasing Brussels and antagonizing the Kremlin.

    Wise words.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon 2
    Poland feeling cheated about the loss of Lvov?
    Poland wanting to partition Ukraine? Nonsense.
    In fact, this is a good example of 19th century
    thinking. The key fact is that Poland, Ukraine,
    (European part of) Russia, and Germany,are all
    losing population. The fertility rates have dropped
    below replacement level, and there is no population
    pressure to expand the territory. Where are the invading
    armies going to come from? That's how people from
    a country that hasn't been invaded in 200 years (i.e.,
    U.S.) think, and that's why America is so out of touch
    with Europe and the rest of the world.

    Moreover, the painful memories from WW II are still
    very fresh in Poland, Ukraine, and Russia. These countries
    are still traumatized, millions still suffer from PTSD.
    Nobody is in the mood to go to war again. The U.S. only
    lost 650,000 people in the Civil War 150 years ago,and the
    country still talks about it endlessly. Try losing 20% of your
    population. How would you feel then?

    By the way, white America is also losing population while
    the Asians and the Hispanics are going through a population
    explosion in the U.S.
    , @AP

    Poland’s attitude towards the Ukraine is decidedly ambivalent. They strongly side with Kiev against the Russian bogey, but there is also a sense that the western Ukraine has been stolen from them.
     
    They see themselves in Ukraine's current plight. Poles have as sentimentality towards Lviv/Lwow, but not for all that territory and in general they admit that they were wrong in occupying those areas. In general, Poles don't hate the Ukrainians as much for the massacres as they do Germans or Soviets for what was done to them.

    Ukrainians are just below Russians on the Polish shit-list
     
    This was true in the early 2000s: surveys showed that of all peoples only Russians were disliked more than Ukrainians by Poles (although more Poles liked Ukrainians than disliked them). However there were changes in which Ukrainians were getting to be less disliked while Russians were becoming more disliked. I haven't seen a more recent survey.

    In a recent poll in November-December 2015, Poland was the most strongly liked country by Ukrainians. Russia was the most disliked one.

    Partitioning Ukraine is a meme that has gained some currency in Poland. Sikorsky floated the idea as a trial balloon after meeting with Putin, alleging that Putin suggested it
     
    .

    The idea that Sikorsky or Poland wants to partition Ukraine is laughable b.s. that only Russians believe, because it fits with what Russians would want to do if they were in Poland's shoes.

    The Polish dream of reclaiming “our great city of Lvov”
     
    Again, b.s. Russians believe this because this is what many Russians would want. In Poland this is a real fringe belief.

    Also Polish Lwow is pronounced differently from Russian Lvov.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. Yevardian says:

    I’d like to see Linh Dinh write an article on Hungary sometime. That country has faded out of the MSM for a while and I’m sure a lot of people here are wondering whether their ‘fence’ is working.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  10. @anonymous
    Linh Dinh is one of the consistently insightful contributors published here. But he seems to annoy many of us. Even those who comment positively seem compelled to qualify their praise. You cite nothing in this article with which you find fault, but take a needless swipe at him in telling us that you like Polish people with whom you're acquainted.

    I'm curious why Americans (other than gulled flag-wavers) aren't glad that he's here. I hope that his Vietnamese origin isn't a trigger for some of the hostility, but I've wondered about that.

    He’s not really insightful at all, sorry to burst your bubble. To take one example from this story. He starts out by saying Poland is in open defiance of EU mandates to take refugees. Then towards the end he writes that Poland needs to stop “appeasing Brussels.” A total contradiction from what he wrote earlier. I could go on, but it’s too boring.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Linh Dinh
    I wrote "Poland is rejecting the European Union’s mandate to accept thousands of Muslim refugees."

    After much pressure from the European Union, they're promising to accept 400 in 2016, down from the 7,000 agreed to by the previous government. The 400 will also be subjected to their conditions. They basically just want Christian refugees.

    Even this modest number, 400, is being agreed to under duress. That's appeasement.

    Poland has other disagreements with the European Union besides the refugee issue.

    I suspect, though, that my explanation will be met with more sniping from you, so snipe away! Have a nice day.

    , @anonymous
    That's no contradiction, as you appear to know by your artful, inaccurate paraphrase of an essay that's right there before your eyes. The appeasement of which he speaks is Poland's joining the USG and NATO in their belligerence towards Russia, as reflected in the observed adoption of American culture and the eradication of all things Russian.

    Again, I think you may be among those here who are predisposed to reject anything Linh Dinh has to say. Is it because, being Vietnamese, he has no right to call out "your" Uncle Sam?
    , @anonymous
    Bragadocious:

    Having reviewed your recent comment history, you seem to attack anyone (Dinh, Roberts, Reed) who questions Americans' infantile notions about the exceptional, purely motivated government under which they live. (You also delusionally claim that Britain and France, not Uncle Sam, were behind some of the orchestrated destruction in the Middle East and North Africa.) That "America, F**k Yeah!" attitude is, sadly, what appears to allow Donald Trump to gain the support of you and many others as he clumsily knocks at least some scales from your eyes.

    Afraid to put down the flag, Linus?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. anon • Disclaimer says:

    Maybe the Iron Curtain was a blessing in disguise. It kept Poland POLISH, with the exception of a few Vietnamese who wormed their way in. If the United Kingdom had been “Iron Curtained” from 1945-89, England would still be a white country today. Who knows what the future holds. Perhaps Moscow will prove to have been a better master then Brussels in time.

    Read More
    • Replies: @woodNfish
    You ignore what became of Yugoslavia. The Soviets balkanized their colonies just as the West is balkanizing its own homelands. It will all end badly - guaranteed.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. Anon 2 says:

    What Linh Dinh is apparently not aware of is that the Polish
    fascination with America has deep historical roots. The first
    Polish settlers already came on the Mayflower, then as many
    Americans know, two Polish generals Kosciuszko and Pulaski
    played a key role in the American Revolutionary War. The latter
    actually gave his life for America’s independence. There are
    more statues of Gen. Kosciuszko (sometimes known in
    the U.S. as Kosciusko) in the U.S. than any other historical
    figure except for George Washington. Thousands of the Polish
    emigrated to the U.S. starting in the 19th century, and today
    there are 10 million Polish Americans living in the United States.
    America is popular in Poland because practically every Polish
    family has a relative there, there are mutual visits, phone calls,
    letters, emails, and this kind of continuous exchange has been
    going on for many decades. This has nothing to do with politics.

    Unlike Western Europe, incl. West Germany, Poland was denied
    the benefits of the Marshall Plan by whom? Well, who else? The
    Soviet Union, of course, and so the country is now playing catch-up.
    Linh Dinh should check his figures – Poland’s economy has been
    growing in recent years at rates comparable to those in South
    Korea, and at $27,700 its GDP (PPP) per capita is currently
    about $4,000 higher than that of Russia. Poland’s overall
    economy is larger than that of the Netherlands, twice the
    size of Sweden’s economy, and three times the size of
    Ukrainian economy.
    True, the relations between the Ukrainians on one hand,
    and the Polish and the Jews on the other are conditioned
    by a lot of painful memories but today there are over 500,000
    Ukrainians working and studying in Poland, in addition to
    at least 10,000 Russians, and about 8,000 Chechen refugees.
    The languages are similar which means that the Ukrainians
    and the Russians can learn Polish very quickly. Ukrainian
    women often work as housekeepers or in retail. I know two
    wonderful Ukrainian girls who work with foster children,
    and it’s true, some may be looking for Polish husbands.
    Poland and Ukraine have a lot of history in common so
    this brings us together.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  13. Anon 2 says:
    @Thirdeye
    Grievance-driven revanchism has been part of eastern European nationalist movements since they emerged in various corners of the empires of the Nineteenth Century. Poland has simply carried it forward. They feel cheated that they never became the great power between the Baltic and the Black seas. Pilsudski sought to right that great historical wrong by leveraging support from Britain and France. Now NATO is the the tool Poland sees as their key to national greatness. IMO that's a dangerous situation, as Erdogan's attempt to enlist NATO support for his neo-Ottoman ambitions in Syria shows. Erdogan was refused. But might a Polish attempt to do the same meet with more favor with some more jingoistic fanatically anti-Russian fool occupying the White House and lending a sympathetic ear?

    Poland's attitude towards the Ukraine is decidedly ambivalent. They strongly side with Kiev against the Russian bogey, but there is also a sense that the western Ukraine has been stolen from them. Ukrainians are just below Russians on the Polish shit-list. Relations between Poles and Ukrainians were downright vicious during the interwar occupation of the western Ukraine by Poland, and during the German occupation of the Ukraine. Ukrainians were expelled from Poland at the end of the war. Partitioning Ukraine is a meme that has gained some currency in Poland. Sikorsky floated the idea as a trial balloon after meeting with Putin, alleging that Putin suggested it. That was vigorously denied by Putin. The Polish dream of reclaiming "our great city of Lvov" has one big fly in the ointment: Lvov is full of Ukrainians.


    To avert disaster, [Poland] will need to stop supporting Uncle Sam’s belligerence, appeasing Brussels and antagonizing the Kremlin.
     
    Wise words.

    Poland feeling cheated about the loss of Lvov?
    Poland wanting to partition Ukraine? Nonsense.
    In fact, this is a good example of 19th century
    thinking. The key fact is that Poland, Ukraine,
    (European part of) Russia, and Germany,are all
    losing population. The fertility rates have dropped
    below replacement level, and there is no population
    pressure to expand the territory. Where are the invading
    armies going to come from? That’s how people from
    a country that hasn’t been invaded in 200 years (i.e.,
    U.S.) think, and that’s why America is so out of touch
    with Europe and the rest of the world.

    Moreover, the painful memories from WW II are still
    very fresh in Poland, Ukraine, and Russia. These countries
    are still traumatized, millions still suffer from PTSD.
    Nobody is in the mood to go to war again. The U.S. only
    lost 650,000 people in the Civil War 150 years ago,and the
    country still talks about it endlessly. Try losing 20% of your
    population. How would you feel then?

    By the way, white America is also losing population while
    the Asians and the Hispanics are going through a population
    explosion in the U.S.

    Read More
    • Replies: @scoops
    so what do we do about it?!!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. Linh Dinh says: • Website
    @Bragadocious
    He's not really insightful at all, sorry to burst your bubble. To take one example from this story. He starts out by saying Poland is in open defiance of EU mandates to take refugees. Then towards the end he writes that Poland needs to stop "appeasing Brussels." A total contradiction from what he wrote earlier. I could go on, but it's too boring.

    I wrote “Poland is rejecting the European Union’s mandate to accept thousands of Muslim refugees.”

    After much pressure from the European Union, they’re promising to accept 400 in 2016, down from the 7,000 agreed to by the previous government. The 400 will also be subjected to their conditions. They basically just want Christian refugees.

    Even this modest number, 400, is being agreed to under duress. That’s appeasement.

    Poland has other disagreements with the European Union besides the refugee issue.

    I suspect, though, that my explanation will be met with more sniping from you, so snipe away! Have a nice day.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous
    I had already drawn the same distinction in further response to Bragadocious, which may yet appear in this thread.

    I write here to note another laudable aspect of your work: taking the time to address we mere commenters.
    , @Rehmat
    Poland is 94% Catholic nation with only 50,000 Muslim minority. Polish and other Europeans' hatred of Muslims and Islam is deep-rooted in history especially during the Ottoman era.

    Thanks to Israel/Zionist lobby funded local White supremacist organizations are found in almost every EU nations.

    Poland is known as the Vatican of the Holocaust Industry (Auschwitz Museum).

    Israeli leaders have shown their pleasure over the rejection of several European nations (Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic, Slovakia, etc.) to accept refugees from the Middle East – fearing the refugees would help in delegitimizing Israel in the West.

    Like Israel, Poland too has attracted many Western Jewish rich crooks, such as, Australian fugitive oligarch Abe Goldberg. Jew tourists and annual Auschwitz visits by world leaders pumps a significant foreign exchange into Warsaw’s.

    Interestingly, last year, Polish-born professor Jan T. Gross (Princeton University) in an article claimed that Poles killed more Jews than Germans during the WWII.

    http://rehmat1.com/2015/10/17/jew-historian-poles-killed-more-jews-than-germans/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Bragadocious
    He's not really insightful at all, sorry to burst your bubble. To take one example from this story. He starts out by saying Poland is in open defiance of EU mandates to take refugees. Then towards the end he writes that Poland needs to stop "appeasing Brussels." A total contradiction from what he wrote earlier. I could go on, but it's too boring.

    That’s no contradiction, as you appear to know by your artful, inaccurate paraphrase of an essay that’s right there before your eyes. The appeasement of which he speaks is Poland’s joining the USG and NATO in their belligerence towards Russia, as reflected in the observed adoption of American culture and the eradication of all things Russian.

    Again, I think you may be among those here who are predisposed to reject anything Linh Dinh has to say. Is it because, being Vietnamese, he has no right to call out “your” Uncle Sam?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bragadocious
    No. Let me guess, you a Canuck living in the US? Or a Brit maybe. You keep hitting the racism button -- hard -- like a typical dipshit SJW from Her Majesty's politically correct slag heaps.

    In any case you might want to compare notes with the thin-skinned Dinh (hey I like that!) regarding what he meant by "appeasement." Because youse two are like 50 million light years apart. Carry on now.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Linh Dinh
    I wrote "Poland is rejecting the European Union’s mandate to accept thousands of Muslim refugees."

    After much pressure from the European Union, they're promising to accept 400 in 2016, down from the 7,000 agreed to by the previous government. The 400 will also be subjected to their conditions. They basically just want Christian refugees.

    Even this modest number, 400, is being agreed to under duress. That's appeasement.

    Poland has other disagreements with the European Union besides the refugee issue.

    I suspect, though, that my explanation will be met with more sniping from you, so snipe away! Have a nice day.

    I had already drawn the same distinction in further response to Bragadocious, which may yet appear in this thread.

    I write here to note another laudable aspect of your work: taking the time to address we mere commenters.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. Knew quite a few Polish expats in NZ post war migrants whose kids were at school with me. It was explained to me that the Poles always feel that noone likes them and that’s why their nation has never lasted long , often sucked up into one empire or another for hundreds of years. The current daft baseless anti Russian paranoia probably stems from that. Doesnt excuse it of course

    Read More
    • Replies: @szopen
    " nation has never lasted long " What a bullshit. Up to the XVII century WE were the empire. And never lasted long means, in our case, something like 700 years of existence, then 124 years of losing independence, 20 years independence, 6 years losing it, 45 years of being a Russian satellite and again 25 years of independence.
    , @Davidski

    It was explained to me that the Poles always feel that no one likes them and that’s why their nation has never lasted long.
     
    How did you come to this conclusion I wonder?

    Poland came on the scene around 998 AD and was an independent state, and in fact, the leader of a very large Commonwealth in East Central and Eastern Europe, for much of the time since then.

    So...???
    , @Bies Podkrakowski
    Only one question: baseless to whom?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. Sorry Mr. Dinh. Poland has good reason to worry about the intentions of Russia. Russia stole the Crimea and occupies it illegally. Russia invaded the Donbass after the “rebels” were having their heads handed to them. The narrative that Russia did not invade Ukraine is stupid and absurd.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous
    Way to stick in your schtick, Q.

    Now Ms. Nuland has another cookie for you.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Bragadocious
    He's not really insightful at all, sorry to burst your bubble. To take one example from this story. He starts out by saying Poland is in open defiance of EU mandates to take refugees. Then towards the end he writes that Poland needs to stop "appeasing Brussels." A total contradiction from what he wrote earlier. I could go on, but it's too boring.

    Bragadocious:

    Having reviewed your recent comment history, you seem to attack anyone (Dinh, Roberts, Reed) who questions Americans’ infantile notions about the exceptional, purely motivated government under which they live. (You also delusionally claim that Britain and France, not Uncle Sam, were behind some of the orchestrated destruction in the Middle East and North Africa.) That “America, F**k Yeah!” attitude is, sadly, what appears to allow Donald Trump to gain the support of you and many others as he clumsily knocks at least some scales from your eyes.

    Afraid to put down the flag, Linus?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Quartermaster
    Sorry Mr. Dinh. Poland has good reason to worry about the intentions of Russia. Russia stole the Crimea and occupies it illegally. Russia invaded the Donbass after the "rebels" were having their heads handed to them. The narrative that Russia did not invade Ukraine is stupid and absurd.

    Way to stick in your schtick, Q.

    Now Ms. Nuland has another cookie for you.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. @anonymous
    That's no contradiction, as you appear to know by your artful, inaccurate paraphrase of an essay that's right there before your eyes. The appeasement of which he speaks is Poland's joining the USG and NATO in their belligerence towards Russia, as reflected in the observed adoption of American culture and the eradication of all things Russian.

    Again, I think you may be among those here who are predisposed to reject anything Linh Dinh has to say. Is it because, being Vietnamese, he has no right to call out "your" Uncle Sam?

    No. Let me guess, you a Canuck living in the US? Or a Brit maybe. You keep hitting the racism button — hard — like a typical dipshit SJW from Her Majesty’s politically correct slag heaps.

    In any case you might want to compare notes with the thin-skinned Dinh (hey I like that!) regarding what he meant by “appeasement.” Because youse two are like 50 million light years apart. Carry on now.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous
    Wrong again, sir. Born American, raised American, and love America. And anything but a Social Justice Warrior.

    Now, if I may: We see here, yet again, the tendency of flag-waving Americans to assume that those of us who are disgusted with the NeoConning of our country must be their polar opposites in every respect. (This also seems to coincide with serial commenting under snazzy handles, rather than using anonymity that allows each idea to rise or fall on its merits.)

    Most two crayon types stick to TV, so thanks for at least reading and writing. But in asserting that Dinh and I are "light years apart," you've dissembled yet again -- Dinh in response to you was saying that, even in taking a relatively few, Christian refugees, Poland was also appeasing the EU. Maybe he'll waste more time telling you the same thing.

    I'm here to try to learn. Not sure of your motives, but a neutral observer would, I believe, conclude from this thread that you're incorrigibly distorting what others are saying
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Bragadocious
    No. Let me guess, you a Canuck living in the US? Or a Brit maybe. You keep hitting the racism button -- hard -- like a typical dipshit SJW from Her Majesty's politically correct slag heaps.

    In any case you might want to compare notes with the thin-skinned Dinh (hey I like that!) regarding what he meant by "appeasement." Because youse two are like 50 million light years apart. Carry on now.

    Wrong again, sir. Born American, raised American, and love America. And anything but a Social Justice Warrior.

    Now, if I may: We see here, yet again, the tendency of flag-waving Americans to assume that those of us who are disgusted with the NeoConning of our country must be their polar opposites in every respect. (This also seems to coincide with serial commenting under snazzy handles, rather than using anonymity that allows each idea to rise or fall on its merits.)

    Most two crayon types stick to TV, so thanks for at least reading and writing. But in asserting that Dinh and I are “light years apart,” you’ve dissembled yet again — Dinh in response to you was saying that, even in taking a relatively few, Christian refugees, Poland was also appeasing the EU. Maybe he’ll waste more time telling you the same thing.

    I’m here to try to learn. Not sure of your motives, but a neutral observer would, I believe, conclude from this thread that you’re incorrigibly distorting what others are saying

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bragadocious
    Try reading your response again on the "appeasement" issue, and thin skinned Dinh's. If you can't see the cavernous divergence there, I'm afraid there's no hope for you. Lashing out at my "interpretation" won't help you.

    Oh and thanks for stalking me, at least now I realize I'm dealing with a nutter.
    , @Anonymous
    Bragadocious himself doesn't even live in America. He lives in NYC.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. AP says:
    @German_Reader
    I've been annoyed by some of Linh Dinh's previous articles, but this one is actually not bad, quite interesting in a way. I disagree with Linh about Russia, I think Polish apprehensions and fears about Russian imperialism are understandable and to some degree pefectly rational. But of course US cultural influence and the EU are also grave dangers to Polish sovereignty and nationhood. I wish Poland well, hopefully they and the other Eastern Europeans can stand up to foreign pressure and create a viable alternative both to Russia's system and to the Western globalist nation-wreckers.

    I wish Poland well, hopefully they and the other Eastern Europeans can stand up to foreign pressure and create a viable alternative both to Russia’s system and to the Western globalist nation-wreckers.

    The consensus among Poland’s elite is that Ukraine’s post-Russian success is, if not necessary, certainly very important for this project to work. They are correct.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. AP says:
    @schmenz
    A very informative article. I admit I do not understand Poland's fear of today's Russia, and I do know they are unfortunately susceptible to US propaganda, but it does seem their actions of inviting in US weapons and keeping the hatred of Russia alive is rather like shooting yourself in the foot.

    I admit I do not understand Poland’s fear of today’s Russia, and I do know they are unfortunately susceptible to US propaganda,

    I don’t know enough about you to make this comment about you, but in general it’s somewhat patronizing of certain Russia-friendly Westerners to believe that they understand better what happens in Eastern Europe than Eastern Europeans themselves do. Poles (and Ukrainians) know much more about Russia’s relationship with their own country than you do, even though you’ve been reading Russia Insider or watching Russia Today or whatever. And hostility towards Russia in these countries is not the result of US propaganda.

    Read More
    • Replies: @schmenz
    You bring up an interesting point which I hope you can elaborate one. What is the reason for the hostility of today's Poland with today's Russia?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. @German_Reader
    I've been annoyed by some of Linh Dinh's previous articles, but this one is actually not bad, quite interesting in a way. I disagree with Linh about Russia, I think Polish apprehensions and fears about Russian imperialism are understandable and to some degree pefectly rational. But of course US cultural influence and the EU are also grave dangers to Polish sovereignty and nationhood. I wish Poland well, hopefully they and the other Eastern Europeans can stand up to foreign pressure and create a viable alternative both to Russia's system and to the Western globalist nation-wreckers.

    Yeah, Russia is an historic threat and it makes sense to maintain a martial tradition to deter aggression. Of course the current threat is western cultural Marxism – but the same militia that might one day deter Russian meddling can also deter Arab rape gangs and other signs of cultural Marxist societal collapse.

    It makes sense not to trust Russia – but don’t make the mistake of trusting the USA or EU instead. The priest has the right idea.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. @anonymous
    Wrong again, sir. Born American, raised American, and love America. And anything but a Social Justice Warrior.

    Now, if I may: We see here, yet again, the tendency of flag-waving Americans to assume that those of us who are disgusted with the NeoConning of our country must be their polar opposites in every respect. (This also seems to coincide with serial commenting under snazzy handles, rather than using anonymity that allows each idea to rise or fall on its merits.)

    Most two crayon types stick to TV, so thanks for at least reading and writing. But in asserting that Dinh and I are "light years apart," you've dissembled yet again -- Dinh in response to you was saying that, even in taking a relatively few, Christian refugees, Poland was also appeasing the EU. Maybe he'll waste more time telling you the same thing.

    I'm here to try to learn. Not sure of your motives, but a neutral observer would, I believe, conclude from this thread that you're incorrigibly distorting what others are saying

    Try reading your response again on the “appeasement” issue, and thin skinned Dinh’s. If you can’t see the cavernous divergence there, I’m afraid there’s no hope for you. Lashing out at my “interpretation” won’t help you.

    Oh and thanks for stalking me, at least now I realize I’m dealing with a nutter.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. AP says:
    @Thirdeye
    Grievance-driven revanchism has been part of eastern European nationalist movements since they emerged in various corners of the empires of the Nineteenth Century. Poland has simply carried it forward. They feel cheated that they never became the great power between the Baltic and the Black seas. Pilsudski sought to right that great historical wrong by leveraging support from Britain and France. Now NATO is the the tool Poland sees as their key to national greatness. IMO that's a dangerous situation, as Erdogan's attempt to enlist NATO support for his neo-Ottoman ambitions in Syria shows. Erdogan was refused. But might a Polish attempt to do the same meet with more favor with some more jingoistic fanatically anti-Russian fool occupying the White House and lending a sympathetic ear?

    Poland's attitude towards the Ukraine is decidedly ambivalent. They strongly side with Kiev against the Russian bogey, but there is also a sense that the western Ukraine has been stolen from them. Ukrainians are just below Russians on the Polish shit-list. Relations between Poles and Ukrainians were downright vicious during the interwar occupation of the western Ukraine by Poland, and during the German occupation of the Ukraine. Ukrainians were expelled from Poland at the end of the war. Partitioning Ukraine is a meme that has gained some currency in Poland. Sikorsky floated the idea as a trial balloon after meeting with Putin, alleging that Putin suggested it. That was vigorously denied by Putin. The Polish dream of reclaiming "our great city of Lvov" has one big fly in the ointment: Lvov is full of Ukrainians.


    To avert disaster, [Poland] will need to stop supporting Uncle Sam’s belligerence, appeasing Brussels and antagonizing the Kremlin.
     
    Wise words.

    Poland’s attitude towards the Ukraine is decidedly ambivalent. They strongly side with Kiev against the Russian bogey, but there is also a sense that the western Ukraine has been stolen from them.

    They see themselves in Ukraine’s current plight. Poles have as sentimentality towards Lviv/Lwow, but not for all that territory and in general they admit that they were wrong in occupying those areas. In general, Poles don’t hate the Ukrainians as much for the massacres as they do Germans or Soviets for what was done to them.

    Ukrainians are just below Russians on the Polish shit-list

    This was true in the early 2000s: surveys showed that of all peoples only Russians were disliked more than Ukrainians by Poles (although more Poles liked Ukrainians than disliked them). However there were changes in which Ukrainians were getting to be less disliked while Russians were becoming more disliked. I haven’t seen a more recent survey.

    In a recent poll in November-December 2015, Poland was the most strongly liked country by Ukrainians. Russia was the most disliked one.

    Partitioning Ukraine is a meme that has gained some currency in Poland. Sikorsky floated the idea as a trial balloon after meeting with Putin, alleging that Putin suggested it

    .

    The idea that Sikorsky or Poland wants to partition Ukraine is laughable b.s. that only Russians believe, because it fits with what Russians would want to do if they were in Poland’s shoes.

    The Polish dream of reclaiming “our great city of Lvov”

    Again, b.s. Russians believe this because this is what many Russians would want. In Poland this is a real fringe belief.

    Also Polish Lwow is pronounced differently from Russian Lvov.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thirdeye

    In general, Poles don’t hate the Ukrainians as much for the massacres as they do Germans or Soviets for what was done to them.
     
    I suspect that the scale of Ukrainian atrocities against Poles has been obscured. I had the opportunity to exchange comments with a descendant of someone who experienced Banderites in action. The story was that they were worse than the SS.

    If you read Polish, I suggest you dig up the report of a joint Polish-Ukrainian team of forensic anthropologists who investigated mass graves attributed to the Katyn massacre. I believe it's from 2012. I have only read summaries and interpretations. I don't know if it has ever been translated in its entirety to English.

    The only map I've seen of a hypothetical Ukrainian partition was on a Polish website. On other comment boards Poles lament the loss of the western Ukraine and Belarus after WWII. Giving up those lands and gaining Silesia and a chunk of East Prussia looks to me like a net gain for Poland, although the land area is less.

    I'm sure that Polish sentiments about the western Ukraine are constrained by economics and realpolitik. They might view the issue differently if Russia regarded Ukrainian territory differently. It would be a social and economic burden. That's one reason why Russia said no to the Strelkovites.

    I would agree with Ukraine ceding Transcarpathia back to Hungary and Slovakia. Those groups were blatantly screwed over by Stalin.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. schmenz says:
    @AP

    I admit I do not understand Poland’s fear of today’s Russia, and I do know they are unfortunately susceptible to US propaganda,
     
    I don't know enough about you to make this comment about you, but in general it's somewhat patronizing of certain Russia-friendly Westerners to believe that they understand better what happens in Eastern Europe than Eastern Europeans themselves do. Poles (and Ukrainians) know much more about Russia's relationship with their own country than you do, even though you've been reading Russia Insider or watching Russia Today or whatever. And hostility towards Russia in these countries is not the result of US propaganda.

    You bring up an interesting point which I hope you can elaborate one. What is the reason for the hostility of today’s Poland with today’s Russia?

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    What is the reason for the hostility of today’s Poland with today’s Russia?
     
    Several reasons. Like in the English-French rivalry, there has been historical enmity that is reflected in personal bad feelings. Add to that 120 years of occupation involving persecution, failed rebellions, exile, language being limited, followed by wars between the two countries, then brutal Soviet occupation involving mass murders and persecution. This occupation ended only in the late 1980s, well within many people's living memories.

    In addition to these old factors whose influence continues, there are contemporary ones. The ones I can immediately think of are:

    1. Russia (unlike Germany with respect to its Nazi past) has not totally repudiated its Soviet legacy. When Russian textbooks or politicians praise Stalin this is widely reported in the Polish media. For Poles, the effect of this is a little like how Jews would feel if German politicians or textbooks described Hitler in positive terms.

    2. Russia has officially apologized for Katyn but unofficially the Soviet responsibility for Katyn has been denied, or justified (i.e, Polish officers deserved what happened to them because Poles let Soviet POWS die in 1920) by various Russian figures. This was even in some documentary shown on Russian TV. Poles are aware of this happening. Katyn's memory is sort of "sacred" for Poles.

    3. Chechnya, Georgia, Ukraine. When Russia invades some other people, Poles are reminded of what Russia did to them. It tells them that Russia hasn't really changed. Poles sympathize with the victims and relate to them. For example, an article I read in some Polish newspaper about executions of Ukrainian POWs in Donbas mentioned that the Ukrainians were killed with a shot to the back of the head, just like what was done to Polish POWs in Katyn. Russian forces seizing parts of Ukraine feels like Russia gobbling up parts of Poland in the 18th century partitions.

    4. Putin. He was a KGB guy, from the system that repressed Poles until the 1980s. Russian support for Putin has made Russians much more disliked as people by Poles than they had been before. Before, many people thought that Russia was horrible but that its people were nice and victims of their government. Their obvious support for Putin has made Russians more complicit in their state's historical and current crimes, in Polish eyes.
    , @szopen
    We have a direct border with a country which has huge military complex, a history of subjugating all its neighbours, and which have forced upon us in the previous century, while still expressing the disbelief that we were not happy about that. This country also express rage every time we behave like sovereign state, with constant small harrassment like about Zalew Elbląski or banning our trade items for no apparent reasons. Moreover, it seems that there is no logic in their behaviour; whether we have government friendly to Russia, or hostile to Russia, the result is the same when we measure it in gas prices, trade bans and so on. Moreover, this state's popular philosophers are quite clear about their vision in which Russia is reborn empire, and Poland has a choice of joining it willingly or being destroyed.

    There is of course a lot of prejudices too, combined with a feeling that we were exploited (As in this old joke: Poland signed a trade agreement with Soviet Russia. Poland will export a thousand tons of coal to USSR. In exchange, USSR will take thousand tons of grain from Poland). Even today many Russians think that Polish export items were USSR-made, because that's how they were marketed (e.g. Nivea - i've heard one Russian women who claimed it was produced in USSR and exported to Poland!).

    All in all, I think you would agree that we do have some basis for certain distrust of Russia.
    , @Bies Podkrakowski
    History that will not go away.
    , @Thirdeye
    AP recited the "official" Polish line that it's all about what those Evil Russians did, but it's an attitude with deep historical roots in the Orthodox-Catholic schism. Medieval Poland was an ascending power until the turn of the Seventeenth Century, when they nearly established rule over Russia. Afterwards Russia, who Poland regarded as Heathen, became the ascendant power in the region that the Poles saw as rightfully theirs. They resent that, especially after the humiliation of being partitioned by Prussia, Austria, and Russia towards the close of the Eighteenth Century. They hold it against the Russians more than they do the Germanics because the Russians were Orthodox and, truth be told, the Russian Orthodox Church was very nationalistic. So the religious aspect of Polish nationalism was reinforced as a result. When Lech Walesa ran for President of Poland in 1990, he presented himself as the candidate of the "True Catholic Poles" and won.

    In spite of the assurances that NATO would not expand after the breakup of the Soviet bloc, Poland was admitted to NATO in 1998. Russia was very weak at that time and not a threat, as demonstrated by their complete inability to influence outcomes in the former Yugoslavia and their loss in the first Chechen war. Now Poland bitches about the Russian response to Poland joining NATO and the various western hegemonic projects in the former Soviet sphere. Go figure.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. Rehmat says:
    @Linh Dinh
    I wrote "Poland is rejecting the European Union’s mandate to accept thousands of Muslim refugees."

    After much pressure from the European Union, they're promising to accept 400 in 2016, down from the 7,000 agreed to by the previous government. The 400 will also be subjected to their conditions. They basically just want Christian refugees.

    Even this modest number, 400, is being agreed to under duress. That's appeasement.

    Poland has other disagreements with the European Union besides the refugee issue.

    I suspect, though, that my explanation will be met with more sniping from you, so snipe away! Have a nice day.

    Poland is 94% Catholic nation with only 50,000 Muslim minority. Polish and other Europeans’ hatred of Muslims and Islam is deep-rooted in history especially during the Ottoman era.

    Thanks to Israel/Zionist lobby funded local White supremacist organizations are found in almost every EU nations.

    Poland is known as the Vatican of the Holocaust Industry (Auschwitz Museum).

    Israeli leaders have shown their pleasure over the rejection of several European nations (Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic, Slovakia, etc.) to accept refugees from the Middle East – fearing the refugees would help in delegitimizing Israel in the West.

    Like Israel, Poland too has attracted many Western Jewish rich crooks, such as, Australian fugitive oligarch Abe Goldberg. Jew tourists and annual Auschwitz visits by world leaders pumps a significant foreign exchange into Warsaw’s.

    Interestingly, last year, Polish-born professor Jan T. Gross (Princeton University) in an article claimed that Poles killed more Jews than Germans during the WWII.

    http://rehmat1.com/2015/10/17/jew-historian-poles-killed-more-jews-than-germans/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Yevardian
    Go run to Saudi Arabia and worship your demon-possessed pedophile warlord Mahomet and that black-cube if you feel so aggrieved Christendom has been hijacked by a bunch of fellow semites.
    , @anon
    "Polish and other Europeans' hatred of Muslim and Islam is deep-rooted in history especially during the Ottoman era."

    And whose fault is that sport?
    , @Bies Podkrakowski
    And those 50 thousands are mostly recent migrants. So not very long ago we had ever less Muslims. Good times.

    Poles don't hate Islam. Yet. Turkey get positive reactions especially from older people thanks to being - according to a legend - only country that didn't recognize Partition of Poland. Ottomans were a menace but when they were a menace Poland was also a power - so there is this strange mix of negative and positive, nostalgic feelings.

    However thanks to recent activities of Muslims and mass migration from Muslim countries this historically based goodwill is fast dissappearing.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. gdpbull says:

    Injustice is no respecter of persons or nations. I doubt the Poles are honest about what happened to the Masurisch, an obscure ethnic group that lived in former east Prussia. There could be no people more deserving to live in that location. They were a mixture of the original Baltic Prussians, German Prussians, and Poles. They were mostly farmers and loggers. At some point along the way, they converted to protestantism, and over time, because of that, they identified more with the German Prussians than with the Poles. But most had Slavic last names. After WWII, they were either killed or forcibly deported into the new borders of Germany mainly because they were protestants and most spoke German. Their property was confiscated. Shouldn’t they or their descendants be given the right of return and compensation for their property? If they were Jewish it would have already happened.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  31. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @anonymous
    Wrong again, sir. Born American, raised American, and love America. And anything but a Social Justice Warrior.

    Now, if I may: We see here, yet again, the tendency of flag-waving Americans to assume that those of us who are disgusted with the NeoConning of our country must be their polar opposites in every respect. (This also seems to coincide with serial commenting under snazzy handles, rather than using anonymity that allows each idea to rise or fall on its merits.)

    Most two crayon types stick to TV, so thanks for at least reading and writing. But in asserting that Dinh and I are "light years apart," you've dissembled yet again -- Dinh in response to you was saying that, even in taking a relatively few, Christian refugees, Poland was also appeasing the EU. Maybe he'll waste more time telling you the same thing.

    I'm here to try to learn. Not sure of your motives, but a neutral observer would, I believe, conclude from this thread that you're incorrigibly distorting what others are saying

    Bragadocious himself doesn’t even live in America. He lives in NYC.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. Thirdeye says:
    @AP

    Poland’s attitude towards the Ukraine is decidedly ambivalent. They strongly side with Kiev against the Russian bogey, but there is also a sense that the western Ukraine has been stolen from them.
     
    They see themselves in Ukraine's current plight. Poles have as sentimentality towards Lviv/Lwow, but not for all that territory and in general they admit that they were wrong in occupying those areas. In general, Poles don't hate the Ukrainians as much for the massacres as they do Germans or Soviets for what was done to them.

    Ukrainians are just below Russians on the Polish shit-list
     
    This was true in the early 2000s: surveys showed that of all peoples only Russians were disliked more than Ukrainians by Poles (although more Poles liked Ukrainians than disliked them). However there were changes in which Ukrainians were getting to be less disliked while Russians were becoming more disliked. I haven't seen a more recent survey.

    In a recent poll in November-December 2015, Poland was the most strongly liked country by Ukrainians. Russia was the most disliked one.

    Partitioning Ukraine is a meme that has gained some currency in Poland. Sikorsky floated the idea as a trial balloon after meeting with Putin, alleging that Putin suggested it
     
    .

    The idea that Sikorsky or Poland wants to partition Ukraine is laughable b.s. that only Russians believe, because it fits with what Russians would want to do if they were in Poland's shoes.

    The Polish dream of reclaiming “our great city of Lvov”
     
    Again, b.s. Russians believe this because this is what many Russians would want. In Poland this is a real fringe belief.

    Also Polish Lwow is pronounced differently from Russian Lvov.

    In general, Poles don’t hate the Ukrainians as much for the massacres as they do Germans or Soviets for what was done to them.

    I suspect that the scale of Ukrainian atrocities against Poles has been obscured. I had the opportunity to exchange comments with a descendant of someone who experienced Banderites in action. The story was that they were worse than the SS.

    If you read Polish, I suggest you dig up the report of a joint Polish-Ukrainian team of forensic anthropologists who investigated mass graves attributed to the Katyn massacre. I believe it’s from 2012. I have only read summaries and interpretations. I don’t know if it has ever been translated in its entirety to English.

    The only map I’ve seen of a hypothetical Ukrainian partition was on a Polish website. On other comment boards Poles lament the loss of the western Ukraine and Belarus after WWII. Giving up those lands and gaining Silesia and a chunk of East Prussia looks to me like a net gain for Poland, although the land area is less.

    I’m sure that Polish sentiments about the western Ukraine are constrained by economics and realpolitik. They might view the issue differently if Russia regarded Ukrainian territory differently. It would be a social and economic burden. That’s one reason why Russia said no to the Strelkovites.

    I would agree with Ukraine ceding Transcarpathia back to Hungary and Slovakia. Those groups were blatantly screwed over by Stalin.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    I suspect that the scale of Ukrainian atrocities against Poles has been obscured.
     
    It was under the communists but is no

    "I had the opportunity to exchange comments with a descendant of someone who experienced Banderites in action. The story was that they were worse than the SS.
     
    I know such people too. It was a typical peasant revolt - very brutal. Only 100 years earlier Polish peasants were doing similar things though.

    Russians try to bring the UPA massacre of Poles up, but most Poles see this as a cheap attempt at dividing Poles and Ukrainians.

    The only map I’ve seen of a hypothetical Ukrainian partition was on a Polish website.
     
    Fringe views are easy to find on the web. Poles seeking partition of Ukraine is in the same general category of popularity as Germans who want to retake Danzig.

    I would agree with Ukraine ceding Transcarpathia back to Hungary and Slovakia.
     
    That would be odd, as this region is only about 12% Hungarian and .5% Slovak. There is a narrow strip of land along the Hungarian border that is majority-Hungarian, however (outside this narrow strip there are few Hungarians in the province). Also, Hungary was on Germany's side during the war.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. Yevardian says:
    @Rehmat
    Poland is 94% Catholic nation with only 50,000 Muslim minority. Polish and other Europeans' hatred of Muslims and Islam is deep-rooted in history especially during the Ottoman era.

    Thanks to Israel/Zionist lobby funded local White supremacist organizations are found in almost every EU nations.

    Poland is known as the Vatican of the Holocaust Industry (Auschwitz Museum).

    Israeli leaders have shown their pleasure over the rejection of several European nations (Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic, Slovakia, etc.) to accept refugees from the Middle East – fearing the refugees would help in delegitimizing Israel in the West.

    Like Israel, Poland too has attracted many Western Jewish rich crooks, such as, Australian fugitive oligarch Abe Goldberg. Jew tourists and annual Auschwitz visits by world leaders pumps a significant foreign exchange into Warsaw’s.

    Interestingly, last year, Polish-born professor Jan T. Gross (Princeton University) in an article claimed that Poles killed more Jews than Germans during the WWII.

    http://rehmat1.com/2015/10/17/jew-historian-poles-killed-more-jews-than-germans/

    Go run to Saudi Arabia and worship your demon-possessed pedophile warlord Mahomet and that black-cube if you feel so aggrieved Christendom has been hijacked by a bunch of fellow semites.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    Well said sir. Seconded!
    , @Rehmat
    But darling, didn't your rabbi tell you, Saudi 'royals' are Jewish? During 2013-2014, they donated $16 billion to dying Jews in Israel.

    Earlier this month, Saudi Arabia broke diplomatic relation with the Islamic Republic over its execution of Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr, a top leaders of Saudi Shi’ite minority.

    The diplomatic break-up was hailed by Israeli media and brought several Israel Firsts American Jewish traitors out of sewer to throw their support behind Saudi Arabia. The same Saudi Arabia which they had blamed for 9/11 and bankrolling anti-Israel Muslim Brotherhood by the Jewish Lobby in the past....

    http://rehmat1.com/2016/01/10/jewish-lobby-backs-saudi-arabia-against-iran/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  34. scoops says:
    @Anon 2
    Poland feeling cheated about the loss of Lvov?
    Poland wanting to partition Ukraine? Nonsense.
    In fact, this is a good example of 19th century
    thinking. The key fact is that Poland, Ukraine,
    (European part of) Russia, and Germany,are all
    losing population. The fertility rates have dropped
    below replacement level, and there is no population
    pressure to expand the territory. Where are the invading
    armies going to come from? That's how people from
    a country that hasn't been invaded in 200 years (i.e.,
    U.S.) think, and that's why America is so out of touch
    with Europe and the rest of the world.

    Moreover, the painful memories from WW II are still
    very fresh in Poland, Ukraine, and Russia. These countries
    are still traumatized, millions still suffer from PTSD.
    Nobody is in the mood to go to war again. The U.S. only
    lost 650,000 people in the Civil War 150 years ago,and the
    country still talks about it endlessly. Try losing 20% of your
    population. How would you feel then?

    By the way, white America is also losing population while
    the Asians and the Hispanics are going through a population
    explosion in the U.S.

    so what do we do about it?!!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Yevardian
    Go run to Saudi Arabia and worship your demon-possessed pedophile warlord Mahomet and that black-cube if you feel so aggrieved Christendom has been hijacked by a bunch of fellow semites.

    Well said sir. Seconded!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Rehmat
    Poland is 94% Catholic nation with only 50,000 Muslim minority. Polish and other Europeans' hatred of Muslims and Islam is deep-rooted in history especially during the Ottoman era.

    Thanks to Israel/Zionist lobby funded local White supremacist organizations are found in almost every EU nations.

    Poland is known as the Vatican of the Holocaust Industry (Auschwitz Museum).

    Israeli leaders have shown their pleasure over the rejection of several European nations (Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic, Slovakia, etc.) to accept refugees from the Middle East – fearing the refugees would help in delegitimizing Israel in the West.

    Like Israel, Poland too has attracted many Western Jewish rich crooks, such as, Australian fugitive oligarch Abe Goldberg. Jew tourists and annual Auschwitz visits by world leaders pumps a significant foreign exchange into Warsaw’s.

    Interestingly, last year, Polish-born professor Jan T. Gross (Princeton University) in an article claimed that Poles killed more Jews than Germans during the WWII.

    http://rehmat1.com/2015/10/17/jew-historian-poles-killed-more-jews-than-germans/

    “Polish and other Europeans’ hatred of Muslim and Islam is deep-rooted in history especially during the Ottoman era.”

    And whose fault is that sport?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. AP says:
    @Thirdeye

    In general, Poles don’t hate the Ukrainians as much for the massacres as they do Germans or Soviets for what was done to them.
     
    I suspect that the scale of Ukrainian atrocities against Poles has been obscured. I had the opportunity to exchange comments with a descendant of someone who experienced Banderites in action. The story was that they were worse than the SS.

    If you read Polish, I suggest you dig up the report of a joint Polish-Ukrainian team of forensic anthropologists who investigated mass graves attributed to the Katyn massacre. I believe it's from 2012. I have only read summaries and interpretations. I don't know if it has ever been translated in its entirety to English.

    The only map I've seen of a hypothetical Ukrainian partition was on a Polish website. On other comment boards Poles lament the loss of the western Ukraine and Belarus after WWII. Giving up those lands and gaining Silesia and a chunk of East Prussia looks to me like a net gain for Poland, although the land area is less.

    I'm sure that Polish sentiments about the western Ukraine are constrained by economics and realpolitik. They might view the issue differently if Russia regarded Ukrainian territory differently. It would be a social and economic burden. That's one reason why Russia said no to the Strelkovites.

    I would agree with Ukraine ceding Transcarpathia back to Hungary and Slovakia. Those groups were blatantly screwed over by Stalin.

    I suspect that the scale of Ukrainian atrocities against Poles has been obscured.

    It was under the communists but is no

    “I had the opportunity to exchange comments with a descendant of someone who experienced Banderites in action. The story was that they were worse than the SS.

    I know such people too. It was a typical peasant revolt – very brutal. Only 100 years earlier Polish peasants were doing similar things though.

    Russians try to bring the UPA massacre of Poles up, but most Poles see this as a cheap attempt at dividing Poles and Ukrainians.

    The only map I’ve seen of a hypothetical Ukrainian partition was on a Polish website.

    Fringe views are easy to find on the web. Poles seeking partition of Ukraine is in the same general category of popularity as Germans who want to retake Danzig.

    I would agree with Ukraine ceding Transcarpathia back to Hungary and Slovakia.

    That would be odd, as this region is only about 12% Hungarian and .5% Slovak. There is a narrow strip of land along the Hungarian border that is majority-Hungarian, however (outside this narrow strip there are few Hungarians in the province). Also, Hungary was on Germany’s side during the war.

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    [Only 100 years earlier Polish peasants were doing similar things though.]

    No, the Polish peasants who revolted against their lords in 1846 did not do anything remotely similar to murdering hundreds of thousands of civilians, you squalid Banderite.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. AP says:
    @schmenz
    You bring up an interesting point which I hope you can elaborate one. What is the reason for the hostility of today's Poland with today's Russia?

    What is the reason for the hostility of today’s Poland with today’s Russia?

    Several reasons. Like in the English-French rivalry, there has been historical enmity that is reflected in personal bad feelings. Add to that 120 years of occupation involving persecution, failed rebellions, exile, language being limited, followed by wars between the two countries, then brutal Soviet occupation involving mass murders and persecution. This occupation ended only in the late 1980s, well within many people’s living memories.

    In addition to these old factors whose influence continues, there are contemporary ones. The ones I can immediately think of are:

    1. Russia (unlike Germany with respect to its Nazi past) has not totally repudiated its Soviet legacy. When Russian textbooks or politicians praise Stalin this is widely reported in the Polish media. For Poles, the effect of this is a little like how Jews would feel if German politicians or textbooks described Hitler in positive terms.

    2. Russia has officially apologized for Katyn but unofficially the Soviet responsibility for Katyn has been denied, or justified (i.e, Polish officers deserved what happened to them because Poles let Soviet POWS die in 1920) by various Russian figures. This was even in some documentary shown on Russian TV. Poles are aware of this happening. Katyn’s memory is sort of “sacred” for Poles.

    3. Chechnya, Georgia, Ukraine. When Russia invades some other people, Poles are reminded of what Russia did to them. It tells them that Russia hasn’t really changed. Poles sympathize with the victims and relate to them. For example, an article I read in some Polish newspaper about executions of Ukrainian POWs in Donbas mentioned that the Ukrainians were killed with a shot to the back of the head, just like what was done to Polish POWs in Katyn. Russian forces seizing parts of Ukraine feels like Russia gobbling up parts of Poland in the 18th century partitions.

    4. Putin. He was a KGB guy, from the system that repressed Poles until the 1980s. Russian support for Putin has made Russians much more disliked as people by Poles than they had been before. Before, many people thought that Russia was horrible but that its people were nice and victims of their government. Their obvious support for Putin has made Russians more complicit in their state’s historical and current crimes, in Polish eyes.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. szopen says:
    @Andrew Nichols
    Knew quite a few Polish expats in NZ post war migrants whose kids were at school with me. It was explained to me that the Poles always feel that noone likes them and that's why their nation has never lasted long , often sucked up into one empire or another for hundreds of years. The current daft baseless anti Russian paranoia probably stems from that. Doesnt excuse it of course

    ” nation has never lasted long ” What a bullshit. Up to the XVII century WE were the empire. And never lasted long means, in our case, something like 700 years of existence, then 124 years of losing independence, 20 years independence, 6 years losing it, 45 years of being a Russian satellite and again 25 years of independence.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. An honest bowl of tripe soup with bits of ham and vegetables….

    Heh heh. That reminds me of this classic scene from The Heartbreak Kid.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  41. szopen says:
    @schmenz
    You bring up an interesting point which I hope you can elaborate one. What is the reason for the hostility of today's Poland with today's Russia?

    We have a direct border with a country which has huge military complex, a history of subjugating all its neighbours, and which have forced upon us in the previous century, while still expressing the disbelief that we were not happy about that. This country also express rage every time we behave like sovereign state, with constant small harrassment like about Zalew Elbląski or banning our trade items for no apparent reasons. Moreover, it seems that there is no logic in their behaviour; whether we have government friendly to Russia, or hostile to Russia, the result is the same when we measure it in gas prices, trade bans and so on. Moreover, this state’s popular philosophers are quite clear about their vision in which Russia is reborn empire, and Poland has a choice of joining it willingly or being destroyed.

    There is of course a lot of prejudices too, combined with a feeling that we were exploited (As in this old joke: Poland signed a trade agreement with Soviet Russia. Poland will export a thousand tons of coal to USSR. In exchange, USSR will take thousand tons of grain from Poland). Even today many Russians think that Polish export items were USSR-made, because that’s how they were marketed (e.g. Nivea – i’ve heard one Russian women who claimed it was produced in USSR and exported to Poland!).

    All in all, I think you would agree that we do have some basis for certain distrust of Russia.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. I had no idea that it takes just a short visit to become an authority on Poland. The whole article is disjointed hotchpotch of observations. Is it about Poland, Czech republic, Vietnamese restaurant, immigration, basketball, EU or something else?

    “For a thousand years, Czechoslovakia was part of the West. Today, it is part of the empire to the east.”

    Since Czechoslovakia was created after the end of WW1 it could not have been part of the West for a thousand years. Before its creation the Czechs were for roughly 150 years part of Austro-Hungarian empire which of course was part of the West but the Czechs did not like it. Which makes me wonder if they know what they want.

    Like the Poles, their fellow Slavs, Czechs also see an affinity and allegiance with the West, not Russia.

    Perception is one thing and reality another. There are very few similar qualities, ideas, or interests shared between Slavs and the West. Whether the Poles and the Czechs like it or not they are part of the larger Slavic family with a mentality which has nothing to do with the mentality of their western idols. The scene with a Polish waitress is a prime example of that and the shabbiness of the towns another. The Slavs are a rather unruly lot pretty much unable to rule themselves. That is why they like to invite somebody else to do that. The first unification of Slavic tribes was accomplished by a Frankish merchant Samo at their invitation. Another example is a Varangian called Rurik who was invited by the Slavic tribes around Novgorod to re-establish order between various warring tribes. See the Slavs spend more time fighting each other than their enemies. The Slavs are also unreliable, often too naive, undisciplined, sloppy, lack drive, dislike progress and prefer status quo. As far as their infatuation with the West is concerned it only applies to money.

    Read More
    • Replies: @szopen
    You have quite a lot of Slavic nations which ruled over themselves. Czechs, Poles, Croats, Serbs...

    Czechs were part of the West for thousand years, unless you are going to define West as "part of German sphere", but even then, Czechs were part of HRE.

    Everything else was also said about Irish, Italians, French, Spaniards, Waloons. There were also times, when Englishmen travelling via Germany were describing them as bunch of undisciplined, dirty, lazy good-for-nothings.

    Whatever you can say about us, you do not see Western employers describing us as "lazy".

    , @Davidski

    The Slavs are a rather unruly lot pretty much unable to rule themselves. That is why they like to invite somebody else to do that. The first unification of Slavic tribes was accomplished by a Frankish merchant Samo at their invitation. Another example is a Varangian called Rurik who was invited by the Slavic tribes around Novgorod to re-establish order between various warring tribes. See the Slavs spend more time fighting each other than their enemies. The Slavs are also unreliable, often too naive, undisciplined, sloppy, lack drive, dislike progress and prefer status quo. As far as their infatuation with the West is concerned it only applies to money.
     
    lol thanks for the comic relief.

    Let's see you try and cram even more cliched crap in your next post.
    , @Anon 2
    While we're comparing peoples, it must be heartbreaking
    for the Germanics that despite being the largest group in
    Europe (the Russians are partly in Asia), they, unlike the
    Brits and the French, failed completely to create a great
    civilization. There are 100 million German speakers in
    Europe, and then add 15 million Dutch and 20
    million Scandinavians for a total of 135 million Germanics,
    all squeezed into an unimpressive territory while the Brits
    and the French spread their great civilizations and beautiful
    languages all over the globe. The Spanish and the Portuguese,
    while failing to create great civilizations, at least spread out
    over an enormous territory. The Slavs, about 300 million strong,
    also failed to create a great civilization but to their credit
    control an enormous expanse stretching from the Oder to
    Vladivostok - the largest continuous territory occupied by
    the Europeans.

    Contrast this with the Germans. Almost no one today is
    interested in studying the German language (which Mark
    Twain mercilessly satirized in one of his stories). You only
    have to hear a German shout ...Raus! (what's with the Germans
    and the shouting?) to instantly lose interest in the German
    language or culture. Germans are still seen as inherently violent
    and warlike people (see the book "Genius for War"), and that
    doesn't gain them any friends. NATO was created to "keep the
    Germans down and the Russians out," and to this day there are
    over 300 military installations on German territory. In this
    sense, Germany continues to be humiliated by being an occupied
    country, but most Europeans can sleep easier at night as a result
    of Germany being a vassal state to the U.S.

    So how come the verdict of history proclaims the Germans such a
    conspicuous failure in that they failed to create a great civilization
    and failed to expand their culture globally? That's a topic for an
    academic treatise but let me make at least several points.
    1. They failed to develop as a democratic state, and instead
    insisted on their Sonderweg with the result that democracy had
    to be rammed down their throats after WW I and II. In this
    sense they're like the Russians - they love strong-man rule a
    little too much. In contrast, the Polish-Lthuanian Commonwealth
    was a republic for at least 300 years; 2. They were consistently
    behind England in industrial development. The Industrial Revolution
    was delayed in Germany by about 50 years; 3. They failed to develop
    a powerful Navy until it was too late; 4. They failed to develop soft
    power - great food, great wine, joie de vivre, etc; 5. They failed to
    produce a skeptical philosophical culture. There was no German
    Descartes or David Hume.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. @schmenz
    You bring up an interesting point which I hope you can elaborate one. What is the reason for the hostility of today's Poland with today's Russia?

    History that will not go away.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. @Rehmat
    Poland is 94% Catholic nation with only 50,000 Muslim minority. Polish and other Europeans' hatred of Muslims and Islam is deep-rooted in history especially during the Ottoman era.

    Thanks to Israel/Zionist lobby funded local White supremacist organizations are found in almost every EU nations.

    Poland is known as the Vatican of the Holocaust Industry (Auschwitz Museum).

    Israeli leaders have shown their pleasure over the rejection of several European nations (Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic, Slovakia, etc.) to accept refugees from the Middle East – fearing the refugees would help in delegitimizing Israel in the West.

    Like Israel, Poland too has attracted many Western Jewish rich crooks, such as, Australian fugitive oligarch Abe Goldberg. Jew tourists and annual Auschwitz visits by world leaders pumps a significant foreign exchange into Warsaw’s.

    Interestingly, last year, Polish-born professor Jan T. Gross (Princeton University) in an article claimed that Poles killed more Jews than Germans during the WWII.

    http://rehmat1.com/2015/10/17/jew-historian-poles-killed-more-jews-than-germans/

    And those 50 thousands are mostly recent migrants. So not very long ago we had ever less Muslims. Good times.

    Poles don’t hate Islam. Yet. Turkey get positive reactions especially from older people thanks to being – according to a legend – only country that didn’t recognize Partition of Poland. Ottomans were a menace but when they were a menace Poland was also a power – so there is this strange mix of negative and positive, nostalgic feelings.

    However thanks to recent activities of Muslims and mass migration from Muslim countries this historically based goodwill is fast dissappearing.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rehmat
    Don't forget darling, it was Ottoman Turkey that embraced to Polish Catholic immigrants escaping good-old communist regime. Some of these Polish converted to Islam and achieved high positions under Ottoman government and army.

    However, I got to give Polish people the credit for putting a Crypto Jew as Pope John Paul II in the Vatican.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. szopen says:
    @Regnum Nostrum
    I had no idea that it takes just a short visit to become an authority on Poland. The whole article is disjointed hotchpotch of observations. Is it about Poland, Czech republic, Vietnamese restaurant, immigration, basketball, EU or something else?

    “For a thousand years, Czechoslovakia was part of the West. Today, it is part of the empire to the east.”

     

    Since Czechoslovakia was created after the end of WW1 it could not have been part of the West for a thousand years. Before its creation the Czechs were for roughly 150 years part of Austro-Hungarian empire which of course was part of the West but the Czechs did not like it. Which makes me wonder if they know what they want.

    Like the Poles, their fellow Slavs, Czechs also see an affinity and allegiance with the West, not Russia.
     
    Perception is one thing and reality another. There are very few similar qualities, ideas, or interests shared between Slavs and the West. Whether the Poles and the Czechs like it or not they are part of the larger Slavic family with a mentality which has nothing to do with the mentality of their western idols. The scene with a Polish waitress is a prime example of that and the shabbiness of the towns another. The Slavs are a rather unruly lot pretty much unable to rule themselves. That is why they like to invite somebody else to do that. The first unification of Slavic tribes was accomplished by a Frankish merchant Samo at their invitation. Another example is a Varangian called Rurik who was invited by the Slavic tribes around Novgorod to re-establish order between various warring tribes. See the Slavs spend more time fighting each other than their enemies. The Slavs are also unreliable, often too naive, undisciplined, sloppy, lack drive, dislike progress and prefer status quo. As far as their infatuation with the West is concerned it only applies to money.

    You have quite a lot of Slavic nations which ruled over themselves. Czechs, Poles, Croats, Serbs…

    Czechs were part of the West for thousand years, unless you are going to define West as “part of German sphere”, but even then, Czechs were part of HRE.

    Everything else was also said about Irish, Italians, French, Spaniards, Waloons. There were also times, when Englishmen travelling via Germany were describing them as bunch of undisciplined, dirty, lazy good-for-nothings.

    Whatever you can say about us, you do not see Western employers describing us as “lazy”.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. Davidski says:
    @Regnum Nostrum
    I had no idea that it takes just a short visit to become an authority on Poland. The whole article is disjointed hotchpotch of observations. Is it about Poland, Czech republic, Vietnamese restaurant, immigration, basketball, EU or something else?

    “For a thousand years, Czechoslovakia was part of the West. Today, it is part of the empire to the east.”

     

    Since Czechoslovakia was created after the end of WW1 it could not have been part of the West for a thousand years. Before its creation the Czechs were for roughly 150 years part of Austro-Hungarian empire which of course was part of the West but the Czechs did not like it. Which makes me wonder if they know what they want.

    Like the Poles, their fellow Slavs, Czechs also see an affinity and allegiance with the West, not Russia.
     
    Perception is one thing and reality another. There are very few similar qualities, ideas, or interests shared between Slavs and the West. Whether the Poles and the Czechs like it or not they are part of the larger Slavic family with a mentality which has nothing to do with the mentality of their western idols. The scene with a Polish waitress is a prime example of that and the shabbiness of the towns another. The Slavs are a rather unruly lot pretty much unable to rule themselves. That is why they like to invite somebody else to do that. The first unification of Slavic tribes was accomplished by a Frankish merchant Samo at their invitation. Another example is a Varangian called Rurik who was invited by the Slavic tribes around Novgorod to re-establish order between various warring tribes. See the Slavs spend more time fighting each other than their enemies. The Slavs are also unreliable, often too naive, undisciplined, sloppy, lack drive, dislike progress and prefer status quo. As far as their infatuation with the West is concerned it only applies to money.

    The Slavs are a rather unruly lot pretty much unable to rule themselves. That is why they like to invite somebody else to do that. The first unification of Slavic tribes was accomplished by a Frankish merchant Samo at their invitation. Another example is a Varangian called Rurik who was invited by the Slavic tribes around Novgorod to re-establish order between various warring tribes. See the Slavs spend more time fighting each other than their enemies. The Slavs are also unreliable, often too naive, undisciplined, sloppy, lack drive, dislike progress and prefer status quo. As far as their infatuation with the West is concerned it only applies to money.

    lol thanks for the comic relief.

    Let’s see you try and cram even more cliched crap in your next post.

    Read More
    • Replies: @dcite
    Slavic Czechoslovakia (especially the Czech part) was one of the most advanced countries of the 20th century. They even had the luxury to be PC before and during WWII, relatively speaking. Slovenia is another gem of Slavic efficiency. You might call it the Switzerland of Slaviland.

    Come to think of it, Russia has been a contender for some time, and when they sent a man up in the space before the U.S., all kinds of angst resulted here.

    If the "bankers" leave Poland alone, it will do ok. In fact, if the "bankers" just leave the planet completely everything will be better, but I realize that is not going to happen, at least not in an obvious way.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  47. Davidski says:
    @Andrew Nichols
    Knew quite a few Polish expats in NZ post war migrants whose kids were at school with me. It was explained to me that the Poles always feel that noone likes them and that's why their nation has never lasted long , often sucked up into one empire or another for hundreds of years. The current daft baseless anti Russian paranoia probably stems from that. Doesnt excuse it of course

    It was explained to me that the Poles always feel that no one likes them and that’s why their nation has never lasted long.

    How did you come to this conclusion I wonder?

    Poland came on the scene around 998 AD and was an independent state, and in fact, the leader of a very large Commonwealth in East Central and Eastern Europe, for much of the time since then.

    So…???

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  48. Maj. Kong says:
    @anonymous
    Linh Dinh is one of the consistently insightful contributors published here. But he seems to annoy many of us. Even those who comment positively seem compelled to qualify their praise. You cite nothing in this article with which you find fault, but take a needless swipe at him in telling us that you like Polish people with whom you're acquainted.

    I'm curious why Americans (other than gulled flag-wavers) aren't glad that he's here. I hope that his Vietnamese origin isn't a trigger for some of the hostility, but I've wondered about that.

    Dinh more or less has an Anti-American perspective, much like Enoch Powell. There are usually two types of the immigrant mindset. The first is a sort of uber-patriotism, the second is a demand for the host society to bend over. Dinh holds the host society in contempt, but doesn’t want to have it accommodate him. It’s a bit unusual, neither de Tocqueville or Said.

    I like his columns, most of the writers are good except for Gustavo and Giraldi.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. Rehmat says:
    @Yevardian
    Go run to Saudi Arabia and worship your demon-possessed pedophile warlord Mahomet and that black-cube if you feel so aggrieved Christendom has been hijacked by a bunch of fellow semites.

    But darling, didn’t your rabbi tell you, Saudi ‘royals’ are Jewish? During 2013-2014, they donated $16 billion to dying Jews in Israel.

    Earlier this month, Saudi Arabia broke diplomatic relation with the Islamic Republic over its execution of Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr, a top leaders of Saudi Shi’ite minority.

    The diplomatic break-up was hailed by Israeli media and brought several Israel Firsts American Jewish traitors out of sewer to throw their support behind Saudi Arabia. The same Saudi Arabia which they had blamed for 9/11 and bankrolling anti-Israel Muslim Brotherhood by the Jewish Lobby in the past….

    http://rehmat1.com/2016/01/10/jewish-lobby-backs-saudi-arabia-against-iran/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sherman
    Hey Homer,

    What exactly does this nonsense have to do with Poland?

    Sherm
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  50. Rehmat says:
    @Bies Podkrakowski
    And those 50 thousands are mostly recent migrants. So not very long ago we had ever less Muslims. Good times.

    Poles don't hate Islam. Yet. Turkey get positive reactions especially from older people thanks to being - according to a legend - only country that didn't recognize Partition of Poland. Ottomans were a menace but when they were a menace Poland was also a power - so there is this strange mix of negative and positive, nostalgic feelings.

    However thanks to recent activities of Muslims and mass migration from Muslim countries this historically based goodwill is fast dissappearing.

    Don’t forget darling, it was Ottoman Turkey that embraced to Polish Catholic immigrants escaping good-old communist regime. Some of these Polish converted to Islam and achieved high positions under Ottoman government and army.

    However, I got to give Polish people the credit for putting a Crypto Jew as Pope John Paul II in the Vatican.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bies Podkrakowski
    "Don’t forget darling, it was Ottoman Turkey that embraced to Polish Catholic immigrants escaping good-old communist regime. Some of these Polish converted to Islam and achieved high positions under Ottoman government and army."

    Ottoman Turkey? Communist regime? When of what?

    A troll is supposed to put some effort into his trolling. You meanwhile are not even trying. You mix facts - OK, thats your prerogative as a troll. But centuries also? You behave as an European refugee! Shame on you.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. Davidski says:

    By the way, the main issue I have with this article is that it’s focusing on small towns, and thus a part of the country that is basically dying.

    But the reason it’s dying is not because Poland is dying, but because people are mostly moving to the bigger towns and cities within Poland, especially the five or so main cities like Warsaw, Krakow, Wroclaw, Poznan and the Tri-City in the north.

    And the fixation with Americana…what fixation? Like the small towns, it’s also dying.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  52. Mr. Dinh is at his best much like Fred when he is providing a sympathetic window into the world of urban collapse as Fred does to the old rural south and the Vietnam war years with warts and love. Much like Fred he also sometimes seems to have lost the love when it comes to our nation (“Clinging to that dangerously flailing zombie that’s Uncle Sam”). The US may be a mangy old egg sucking, deer chasing dog we are not blind to her flaws, but we would still not see her kicked especially by those she has protected and gifted with her love, it is repugnant. He and Fred are welcome to point to the flaws, and I often find I agree with them about such, but when they seem to turn their back on her ownership they loose me. She is ours and we must bring her to heel, nurse her back to health, and care for her to the last of her days.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous
    Fair comment. But I don't see Dinh's "Uncle Sam" and your "our nation" as one and the same. Nor does Dinh, as I understand him.
    , @Bragadocious
    Good comment. I doubt however that Dinh ever had any affection for America. My sense of him is he was brought here at a young age, bullied beyond belief, never got any poon, and is now taking it out on the world through his scribblings. Hey, I give the guy credit -- he hates America with the hot hot heat of a thousand Vietnamese dogs marinating in Habanero peppers, but at least he doesn't live here. He put his passport where his mouth is. I hope his column is distributed in Mexico in Honduras; might get those anchor baby numbers down!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. dcite says:
    @Davidski

    The Slavs are a rather unruly lot pretty much unable to rule themselves. That is why they like to invite somebody else to do that. The first unification of Slavic tribes was accomplished by a Frankish merchant Samo at their invitation. Another example is a Varangian called Rurik who was invited by the Slavic tribes around Novgorod to re-establish order between various warring tribes. See the Slavs spend more time fighting each other than their enemies. The Slavs are also unreliable, often too naive, undisciplined, sloppy, lack drive, dislike progress and prefer status quo. As far as their infatuation with the West is concerned it only applies to money.
     
    lol thanks for the comic relief.

    Let's see you try and cram even more cliched crap in your next post.

    Slavic Czechoslovakia (especially the Czech part) was one of the most advanced countries of the 20th century. They even had the luxury to be PC before and during WWII, relatively speaking. Slovenia is another gem of Slavic efficiency. You might call it the Switzerland of Slaviland.

    Come to think of it, Russia has been a contender for some time, and when they sent a man up in the space before the U.S., all kinds of angst resulted here.

    If the “bankers” leave Poland alone, it will do ok. In fact, if the “bankers” just leave the planet completely everything will be better, but I realize that is not going to happen, at least not in an obvious way.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. woodNfish says:
    @anon
    Maybe the Iron Curtain was a blessing in disguise. It kept Poland POLISH, with the exception of a few Vietnamese who wormed their way in. If the United Kingdom had been "Iron Curtained" from 1945-89, England would still be a white country today. Who knows what the future holds. Perhaps Moscow will prove to have been a better master then Brussels in time.

    You ignore what became of Yugoslavia. The Soviets balkanized their colonies just as the West is balkanizing its own homelands. It will all end badly – guaranteed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. My, God. This sounds all so depressing.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Davidski
    It's supposed to sound depressing.

    The author had the angle worked out before he crossed the border into Poland. It reads like something from the early 90s, starting with the misguided title.

    The upshot is, don't believe everything you read.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Bob who likes Lihn the sympathetic chronicler of the lowly
    Mr. Dinh is at his best much like Fred when he is providing a sympathetic window into the world of urban collapse as Fred does to the old rural south and the Vietnam war years with warts and love. Much like Fred he also sometimes seems to have lost the love when it comes to our nation ("Clinging to that dangerously flailing zombie that’s Uncle Sam"). The US may be a mangy old egg sucking, deer chasing dog we are not blind to her flaws, but we would still not see her kicked especially by those she has protected and gifted with her love, it is repugnant. He and Fred are welcome to point to the flaws, and I often find I agree with them about such, but when they seem to turn their back on her ownership they loose me. She is ours and we must bring her to heel, nurse her back to health, and care for her to the last of her days.

    Fair comment. But I don’t see Dinh’s “Uncle Sam” and your “our nation” as one and the same. Nor does Dinh, as I understand him.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. Sherman says:
    @Rehmat
    But darling, didn't your rabbi tell you, Saudi 'royals' are Jewish? During 2013-2014, they donated $16 billion to dying Jews in Israel.

    Earlier this month, Saudi Arabia broke diplomatic relation with the Islamic Republic over its execution of Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr, a top leaders of Saudi Shi’ite minority.

    The diplomatic break-up was hailed by Israeli media and brought several Israel Firsts American Jewish traitors out of sewer to throw their support behind Saudi Arabia. The same Saudi Arabia which they had blamed for 9/11 and bankrolling anti-Israel Muslim Brotherhood by the Jewish Lobby in the past....

    http://rehmat1.com/2016/01/10/jewish-lobby-backs-saudi-arabia-against-iran/

    Hey Homer,

    What exactly does this nonsense have to do with Poland?

    Sherm

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. 5371 says:
    @AP

    I suspect that the scale of Ukrainian atrocities against Poles has been obscured.
     
    It was under the communists but is no

    "I had the opportunity to exchange comments with a descendant of someone who experienced Banderites in action. The story was that they were worse than the SS.
     
    I know such people too. It was a typical peasant revolt - very brutal. Only 100 years earlier Polish peasants were doing similar things though.

    Russians try to bring the UPA massacre of Poles up, but most Poles see this as a cheap attempt at dividing Poles and Ukrainians.

    The only map I’ve seen of a hypothetical Ukrainian partition was on a Polish website.
     
    Fringe views are easy to find on the web. Poles seeking partition of Ukraine is in the same general category of popularity as Germans who want to retake Danzig.

    I would agree with Ukraine ceding Transcarpathia back to Hungary and Slovakia.
     
    That would be odd, as this region is only about 12% Hungarian and .5% Slovak. There is a narrow strip of land along the Hungarian border that is majority-Hungarian, however (outside this narrow strip there are few Hungarians in the province). Also, Hungary was on Germany's side during the war.

    [Only 100 years earlier Polish peasants were doing similar things though.]

    No, the Polish peasants who revolted against their lords in 1846 did not do anything remotely similar to murdering hundreds of thousands of civilians, you squalid Banderite.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP
    Upper estimate of Polish victims of UPA by scholars was 100,00o - not "hundreds of thousands."

    Nature of brutality by Polish peasants was indeed similar to that of Ukrainian peasants:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galician_slaughter
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. Davidski says:
    @Epaminondas
    My, God. This sounds all so depressing.

    It’s supposed to sound depressing.

    The author had the angle worked out before he crossed the border into Poland. It reads like something from the early 90s, starting with the misguided title.

    The upshot is, don’t believe everything you read.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. AP says:
    @5371
    [Only 100 years earlier Polish peasants were doing similar things though.]

    No, the Polish peasants who revolted against their lords in 1846 did not do anything remotely similar to murdering hundreds of thousands of civilians, you squalid Banderite.

    Upper estimate of Polish victims of UPA by scholars was 100,00o – not “hundreds of thousands.”

    Nature of brutality by Polish peasants was indeed similar to that of Ukrainian peasants:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galician_slaughter

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    You must hope that no-one will ever read your links, that all will be content with your misrepresentation of their contents, you comical fraud.
    , @Thirdeye
    http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2010/02/24/a-fascist-hero-in-democratic-kiev/

    According to this source, at least as many Ukrainians as Poles were killed by the Banderites. The Banderites did not stage a "typical peasant revolt." They identified with the Nazis' vision of ethnic purity, free from Poles, "Moskals," and Jews. West Ukrainian Fascists were recruited for two SS divisions, Galizien and Nachtigall, which did their duty for the "final solution."

    I can't fathom what is behind your desire to minimize the crimes of the west Ukrainian Fascists, unless it is for the sake of trying to align Poles with the modern Fascists in Ukraine against the Russian bogey.

    If Poland wants Russia to apologize for the crimes committed against them under Stalin, maybe they could start by apologizing for the crimes they committed during the Polish-Soviet war and the occupations of the western Ukraine and Belarus. And maybe the Brits could apologize for whitewashing them.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  61. @Bob who likes Lihn the sympathetic chronicler of the lowly
    Mr. Dinh is at his best much like Fred when he is providing a sympathetic window into the world of urban collapse as Fred does to the old rural south and the Vietnam war years with warts and love. Much like Fred he also sometimes seems to have lost the love when it comes to our nation ("Clinging to that dangerously flailing zombie that’s Uncle Sam"). The US may be a mangy old egg sucking, deer chasing dog we are not blind to her flaws, but we would still not see her kicked especially by those she has protected and gifted with her love, it is repugnant. He and Fred are welcome to point to the flaws, and I often find I agree with them about such, but when they seem to turn their back on her ownership they loose me. She is ours and we must bring her to heel, nurse her back to health, and care for her to the last of her days.

    Good comment. I doubt however that Dinh ever had any affection for America. My sense of him is he was brought here at a young age, bullied beyond belief, never got any poon, and is now taking it out on the world through his scribblings. Hey, I give the guy credit — he hates America with the hot hot heat of a thousand Vietnamese dogs marinating in Habanero peppers, but at least he doesn’t live here. He put his passport where his mouth is. I hope his column is distributed in Mexico in Honduras; might get those anchor baby numbers down!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. 5371 says:
    @AP
    Upper estimate of Polish victims of UPA by scholars was 100,00o - not "hundreds of thousands."

    Nature of brutality by Polish peasants was indeed similar to that of Ukrainian peasants:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galician_slaughter

    You must hope that no-one will ever read your links, that all will be content with your misrepresentation of their contents, you comical fraud.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP
    Well, let's look at a link and compare to your claims:

    You wrote:

    "No, the Polish peasants who revolted against their lords in 1846 did not do anything remotely similar to murdering hundreds of thousands of civilians"

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacres_of_Poles_in_Volhynia_and_Eastern_Galicia#Polish_casualties

    "There is a general consensus among Western and Polish historians that Polish civilian casualties from the UPA in Volhynia range from 35,000 to 60,000.[8]... Niall Ferguson estimated the total number of Polish victims in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia to be between 60,000 and 80,000,[143] G. Rossolinski-Liebe: 70,000-100,000,[144] John P. Himka: 100,000.[6] According to Motyka, from 1943 to 1947 in all territories that were covered by the conflict, approximately 80,000-100,000 Poles were killed.[106]"

    The scale in In Galicia in the 1840s was much smaller (1,000-2,000 victims), but Polish peasants decapitated their victims or sawed them in pieces, comparable to the brutality of the Ukrainian peasants in Volyn.

    So, as we have seen, every attempt by 5371 to present a "fact" ends in failure. Including his stupid claim that I am some sort of "Banderist." Comical, indeed.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  63. @German_Reader
    I've been annoyed by some of Linh Dinh's previous articles, but this one is actually not bad, quite interesting in a way. I disagree with Linh about Russia, I think Polish apprehensions and fears about Russian imperialism are understandable and to some degree pefectly rational. But of course US cultural influence and the EU are also grave dangers to Polish sovereignty and nationhood. I wish Poland well, hopefully they and the other Eastern Europeans can stand up to foreign pressure and create a viable alternative both to Russia's system and to the Western globalist nation-wreckers.

    what I find to be funny is that, instead of trying to find and read thought provoking articles, you are just looking for confirmation to your views :P

    are you that scare of differing/opposing views?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. Randy says:

    Love his articles it’s large part of why I keep coming back. Thanks to you!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  65. AP says:
    @5371
    You must hope that no-one will ever read your links, that all will be content with your misrepresentation of their contents, you comical fraud.

    Well, let’s look at a link and compare to your claims:

    You wrote:

    “No, the Polish peasants who revolted against their lords in 1846 did not do anything remotely similar to murdering hundreds of thousands of civilians”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacres_of_Poles_in_Volhynia_and_Eastern_Galicia#Polish_casualties

    “There is a general consensus among Western and Polish historians that Polish civilian casualties from the UPA in Volhynia range from 35,000 to 60,000.[8]… Niall Ferguson estimated the total number of Polish victims in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia to be between 60,000 and 80,000,[143] G. Rossolinski-Liebe: 70,000-100,000,[144] John P. Himka: 100,000.[6] According to Motyka, from 1943 to 1947 in all territories that were covered by the conflict, approximately 80,000-100,000 Poles were killed.[106]”

    The scale in In Galicia in the 1840s was much smaller (1,000-2,000 victims), but Polish peasants decapitated their victims or sawed them in pieces, comparable to the brutality of the Ukrainian peasants in Volyn.

    So, as we have seen, every attempt by 5371 to present a “fact” ends in failure. Including his stupid claim that I am some sort of “Banderist.” Comical, indeed.

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    Yes, one thousand is a similar number to a hundred thousand.
    You have the dignity of Poroshenko, the heterosexuality of Lyashko, the integrity of Yatsenyuk and the courage of Saakashvili.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. Thirdeye says:
    @AP
    Upper estimate of Polish victims of UPA by scholars was 100,00o - not "hundreds of thousands."

    Nature of brutality by Polish peasants was indeed similar to that of Ukrainian peasants:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galician_slaughter

    http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2010/02/24/a-fascist-hero-in-democratic-kiev/

    According to this source, at least as many Ukrainians as Poles were killed by the Banderites. The Banderites did not stage a “typical peasant revolt.” They identified with the Nazis’ vision of ethnic purity, free from Poles, “Moskals,” and Jews. West Ukrainian Fascists were recruited for two SS divisions, Galizien and Nachtigall, which did their duty for the “final solution.”

    I can’t fathom what is behind your desire to minimize the crimes of the west Ukrainian Fascists, unless it is for the sake of trying to align Poles with the modern Fascists in Ukraine against the Russian bogey.

    If Poland wants Russia to apologize for the crimes committed against them under Stalin, maybe they could start by apologizing for the crimes they committed during the Polish-Soviet war and the occupations of the western Ukraine and Belarus. And maybe the Brits could apologize for whitewashing them.

    Read More
    • Replies: @szopen
    There is a difference between soldiers shooting occasionally PoWs here and there (all armies did that, including Soviets, Poles, allies) and bad conditions in camps resulting in typhus epidemies (and with efforts to improve the conditions and stop the epidemics after parliament sent a comission to investigate them), and the government-supported, deliberately planned murder.

    As for "occupation", my family was "occupying" west Belarus for at least 300 years or more. In the village they lived most of population was Polish. Even today, when majority of Poles were expelled or emigrated in 1950, and even though some ruthenised (about half of my family left there does not speak Polish), there are regions in Western Belarus with majority Polish population.
    , @AP

    The Banderites did not stage a “typical peasant revolt.” They identified with the Nazis’ vision of ethnic purity, free from Poles, “Moskals,” and Jews.
     
    The peasants who did most of the slaughtering were not Banderist ideologues. UPA-Banderists helped organize and coordinate their activities but the Ukrainian villagers hacking to death Poles and pillaging their villages were acting out much more ancient patterns that preceded Banderism. These events occurred in a similar region, in an earlier time:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koliyivshchyna


    I can’t fathom what is behind your desire to minimize the crimes of the west Ukrainian Fascists
     
    Please provide a quote where I attempt to minimize the slaughter of up 100,000 Polish civilians by west Ukrainian peasants and fascists.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. Thirdeye says:
    @schmenz
    You bring up an interesting point which I hope you can elaborate one. What is the reason for the hostility of today's Poland with today's Russia?

    AP recited the “official” Polish line that it’s all about what those Evil Russians did, but it’s an attitude with deep historical roots in the Orthodox-Catholic schism. Medieval Poland was an ascending power until the turn of the Seventeenth Century, when they nearly established rule over Russia. Afterwards Russia, who Poland regarded as Heathen, became the ascendant power in the region that the Poles saw as rightfully theirs. They resent that, especially after the humiliation of being partitioned by Prussia, Austria, and Russia towards the close of the Eighteenth Century. They hold it against the Russians more than they do the Germanics because the Russians were Orthodox and, truth be told, the Russian Orthodox Church was very nationalistic. So the religious aspect of Polish nationalism was reinforced as a result. When Lech Walesa ran for President of Poland in 1990, he presented himself as the candidate of the “True Catholic Poles” and won.

    In spite of the assurances that NATO would not expand after the breakup of the Soviet bloc, Poland was admitted to NATO in 1998. Russia was very weak at that time and not a threat, as demonstrated by their complete inability to influence outcomes in the former Yugoslavia and their loss in the first Chechen war. Now Poland bitches about the Russian response to Poland joining NATO and the various western hegemonic projects in the former Soviet sphere. Go figure.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. nndnd says: • Website

    Poland should give back silesia.

    Read More
    • Replies: @szopen
    We will, when Germans will give back the millions of people they murdered during the war they started.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. 5371 says:
    @AP
    Well, let's look at a link and compare to your claims:

    You wrote:

    "No, the Polish peasants who revolted against their lords in 1846 did not do anything remotely similar to murdering hundreds of thousands of civilians"

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacres_of_Poles_in_Volhynia_and_Eastern_Galicia#Polish_casualties

    "There is a general consensus among Western and Polish historians that Polish civilian casualties from the UPA in Volhynia range from 35,000 to 60,000.[8]... Niall Ferguson estimated the total number of Polish victims in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia to be between 60,000 and 80,000,[143] G. Rossolinski-Liebe: 70,000-100,000,[144] John P. Himka: 100,000.[6] According to Motyka, from 1943 to 1947 in all territories that were covered by the conflict, approximately 80,000-100,000 Poles were killed.[106]"

    The scale in In Galicia in the 1840s was much smaller (1,000-2,000 victims), but Polish peasants decapitated their victims or sawed them in pieces, comparable to the brutality of the Ukrainian peasants in Volyn.

    So, as we have seen, every attempt by 5371 to present a "fact" ends in failure. Including his stupid claim that I am some sort of "Banderist." Comical, indeed.

    Yes, one thousand is a similar number to a hundred thousand.
    You have the dignity of Poroshenko, the heterosexuality of Lyashko, the integrity of Yatsenyuk and the courage of Saakashvili.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    Yes, one thousand is a similar number to a hundred thousand.
     
    I wasn't comparing numbers of victims, but the brutality of the crimes.

    But nice to see you that you have been taught that your claim of "hundreds of thousands" was wrong.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. Either Poland submits and recognizes its relative minority and vassalage to Russian Elder Brethren, or it is doomed with rest of the West. All that Poland has now, its Silezian lands, modern culture, healthy population – is granted by Russians. Stalin gave Poles parts of Germany, helped to build industry, raise national culture, many advanced technologies were offered to Poland. Under the benevolent Soviet patronate, Poland flourished, with liberties and living standards better than in USSR itself. After ‘solidarity’ capitulation to the sick West, Poland again is exploited Ruritania, the buffer puppet state with cheap labor as major export.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Davidski

    Under the benevolent Soviet patronate, Poland flourished.
     
    lol more comic relief.

    I see crazy people.
    , @szopen

    Under the benevolent Soviet patronate
     
    WUHAHAHAA

    And that's why after 1989 our crisis ended faster than in Russia, our GDP rose faster and right now is higher per capita (PPP) than Russian. Also, this is why before 1939 our GDP per capita was higher than Greece, Portugal and Spain, and after 50 years of benevolent rule was much lower.

    As for technology transfer, I am sure that this is why Polish genius engineer who created very good computer architecture was persecuted and finally had to flee the country (because Poland was not supposed to produce its own computers). And this is why most of our industry was built using western credits.

    You are completely nuts.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. Davidski says:
    @Poles never learn
    Either Poland submits and recognizes its relative minority and vassalage to Russian Elder Brethren, or it is doomed with rest of the West. All that Poland has now, its Silezian lands, modern culture, healthy population - is granted by Russians. Stalin gave Poles parts of Germany, helped to build industry, raise national culture, many advanced technologies were offered to Poland. Under the benevolent Soviet patronate, Poland flourished, with liberties and living standards better than in USSR itself. After 'solidarity' capitulation to the sick West, Poland again is exploited Ruritania, the buffer puppet state with cheap labor as major export.

    Under the benevolent Soviet patronate, Poland flourished.

    lol more comic relief.

    I see crazy people.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  72. szopen says:
    @Poles never learn
    Either Poland submits and recognizes its relative minority and vassalage to Russian Elder Brethren, or it is doomed with rest of the West. All that Poland has now, its Silezian lands, modern culture, healthy population - is granted by Russians. Stalin gave Poles parts of Germany, helped to build industry, raise national culture, many advanced technologies were offered to Poland. Under the benevolent Soviet patronate, Poland flourished, with liberties and living standards better than in USSR itself. After 'solidarity' capitulation to the sick West, Poland again is exploited Ruritania, the buffer puppet state with cheap labor as major export.

    Under the benevolent Soviet patronate

    WUHAHAHAA

    And that’s why after 1989 our crisis ended faster than in Russia, our GDP rose faster and right now is higher per capita (PPP) than Russian. Also, this is why before 1939 our GDP per capita was higher than Greece, Portugal and Spain, and after 50 years of benevolent rule was much lower.

    As for technology transfer, I am sure that this is why Polish genius engineer who created very good computer architecture was persecuted and finally had to flee the country (because Poland was not supposed to produce its own computers). And this is why most of our industry was built using western credits.

    You are completely nuts.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  73. szopen says:
    @nndnd
    Poland should give back silesia.

    We will, when Germans will give back the millions of people they murdered during the war they started.

    Read More
    • Replies: @HdC
    If you were to really drill down in the causes of WWII you would find that the Poles, egged on by the Brits and the USA president at that time, are the real culprits.

    But that would take intellectual honesty to admit, something sorely lacking in today's PC climate. HdC
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. szopen says:
    @Thirdeye
    http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2010/02/24/a-fascist-hero-in-democratic-kiev/

    According to this source, at least as many Ukrainians as Poles were killed by the Banderites. The Banderites did not stage a "typical peasant revolt." They identified with the Nazis' vision of ethnic purity, free from Poles, "Moskals," and Jews. West Ukrainian Fascists were recruited for two SS divisions, Galizien and Nachtigall, which did their duty for the "final solution."

    I can't fathom what is behind your desire to minimize the crimes of the west Ukrainian Fascists, unless it is for the sake of trying to align Poles with the modern Fascists in Ukraine against the Russian bogey.

    If Poland wants Russia to apologize for the crimes committed against them under Stalin, maybe they could start by apologizing for the crimes they committed during the Polish-Soviet war and the occupations of the western Ukraine and Belarus. And maybe the Brits could apologize for whitewashing them.

    There is a difference between soldiers shooting occasionally PoWs here and there (all armies did that, including Soviets, Poles, allies) and bad conditions in camps resulting in typhus epidemies (and with efforts to improve the conditions and stop the epidemics after parliament sent a comission to investigate them), and the government-supported, deliberately planned murder.

    As for “occupation”, my family was “occupying” west Belarus for at least 300 years or more. In the village they lived most of population was Polish. Even today, when majority of Poles were expelled or emigrated in 1950, and even though some ruthenised (about half of my family left there does not speak Polish), there are regions in Western Belarus with majority Polish population.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thirdeye
    The Polish army committed ethnic cleansing and other war crimes against Ukrainian, Belorussian, and Jewish populations during the Polish-Ukrainian and Polish-Soviet wars, in addition to ghastly treatment of POWs. That behavior was underlain by a nationalist ideology centered on "True Catholic Poles."

    As for “occupation”, my family was “occupying” west Belarus for at least 300 years or more. In the village they lived most of population was Polish.
     
    That arrangement was fine until the revanchist post-independence government came along and set local populations off against each other. Non-Polish populations under that government found themselves ruled by a hostile occupying power.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. HdC says:
    @szopen
    We will, when Germans will give back the millions of people they murdered during the war they started.

    If you were to really drill down in the causes of WWII you would find that the Poles, egged on by the Brits and the USA president at that time, are the real culprits.

    But that would take intellectual honesty to admit, something sorely lacking in today’s PC climate. HdC

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP
    Um...are you suggesting that Poland attacked the Germans and/or the Soviets?
    , @Bies Podkrakowski
    Yes, we even started the war - in Gleiwitz.
    , @szopen
    Not really. This is a lie which is constantly propagated by nazi apologetics. It is based on fabrications, falsifications and half-truths, also ignoring most of historical documents and even logic.
    , @Thirdeye
    The Polish-German conflict that was the flashpoint for WWII is an example of bluffing gone bad, starting a war that was in neither party's interests. Hitler had the idea that he could turn Poland into a vassal state like he did with Romania and Hungary. Poland shared Nazi Germany's rabid hatred of the Soviets, but saw their relationships with France and Britain as a trump card against both the Soviet Union and Germany. From a strictly realpolitik point of view, Poland had to make some unpleasant choices that they were unwilling to face. Poland's best option would have been to mend fences with the Soviet Union with some revision of the Treaty of Riga, in exchange for a united front against Nazi Germany. Stalin was seeking alliances against Nazi Germany at that point, and a shift in Poland's stance would have made it possible. Barring that, some sort of vassal status with Nazi Germany, either from a diplomatic or military outcome, was inevitable. But the stupid, ideologically blinded Polish government failed completely to see that, betting on the lame ponies of Britain and France instead. Britain and France had no more luck bluffing Germany into submission than Poland did. Their ability to affect the military outcome in Poland was zero and Hitler knew it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. AP says:
    @Thirdeye
    http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2010/02/24/a-fascist-hero-in-democratic-kiev/

    According to this source, at least as many Ukrainians as Poles were killed by the Banderites. The Banderites did not stage a "typical peasant revolt." They identified with the Nazis' vision of ethnic purity, free from Poles, "Moskals," and Jews. West Ukrainian Fascists were recruited for two SS divisions, Galizien and Nachtigall, which did their duty for the "final solution."

    I can't fathom what is behind your desire to minimize the crimes of the west Ukrainian Fascists, unless it is for the sake of trying to align Poles with the modern Fascists in Ukraine against the Russian bogey.

    If Poland wants Russia to apologize for the crimes committed against them under Stalin, maybe they could start by apologizing for the crimes they committed during the Polish-Soviet war and the occupations of the western Ukraine and Belarus. And maybe the Brits could apologize for whitewashing them.

    The Banderites did not stage a “typical peasant revolt.” They identified with the Nazis’ vision of ethnic purity, free from Poles, “Moskals,” and Jews.

    The peasants who did most of the slaughtering were not Banderist ideologues. UPA-Banderists helped organize and coordinate their activities but the Ukrainian villagers hacking to death Poles and pillaging their villages were acting out much more ancient patterns that preceded Banderism. These events occurred in a similar region, in an earlier time:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koliyivshchyna

    I can’t fathom what is behind your desire to minimize the crimes of the west Ukrainian Fascists

    Please provide a quote where I attempt to minimize the slaughter of up 100,000 Polish civilians by west Ukrainian peasants and fascists.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thirdeye

    The peasants who did most of the slaughtering were not Banderist ideologues. UPA-Banderists helped organize and coordinate their activities.....
     
    WTF do you think you're doing with that kind of hair-splitting sophistry?

    Please provide a quote where I attempt to minimize the slaughter of up 100,000 Polish civilians by west Ukrainian peasants and fascists.
     
    You overlooked at least an equal number of Ukrainians killed by the Banderists. Again. And it was over a much longer time than the reactive paroxysms of violence against the nobles that were the peasant rebellions. It's like the difference between first and second degree murder.
    , @The Kulak
    You know AP, there's a Polish film called 'Volyn' coming out, right? You've seen the videos of Polish soccer hooligans chanting, "Vilna and Lvov are Polish, Bandera is a d-ck" probably emphasizing the latter epithet in the Ukrainian style of huil-o when a Galician squad comes to play in Poland?

    Yes we know the Poles who went to Donetsk and said they too, sympathized with the struggle against Banderism were a tiny minority. So what? That doesn't mean many of your countrymen would be very happy with your attempts to downplay the viciousness and thuggishness of the UPA or to pretend that the current U.S./IMFer funded Kiev regime glorifying them and Bandera isn't a problem. The older Poles I've spoken with in the U.S. don't like that legacy very much at all. Trying to pretend all the hipsters and State Dept. sponsored tech camp participants you'd meet in Kiev or Lvov are typically representative of Ukraine as a whole is one technique the RFE/RL and MSM propaganda use. The other is to simply not talk about Ukrainian war crimes while endlessly playing up stupid propaganda stories that made into Russian media, so that somehow if the boy was never crucified in Slavyansk that means that all of the civilians shot there were killed by Strelkov and co rather than the Right Sector Nazis, and we can forget about Banderites burning people to death in Odessa and Kiev not prosecuting a single one of them, massive indiscriminate punishment shelling of civilian areas, and Poroshenko declaring Ukraine will win the war by forcing Donbass kids to hide in basements.

    I was raised on the 'Christ between two thieves' narrative of Polish history that by and large prevailed after WWII because it was politically convenient during the Cold War. Things like the Poles somewhat dealing with the OUN pre-WWII like the Brits dealt with the IRA, or taking a piece of Slovakia as part of the Munich agreement, did not really become known to me until well into my 30s. Nor did I learn about a few of the postwar Polish progroms of Jews, though the claim that Poles killed as many Jews as the Germans is laughable (with that said many of the SS Totenkopf guards were western Ukrainian greater Galicia Nazis and like the Utsashe Croats many of them were more sadistic than the Germans ever were).

    So yes, you can try insisting on your 'Poles and Ukrainians are one big happy family and anybody who suggests otherwise has bought the Kremlin propaganda' rhetoric. But I doubt that many Polish nationalists themselves buy it. And they'd probably be disgusted with your whataboutism comparing massacres of a few thousand people in a Ukrainian peasants revolt to a Nazi-abetted modern ethnic cleansing/terror campaign that claimed the lives of over 100,000 Poles.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  77. AP says:
    @HdC
    If you were to really drill down in the causes of WWII you would find that the Poles, egged on by the Brits and the USA president at that time, are the real culprits.

    But that would take intellectual honesty to admit, something sorely lacking in today's PC climate. HdC

    Um…are you suggesting that Poland attacked the Germans and/or the Soviets?

    Read More
    • Replies: @HdC
    The poles were murdering German expatriates. See my post #83 below. HdC
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  78. AP says:
    @5371
    Yes, one thousand is a similar number to a hundred thousand.
    You have the dignity of Poroshenko, the heterosexuality of Lyashko, the integrity of Yatsenyuk and the courage of Saakashvili.

    Yes, one thousand is a similar number to a hundred thousand.

    I wasn’t comparing numbers of victims, but the brutality of the crimes.

    But nice to see you that you have been taught that your claim of “hundreds of thousands” was wrong.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  79. @Rehmat
    Don't forget darling, it was Ottoman Turkey that embraced to Polish Catholic immigrants escaping good-old communist regime. Some of these Polish converted to Islam and achieved high positions under Ottoman government and army.

    However, I got to give Polish people the credit for putting a Crypto Jew as Pope John Paul II in the Vatican.

    “Don’t forget darling, it was Ottoman Turkey that embraced to Polish Catholic immigrants escaping good-old communist regime. Some of these Polish converted to Islam and achieved high positions under Ottoman government and army.”

    Ottoman Turkey? Communist regime? When of what?

    A troll is supposed to put some effort into his trolling. You meanwhile are not even trying. You mix facts – OK, thats your prerogative as a troll. But centuries also? You behave as an European refugee! Shame on you.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  80. @Andrew Nichols
    Knew quite a few Polish expats in NZ post war migrants whose kids were at school with me. It was explained to me that the Poles always feel that noone likes them and that's why their nation has never lasted long , often sucked up into one empire or another for hundreds of years. The current daft baseless anti Russian paranoia probably stems from that. Doesnt excuse it of course

    Only one question: baseless to whom?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. @HdC
    If you were to really drill down in the causes of WWII you would find that the Poles, egged on by the Brits and the USA president at that time, are the real culprits.

    But that would take intellectual honesty to admit, something sorely lacking in today's PC climate. HdC

    Yes, we even started the war – in Gleiwitz.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  82. szopen says:
    @HdC
    If you were to really drill down in the causes of WWII you would find that the Poles, egged on by the Brits and the USA president at that time, are the real culprits.

    But that would take intellectual honesty to admit, something sorely lacking in today's PC climate. HdC

    Not really. This is a lie which is constantly propagated by nazi apologetics. It is based on fabrications, falsifications and half-truths, also ignoring most of historical documents and even logic.

    Read More
    • Replies: @HdC
    Well, diplomatic dispatches, Hitler's peace offerings which received no (workable) counter offers, the murder of tens of thousands of German expatriates that wound up in Polish hands after the Diktat of Versailles, say otherwise.

    In fact, the general Polish reactions were threatening, bellicose, and chauvinistic. And yes there were numerous border excursions by Poles.

    Read a book entitled Witness To History by Michael Walsh, which sheds some light onto those miserable occurrences.

    There used to be a website sweetliberty.org that had copies of relevant documents to this issue under a thread entitled How Wars Are Made, but it has been years since I looked there. HdC

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  83. HdC says:
    @szopen
    Not really. This is a lie which is constantly propagated by nazi apologetics. It is based on fabrications, falsifications and half-truths, also ignoring most of historical documents and even logic.

    Well, diplomatic dispatches, Hitler’s peace offerings which received no (workable) counter offers, the murder of tens of thousands of German expatriates that wound up in Polish hands after the Diktat of Versailles, say otherwise.

    In fact, the general Polish reactions were threatening, bellicose, and chauvinistic. And yes there were numerous border excursions by Poles.

    Read a book entitled Witness To History by Michael Walsh, which sheds some light onto those miserable occurrences.

    There used to be a website sweetliberty.org that had copies of relevant documents to this issue under a thread entitled How Wars Are Made, but it has been years since I looked there. HdC

    Read More
    • Replies: @szopen
    Oh, so you are one of nazi apologetics. First of all, everything you wrote is a lie.
    (1) There were no tens of thousands murderered Germans in 1939 before German attack.
    (2) Hitler proposals were completely unacceptable: they were "give up what I want, or else I will take it by force". One of proposals was a referendum over whether Pomorze, which was POlish, should be German or Polish: However all German settlers who were settled there during Kulturkampf (sponsored by German colonisation commissions) would have right to vote, as well as all German clerks and military personel, while Poles who settled after 1919 would have no right to vote. It would be like Mexico demanded USA referendum over future of Texas.
    (3) Poland was open to negotiations and Beck many times said clearly, that he is ready to discuss how to make better communication betwee Prussia and the rest of Germany. All those proposals were ignored.
    (4) The documents you talk are exaclty the Nazi propaganda from war, mixed with some true ones, ignoring some other
    (5) Military incidents were constantly provoked by Germany
    (6) Polish minority within Germany was stripped of all rights, and Polish minority activists were arrested and put to concentration camps. Poland reacted to this making some similar measures to German minority activists. Of course, you are neonazi, so you think that's it's ok when Polish schools are closed by Germany, but it's totally wrong when Poland in reaction do the same to Germans.

    I discussed many hours with neonazis, including on this website and I am tired of your shit. Go and lie to someone, who does not know history.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  84. HdC says:
    @AP
    Um...are you suggesting that Poland attacked the Germans and/or the Soviets?

    The poles were murdering German expatriates. See my post #83 below. HdC

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  85. Thirdeye says:
    @HdC
    If you were to really drill down in the causes of WWII you would find that the Poles, egged on by the Brits and the USA president at that time, are the real culprits.

    But that would take intellectual honesty to admit, something sorely lacking in today's PC climate. HdC

    The Polish-German conflict that was the flashpoint for WWII is an example of bluffing gone bad, starting a war that was in neither party’s interests. Hitler had the idea that he could turn Poland into a vassal state like he did with Romania and Hungary. Poland shared Nazi Germany’s rabid hatred of the Soviets, but saw their relationships with France and Britain as a trump card against both the Soviet Union and Germany. From a strictly realpolitik point of view, Poland had to make some unpleasant choices that they were unwilling to face. Poland’s best option would have been to mend fences with the Soviet Union with some revision of the Treaty of Riga, in exchange for a united front against Nazi Germany. Stalin was seeking alliances against Nazi Germany at that point, and a shift in Poland’s stance would have made it possible. Barring that, some sort of vassal status with Nazi Germany, either from a diplomatic or military outcome, was inevitable. But the stupid, ideologically blinded Polish government failed completely to see that, betting on the lame ponies of Britain and France instead. Britain and France had no more luck bluffing Germany into submission than Poland did. Their ability to affect the military outcome in Poland was zero and Hitler knew it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @szopen
    You do realise that Nazis offered us an alliance against USSR and we refused, and that we signed non-aggression pact with USSR shortly after similar pact with Hitler? "Policy of equal distances" was a dogma for Beck (e.g. the same relations with USSR and Germany).

    As for Riga, come on: during peace talks Soviet negotiators offered us more territories (e.g. Minsk) that we finally decided to receive.
    , @HdC
    "Poland’s best option would have been to mend fences with the Soviet Union..."

    Curious; why would you think so? The Soviet Union was a barbarous empire set on world domination surrounded by vassal states, which in fact did happen after WWII (the vassal state bit). Further, its economic activities were not conducive to a decent living standard for its citizens.

    It seems to me that Poland would have been much better off had it made peace with Germany and hitched its economic wagon on the German economy. One of the reasons Poland did not do this is that hey were promised all sorts of benefits by the British and Americans who sold them down the river after the war ie. agreed to have Poland become a vassal state of the Soviet Union. HdC
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  86. Thirdeye says:
    @szopen
    There is a difference between soldiers shooting occasionally PoWs here and there (all armies did that, including Soviets, Poles, allies) and bad conditions in camps resulting in typhus epidemies (and with efforts to improve the conditions and stop the epidemics after parliament sent a comission to investigate them), and the government-supported, deliberately planned murder.

    As for "occupation", my family was "occupying" west Belarus for at least 300 years or more. In the village they lived most of population was Polish. Even today, when majority of Poles were expelled or emigrated in 1950, and even though some ruthenised (about half of my family left there does not speak Polish), there are regions in Western Belarus with majority Polish population.

    The Polish army committed ethnic cleansing and other war crimes against Ukrainian, Belorussian, and Jewish populations during the Polish-Ukrainian and Polish-Soviet wars, in addition to ghastly treatment of POWs. That behavior was underlain by a nationalist ideology centered on “True Catholic Poles.”

    As for “occupation”, my family was “occupying” west Belarus for at least 300 years or more. In the village they lived most of population was Polish.

    That arrangement was fine until the revanchist post-independence government came along and set local populations off against each other. Non-Polish populations under that government found themselves ruled by a hostile occupying power.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    The Polish army committed ethnic cleansing and other war crimes against Ukrainian, Belorussian, and Jewish populations during the Polish-Ukrainian
     
    Could you provide examples of the Polish army's alleged ethnic cleansing against the Ukrainian population during the Polish-Ukrainians war?
    , @szopen
    And Soviets committed terrible crimes against local populations, shooting local Poles, making pogroms and so on.

    There was however no ethnic cleansing policy and Polish army officials were trying to investigate the crimes, stop the perpetrators and introduce discipline. No organised effort, in contrast to Soviet terror campaign, which caused thousands of Poles to flee west.

    As for western Belarus, my family lived there under hostile (Russian or Soviet) rule for quite a some time. In 1860 some members were deported deep into Siberia. I am quite sure that I have my family there.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  87. Thirdeye says:
    @AP

    The Banderites did not stage a “typical peasant revolt.” They identified with the Nazis’ vision of ethnic purity, free from Poles, “Moskals,” and Jews.
     
    The peasants who did most of the slaughtering were not Banderist ideologues. UPA-Banderists helped organize and coordinate their activities but the Ukrainian villagers hacking to death Poles and pillaging their villages were acting out much more ancient patterns that preceded Banderism. These events occurred in a similar region, in an earlier time:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koliyivshchyna


    I can’t fathom what is behind your desire to minimize the crimes of the west Ukrainian Fascists
     
    Please provide a quote where I attempt to minimize the slaughter of up 100,000 Polish civilians by west Ukrainian peasants and fascists.

    The peasants who did most of the slaughtering were not Banderist ideologues. UPA-Banderists helped organize and coordinate their activities…..

    WTF do you think you’re doing with that kind of hair-splitting sophistry?

    Please provide a quote where I attempt to minimize the slaughter of up 100,000 Polish civilians by west Ukrainian peasants and fascists.

    You overlooked at least an equal number of Ukrainians killed by the Banderists. Again. And it was over a much longer time than the reactive paroxysms of violence against the nobles that were the peasant rebellions. It’s like the difference between first and second degree murder.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    The peasants who did most of the slaughtering were not Banderist ideologues. UPA-Banderists helped organize and coordinate their activities…..

    WTF do you think you’re doing with that kind of hair-splitting sophistry?
     
    What hair-splitting? It is reality. Do you have a problem with it for some reason?

    Here is a quote from Volhynia recorded by Polish intelligence, by a young Ukrainian peasant in 1939, well before UPA:

    "We will decorate our pillars with you and our trees with your wives"

    You overlooked at least an equal number of Ukrainians killed by the Banderists. Again.
     
    This number comes from only one source. The info about Poles killed comes from numerous sources.

    Also Banderists were not targeting and slaughtering ethnic Ukrainian villages, but political rivals and those accused of collaborating with Soviets. Those were different phenomena.

    And it was over a much longer time than the reactive paroxysms of violence against the nobles that were the peasant rebellions.
     
    You really don't know what you are writing about, do you. Massacres of Poles occurred in spasms but mostly over the course of summer 1943-spring 1944 in Volhynia and early 1944 to early 1945 in Galicia. The Koliyivshchyna I linked to - the 18th century slaughter of Poles and Jews by Ukrainian peasants - took place from May 1768 to June 1769 . That's 13 months of slaughtering. There is not much difference in time there.

    Have you checked the globe to see if Chelm was int he southwestern of the Russian Empire btw?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  88. AP says:
    @Thirdeye

    The peasants who did most of the slaughtering were not Banderist ideologues. UPA-Banderists helped organize and coordinate their activities.....
     
    WTF do you think you're doing with that kind of hair-splitting sophistry?

    Please provide a quote where I attempt to minimize the slaughter of up 100,000 Polish civilians by west Ukrainian peasants and fascists.
     
    You overlooked at least an equal number of Ukrainians killed by the Banderists. Again. And it was over a much longer time than the reactive paroxysms of violence against the nobles that were the peasant rebellions. It's like the difference between first and second degree murder.

    The peasants who did most of the slaughtering were not Banderist ideologues. UPA-Banderists helped organize and coordinate their activities…..

    WTF do you think you’re doing with that kind of hair-splitting sophistry?

    What hair-splitting? It is reality. Do you have a problem with it for some reason?

    Here is a quote from Volhynia recorded by Polish intelligence, by a young Ukrainian peasant in 1939, well before UPA:

    “We will decorate our pillars with you and our trees with your wives”

    You overlooked at least an equal number of Ukrainians killed by the Banderists. Again.

    This number comes from only one source. The info about Poles killed comes from numerous sources.

    Also Banderists were not targeting and slaughtering ethnic Ukrainian villages, but political rivals and those accused of collaborating with Soviets. Those were different phenomena.

    And it was over a much longer time than the reactive paroxysms of violence against the nobles that were the peasant rebellions.

    You really don’t know what you are writing about, do you. Massacres of Poles occurred in spasms but mostly over the course of summer 1943-spring 1944 in Volhynia and early 1944 to early 1945 in Galicia. The Koliyivshchyna I linked to – the 18th century slaughter of Poles and Jews by Ukrainian peasants – took place from May 1768 to June 1769 . That’s 13 months of slaughtering. There is not much difference in time there.

    Have you checked the globe to see if Chelm was int he southwestern of the Russian Empire btw?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thirdeye

    Also Banderists were not targeting and slaughtering ethnic Ukrainian villages, but political rivals and those accused of collaborating with Soviets. Those were different phenomena.
     
    That's the standard excuse by Bander-apologists for the slaughter of Jews and culturally Russian Ukrainians. The Banderite ideology saw Russian-speaking Orthodox Ukrainians as a different race that invaded "their" territory. What they were doing was ethnic cleansing, just like with the Poles. But don't let those inconvenient facts get in your way if you want to court Ukrainian Fascists.

    No part of Poland was in the southwestern Russian Empire. Chelm is barely in the southern half of Poland.
    , @annamaria
    "...Banderists were not targeting and slaughtering ethnic Ukrainian villages, but political rivals and those accused of collaborating with Soviets..."
    In late 1942, Bandera's organization, the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists, was involved in a campaign of ethnic cleansing of Volhynia, and in early 1944, these campaigns began to include Eastern Galicia. It is estimated that about 100,000 Poles, mostly women and children along with unarmed men, were killed during the spring and summer campaign of 1943 in Volhynia by the OUN-Bandera..."
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stepan_Bandera
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  89. AP says:
    @Thirdeye
    The Polish army committed ethnic cleansing and other war crimes against Ukrainian, Belorussian, and Jewish populations during the Polish-Ukrainian and Polish-Soviet wars, in addition to ghastly treatment of POWs. That behavior was underlain by a nationalist ideology centered on "True Catholic Poles."

    As for “occupation”, my family was “occupying” west Belarus for at least 300 years or more. In the village they lived most of population was Polish.
     
    That arrangement was fine until the revanchist post-independence government came along and set local populations off against each other. Non-Polish populations under that government found themselves ruled by a hostile occupying power.

    The Polish army committed ethnic cleansing and other war crimes against Ukrainian, Belorussian, and Jewish populations during the Polish-Ukrainian

    Could you provide examples of the Polish army’s alleged ethnic cleansing against the Ukrainian population during the Polish-Ukrainians war?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  90. Thirdeye says:
    @AP

    The peasants who did most of the slaughtering were not Banderist ideologues. UPA-Banderists helped organize and coordinate their activities…..

    WTF do you think you’re doing with that kind of hair-splitting sophistry?
     
    What hair-splitting? It is reality. Do you have a problem with it for some reason?

    Here is a quote from Volhynia recorded by Polish intelligence, by a young Ukrainian peasant in 1939, well before UPA:

    "We will decorate our pillars with you and our trees with your wives"

    You overlooked at least an equal number of Ukrainians killed by the Banderists. Again.
     
    This number comes from only one source. The info about Poles killed comes from numerous sources.

    Also Banderists were not targeting and slaughtering ethnic Ukrainian villages, but political rivals and those accused of collaborating with Soviets. Those were different phenomena.

    And it was over a much longer time than the reactive paroxysms of violence against the nobles that were the peasant rebellions.
     
    You really don't know what you are writing about, do you. Massacres of Poles occurred in spasms but mostly over the course of summer 1943-spring 1944 in Volhynia and early 1944 to early 1945 in Galicia. The Koliyivshchyna I linked to - the 18th century slaughter of Poles and Jews by Ukrainian peasants - took place from May 1768 to June 1769 . That's 13 months of slaughtering. There is not much difference in time there.

    Have you checked the globe to see if Chelm was int he southwestern of the Russian Empire btw?

    Also Banderists were not targeting and slaughtering ethnic Ukrainian villages, but political rivals and those accused of collaborating with Soviets. Those were different phenomena.

    That’s the standard excuse by Bander-apologists for the slaughter of Jews and culturally Russian Ukrainians. The Banderite ideology saw Russian-speaking Orthodox Ukrainians as a different race that invaded “their” territory. What they were doing was ethnic cleansing, just like with the Poles. But don’t let those inconvenient facts get in your way if you want to court Ukrainian Fascists.

    No part of Poland was in the southwestern Russian Empire. Chelm is barely in the southern half of Poland.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP


    "Also Banderists were not targeting and slaughtering ethnic Ukrainian villages, but political rivals and those accused of collaborating with Soviets. Those were different phenomena."

    That’s the standard excuse by Bander-apologists for the slaughter of Jews and culturally Russian Ukrainians. The Banderite ideology saw Russian-speaking Orthodox Ukrainians as a different race that invaded “their” territory.
     
    Banderist apologists actually deny that UPA slaughtered large numbers of people.

    Most of Banderist crimes occurred in Volhynia, where the local Ukrainian population who slaughtered Poles are Orthodox.

    Are you just inventing your nonsense as you go along, or do some sources in Russia actually write such nonsense?

    No part of Poland was in the southwestern Russian Empire. Chelm is barely in the southern half of Poland.
     
    Here is a map for Chelm:

    https://www.google.com/maps/place/Chelm,+Poland/@51.1355623,23.4196661,12z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m2!3m1!1s0x47239a58521ea5df:0x52be7d50d032f9f6

    It is directly west of modern Ukraine, which is southwest of Russia. Chelm is slightly south of Saratov and Kursk, the site of Russia's Southwestern State University.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  91. szopen says:
    @HdC
    Well, diplomatic dispatches, Hitler's peace offerings which received no (workable) counter offers, the murder of tens of thousands of German expatriates that wound up in Polish hands after the Diktat of Versailles, say otherwise.

    In fact, the general Polish reactions were threatening, bellicose, and chauvinistic. And yes there were numerous border excursions by Poles.

    Read a book entitled Witness To History by Michael Walsh, which sheds some light onto those miserable occurrences.

    There used to be a website sweetliberty.org that had copies of relevant documents to this issue under a thread entitled How Wars Are Made, but it has been years since I looked there. HdC

    Oh, so you are one of nazi apologetics. First of all, everything you wrote is a lie.
    (1) There were no tens of thousands murderered Germans in 1939 before German attack.
    (2) Hitler proposals were completely unacceptable: they were “give up what I want, or else I will take it by force”. One of proposals was a referendum over whether Pomorze, which was POlish, should be German or Polish: However all German settlers who were settled there during Kulturkampf (sponsored by German colonisation commissions) would have right to vote, as well as all German clerks and military personel, while Poles who settled after 1919 would have no right to vote. It would be like Mexico demanded USA referendum over future of Texas.
    (3) Poland was open to negotiations and Beck many times said clearly, that he is ready to discuss how to make better communication betwee Prussia and the rest of Germany. All those proposals were ignored.
    (4) The documents you talk are exaclty the Nazi propaganda from war, mixed with some true ones, ignoring some other
    (5) Military incidents were constantly provoked by Germany
    (6) Polish minority within Germany was stripped of all rights, and Polish minority activists were arrested and put to concentration camps. Poland reacted to this making some similar measures to German minority activists. Of course, you are neonazi, so you think that’s it’s ok when Polish schools are closed by Germany, but it’s totally wrong when Poland in reaction do the same to Germans.

    I discussed many hours with neonazis, including on this website and I am tired of your shit. Go and lie to someone, who does not know history.

    Read More
    • Replies: @HdC
    Your knowledge is severely limited and one-sided. Hitler's proposals were deemed most reasonable and acceptable by French and British diplomats. Poland was so besotted by the British and American "guarantees" that it maintained its belligerence towards Germany in the face of all reason. The results of this speak for themselves.

    Germans were murdered by the tens of thousands by the Poles, and the border excursions were also by the Poles.

    I have a book on this written by a Hungarian shortly after the war and I will dig it out. My wife and I recently bought a new house and things are still a little in turmoil. HdC
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  92. szopen says:
    @Thirdeye
    The Polish-German conflict that was the flashpoint for WWII is an example of bluffing gone bad, starting a war that was in neither party's interests. Hitler had the idea that he could turn Poland into a vassal state like he did with Romania and Hungary. Poland shared Nazi Germany's rabid hatred of the Soviets, but saw their relationships with France and Britain as a trump card against both the Soviet Union and Germany. From a strictly realpolitik point of view, Poland had to make some unpleasant choices that they were unwilling to face. Poland's best option would have been to mend fences with the Soviet Union with some revision of the Treaty of Riga, in exchange for a united front against Nazi Germany. Stalin was seeking alliances against Nazi Germany at that point, and a shift in Poland's stance would have made it possible. Barring that, some sort of vassal status with Nazi Germany, either from a diplomatic or military outcome, was inevitable. But the stupid, ideologically blinded Polish government failed completely to see that, betting on the lame ponies of Britain and France instead. Britain and France had no more luck bluffing Germany into submission than Poland did. Their ability to affect the military outcome in Poland was zero and Hitler knew it.

    You do realise that Nazis offered us an alliance against USSR and we refused, and that we signed non-aggression pact with USSR shortly after similar pact with Hitler? “Policy of equal distances” was a dogma for Beck (e.g. the same relations with USSR and Germany).

    As for Riga, come on: during peace talks Soviet negotiators offered us more territories (e.g. Minsk) that we finally decided to receive.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thirdeye
    Yes, I realize that. Poland did not want to become a vassal state of Nazi Germany, which is certainly understandable. The "Policy of equal distances" was based on a misplaced faith in the ability of Britain and France to guarantee Poland's security. All Britain and France could do, in the absence of some working arrangement with the Soviet Union (which they demonstrated time and again that they were not interested in) was bluff.

    After the rise of Nazi Germany, Stalin was seeking "anti-Fascist" alliances with western powers. He briefly achieved one with Czechoslovakia, before the Czech government was lured away from it by France. The result was the Munich sellout. The Soviet Union would have been a more reliable partner in facing the Germans than the British and the French turned out to be, for both Czechoslovakia and Poland. That should have been obvious to the Beck government after Munich. The Soviet Union would have had an objective interest in defending a government that they had some constructive relationship with, rather than in just sweeping up the remaining debris after one hostile government was destroyed by another hostile government.

    The territorial concessions made by the Soviet Union at Riga were a ratification of Polish-conquered territory, not some concession made out of the goodness of the Bolsheviks' hearts.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  93. szopen says:
    @Thirdeye
    The Polish army committed ethnic cleansing and other war crimes against Ukrainian, Belorussian, and Jewish populations during the Polish-Ukrainian and Polish-Soviet wars, in addition to ghastly treatment of POWs. That behavior was underlain by a nationalist ideology centered on "True Catholic Poles."

    As for “occupation”, my family was “occupying” west Belarus for at least 300 years or more. In the village they lived most of population was Polish.
     
    That arrangement was fine until the revanchist post-independence government came along and set local populations off against each other. Non-Polish populations under that government found themselves ruled by a hostile occupying power.

    And Soviets committed terrible crimes against local populations, shooting local Poles, making pogroms and so on.

    There was however no ethnic cleansing policy and Polish army officials were trying to investigate the crimes, stop the perpetrators and introduce discipline. No organised effort, in contrast to Soviet terror campaign, which caused thousands of Poles to flee west.

    As for western Belarus, my family lived there under hostile (Russian or Soviet) rule for quite a some time. In 1860 some members were deported deep into Siberia. I am quite sure that I have my family there.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thirdeye
    Nonsense. The Bolsheviks weren't driven by an ethnic-nationalist ideology. They were seeking to gain support for the revolution throughout eastern Europe and into Germany, among Russian and non-Russian ethnicities alike. They were actually harsher towards ethnic Russians than they were towards other nationalities. On the Soviet side at least, the conflict with the Polish government was political, not ethnic.

    Ethnic cleansing within the Polish-conquered territories did not stop with the end of the Polish-Soviet War. It continues to be a grievance of Ukrainians against Poland to this day.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. HdC says:
    @Thirdeye
    The Polish-German conflict that was the flashpoint for WWII is an example of bluffing gone bad, starting a war that was in neither party's interests. Hitler had the idea that he could turn Poland into a vassal state like he did with Romania and Hungary. Poland shared Nazi Germany's rabid hatred of the Soviets, but saw their relationships with France and Britain as a trump card against both the Soviet Union and Germany. From a strictly realpolitik point of view, Poland had to make some unpleasant choices that they were unwilling to face. Poland's best option would have been to mend fences with the Soviet Union with some revision of the Treaty of Riga, in exchange for a united front against Nazi Germany. Stalin was seeking alliances against Nazi Germany at that point, and a shift in Poland's stance would have made it possible. Barring that, some sort of vassal status with Nazi Germany, either from a diplomatic or military outcome, was inevitable. But the stupid, ideologically blinded Polish government failed completely to see that, betting on the lame ponies of Britain and France instead. Britain and France had no more luck bluffing Germany into submission than Poland did. Their ability to affect the military outcome in Poland was zero and Hitler knew it.

    “Poland’s best option would have been to mend fences with the Soviet Union…”

    Curious; why would you think so? The Soviet Union was a barbarous empire set on world domination surrounded by vassal states, which in fact did happen after WWII (the vassal state bit). Further, its economic activities were not conducive to a decent living standard for its citizens.

    It seems to me that Poland would have been much better off had it made peace with Germany and hitched its economic wagon on the German economy. One of the reasons Poland did not do this is that hey were promised all sorts of benefits by the British and Americans who sold them down the river after the war ie. agreed to have Poland become a vassal state of the Soviet Union. HdC

    Read More
    • Replies: @szopen

    One of the reasons Poland did not do this is that hey were promised all sorts of benefits by the British and Americans
     
    No. The reason was that Hitler broke all his promises before. He said Gdańsk is not an issue (And when Germany had no standing army and when Polish army was much larger and could easily overwhelm Germany without any problems). He was lying all the time saying there are absolutely no issues with Poland.

    Then he said he would stop after Anschluss. Then he said Sudetenland would be last step. Then, just few months later, he annexed Bohemia. This meant that any promise he made would be broken and there is no point in giving up on anything, since within few months he would come back with another demand. Why should Polish government believe in anything Hitler would say?
    And why you ignore this context?

    IF, I say IF, he would start negotiations two years earlier, and if he would limit himself to Gdańsk - yes, then I would say his demands would be reasonable and Polish government would be unreasonable not to negotiate. But in 1939? No way.

    Once again, we would fight no matter what the British would do. We would fight with no chances of victory.

    But, of course, as all nazi apologetics, deep down you believe that we, Slavic subhumans, should happily accept anything German ubermenschen offer us, and one should not apply the same rules to us and to Westerners.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  95. HdC says:
    @szopen
    Oh, so you are one of nazi apologetics. First of all, everything you wrote is a lie.
    (1) There were no tens of thousands murderered Germans in 1939 before German attack.
    (2) Hitler proposals were completely unacceptable: they were "give up what I want, or else I will take it by force". One of proposals was a referendum over whether Pomorze, which was POlish, should be German or Polish: However all German settlers who were settled there during Kulturkampf (sponsored by German colonisation commissions) would have right to vote, as well as all German clerks and military personel, while Poles who settled after 1919 would have no right to vote. It would be like Mexico demanded USA referendum over future of Texas.
    (3) Poland was open to negotiations and Beck many times said clearly, that he is ready to discuss how to make better communication betwee Prussia and the rest of Germany. All those proposals were ignored.
    (4) The documents you talk are exaclty the Nazi propaganda from war, mixed with some true ones, ignoring some other
    (5) Military incidents were constantly provoked by Germany
    (6) Polish minority within Germany was stripped of all rights, and Polish minority activists were arrested and put to concentration camps. Poland reacted to this making some similar measures to German minority activists. Of course, you are neonazi, so you think that's it's ok when Polish schools are closed by Germany, but it's totally wrong when Poland in reaction do the same to Germans.

    I discussed many hours with neonazis, including on this website and I am tired of your shit. Go and lie to someone, who does not know history.

    Your knowledge is severely limited and one-sided. Hitler’s proposals were deemed most reasonable and acceptable by French and British diplomats. Poland was so besotted by the British and American “guarantees” that it maintained its belligerence towards Germany in the face of all reason. The results of this speak for themselves.

    Germans were murdered by the tens of thousands by the Poles, and the border excursions were also by the Poles.

    I have a book on this written by a Hungarian shortly after the war and I will dig it out. My wife and I recently bought a new house and things are still a little in turmoil. HdC

    Read More
    • Replies: @szopen
    No,. You are simply repeating the lies which were uttered by Hitler, and then are blindly accepted as truth by neonazis and Hitler admirers. Germans were not murdered by thousands, and even not by tens. German units were harassing Polish border quite a few times, most famously when Hitler postponed order of attack and one unit had not received this order.

    Germans proposals were completely insane (Except maybe about Gdańsk), and only complete lunatic Poland could even consider them, as they supposed completely assymetric relations: that Poland would give up some parts of her territory in exchange for Hitler saying he won't want the rest. In addition, you have to take the context into the account: Hitler broke every effing promise made before. Heck, just few years earlier he was saying Danzig is not a problem.

    And even if British and French would back Hitler, we would fight anyway. It's better to die than to bend over.

    Poland was not belligerent. In fact, Polish government position was "we are ready to negotiate and we will negotiate, but we refuse to be subdued. If you want to fight, we will fight".

    If you believe otherwise, it means your knowledge comes solely from nazi propaganda and you have not even read anything from Polish point of view.

    Once again, imagine Mexico would start accusing USA about murdering Mexicans and demand that referndum should be organised on New Mexico, overseen by United Nations. You think those would be reasonable demands?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  96. AP says:
    @Thirdeye

    Also Banderists were not targeting and slaughtering ethnic Ukrainian villages, but political rivals and those accused of collaborating with Soviets. Those were different phenomena.
     
    That's the standard excuse by Bander-apologists for the slaughter of Jews and culturally Russian Ukrainians. The Banderite ideology saw Russian-speaking Orthodox Ukrainians as a different race that invaded "their" territory. What they were doing was ethnic cleansing, just like with the Poles. But don't let those inconvenient facts get in your way if you want to court Ukrainian Fascists.

    No part of Poland was in the southwestern Russian Empire. Chelm is barely in the southern half of Poland.

    “Also Banderists were not targeting and slaughtering ethnic Ukrainian villages, but political rivals and those accused of collaborating with Soviets. Those were different phenomena.”

    That’s the standard excuse by Bander-apologists for the slaughter of Jews and culturally Russian Ukrainians. The Banderite ideology saw Russian-speaking Orthodox Ukrainians as a different race that invaded “their” territory.

    Banderist apologists actually deny that UPA slaughtered large numbers of people.

    Most of Banderist crimes occurred in Volhynia, where the local Ukrainian population who slaughtered Poles are Orthodox.

    Are you just inventing your nonsense as you go along, or do some sources in Russia actually write such nonsense?

    No part of Poland was in the southwestern Russian Empire. Chelm is barely in the southern half of Poland.

    Here is a map for Chelm:

    https://www.google.com/maps/place/Chelm,+Poland/@51.1355623,23.4196661,12z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m2!3m1!1s0x47239a58521ea5df:0x52be7d50d032f9f6

    It is directly west of modern Ukraine, which is southwest of Russia. Chelm is slightly south of Saratov and Kursk, the site of Russia’s Southwestern State University.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thirdeye

    Banderist apologists actually deny that UPA slaughtered large numbers of people.
     
    So in your Banderite ass-kissing you propose to meet them halfway. You agree that they slaughtered large numbers of ethnic Poles, but deny that they slaughtered large numbers of Jews and ethnic Ukrainians. And the ones that did get slaughtered deserved it because they were probably Commies. Got it.

    The Banderites were overwhelmingly Uniate. They viewed Orthodox as an anti-Ukrainian religion of eastern "invaders." That attitude persists among west-Ukrainian Uniate Fascists. "Украина Европа!"

    [Chelm] is directly west of modern Ukraine, which is southwest of Russia.
     
    All but a small portion of Ukraine is south of Chelm and parts of Russia are south of Ukraine. Anyway, this has become a "tomayto" vs "tomahto" argument.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  97. annamaria says:
    @AP

    The peasants who did most of the slaughtering were not Banderist ideologues. UPA-Banderists helped organize and coordinate their activities…..

    WTF do you think you’re doing with that kind of hair-splitting sophistry?
     
    What hair-splitting? It is reality. Do you have a problem with it for some reason?

    Here is a quote from Volhynia recorded by Polish intelligence, by a young Ukrainian peasant in 1939, well before UPA:

    "We will decorate our pillars with you and our trees with your wives"

    You overlooked at least an equal number of Ukrainians killed by the Banderists. Again.
     
    This number comes from only one source. The info about Poles killed comes from numerous sources.

    Also Banderists were not targeting and slaughtering ethnic Ukrainian villages, but political rivals and those accused of collaborating with Soviets. Those were different phenomena.

    And it was over a much longer time than the reactive paroxysms of violence against the nobles that were the peasant rebellions.
     
    You really don't know what you are writing about, do you. Massacres of Poles occurred in spasms but mostly over the course of summer 1943-spring 1944 in Volhynia and early 1944 to early 1945 in Galicia. The Koliyivshchyna I linked to - the 18th century slaughter of Poles and Jews by Ukrainian peasants - took place from May 1768 to June 1769 . That's 13 months of slaughtering. There is not much difference in time there.

    Have you checked the globe to see if Chelm was int he southwestern of the Russian Empire btw?

    “…Banderists were not targeting and slaughtering ethnic Ukrainian villages, but political rivals and those accused of collaborating with Soviets…”
    In late 1942, Bandera’s organization, the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists, was involved in a campaign of ethnic cleansing of Volhynia, and in early 1944, these campaigns began to include Eastern Galicia. It is estimated that about 100,000 Poles, mostly women and children along with unarmed men, were killed during the spring and summer campaign of 1943 in Volhynia by the OUN-Bandera…”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stepan_Bandera

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP
    Um...your quote doesn't contradict what I wrote.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  98. szopen says:
    @HdC
    Your knowledge is severely limited and one-sided. Hitler's proposals were deemed most reasonable and acceptable by French and British diplomats. Poland was so besotted by the British and American "guarantees" that it maintained its belligerence towards Germany in the face of all reason. The results of this speak for themselves.

    Germans were murdered by the tens of thousands by the Poles, and the border excursions were also by the Poles.

    I have a book on this written by a Hungarian shortly after the war and I will dig it out. My wife and I recently bought a new house and things are still a little in turmoil. HdC

    No,. You are simply repeating the lies which were uttered by Hitler, and then are blindly accepted as truth by neonazis and Hitler admirers. Germans were not murdered by thousands, and even not by tens. German units were harassing Polish border quite a few times, most famously when Hitler postponed order of attack and one unit had not received this order.

    Germans proposals were completely insane (Except maybe about Gdańsk), and only complete lunatic Poland could even consider them, as they supposed completely assymetric relations: that Poland would give up some parts of her territory in exchange for Hitler saying he won’t want the rest. In addition, you have to take the context into the account: Hitler broke every effing promise made before. Heck, just few years earlier he was saying Danzig is not a problem.

    And even if British and French would back Hitler, we would fight anyway. It’s better to die than to bend over.

    Poland was not belligerent. In fact, Polish government position was “we are ready to negotiate and we will negotiate, but we refuse to be subdued. If you want to fight, we will fight”.

    If you believe otherwise, it means your knowledge comes solely from nazi propaganda and you have not even read anything from Polish point of view.

    Once again, imagine Mexico would start accusing USA about murdering Mexicans and demand that referndum should be organised on New Mexico, overseen by United Nations. You think those would be reasonable demands?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  99. szopen says:
    @HdC
    "Poland’s best option would have been to mend fences with the Soviet Union..."

    Curious; why would you think so? The Soviet Union was a barbarous empire set on world domination surrounded by vassal states, which in fact did happen after WWII (the vassal state bit). Further, its economic activities were not conducive to a decent living standard for its citizens.

    It seems to me that Poland would have been much better off had it made peace with Germany and hitched its economic wagon on the German economy. One of the reasons Poland did not do this is that hey were promised all sorts of benefits by the British and Americans who sold them down the river after the war ie. agreed to have Poland become a vassal state of the Soviet Union. HdC

    One of the reasons Poland did not do this is that hey were promised all sorts of benefits by the British and Americans

    No. The reason was that Hitler broke all his promises before. He said Gdańsk is not an issue (And when Germany had no standing army and when Polish army was much larger and could easily overwhelm Germany without any problems). He was lying all the time saying there are absolutely no issues with Poland.

    Then he said he would stop after Anschluss. Then he said Sudetenland would be last step. Then, just few months later, he annexed Bohemia. This meant that any promise he made would be broken and there is no point in giving up on anything, since within few months he would come back with another demand. Why should Polish government believe in anything Hitler would say?
    And why you ignore this context?

    IF, I say IF, he would start negotiations two years earlier, and if he would limit himself to Gdańsk – yes, then I would say his demands would be reasonable and Polish government would be unreasonable not to negotiate. But in 1939? No way.

    Once again, we would fight no matter what the British would do. We would fight with no chances of victory.

    But, of course, as all nazi apologetics, deep down you believe that we, Slavic subhumans, should happily accept anything German ubermenschen offer us, and one should not apply the same rules to us and to Westerners.

    Read More
    • Replies: @HdC
    Now I get it! Poles always tell the truth! Gee whillikers, why didn't I realize this all along???

    I'm afraid that your very own newspaper headlines of the times contradict your assertions; further, I have pointed out references that contradict everything you claim.

    The Polish government between the wars was belligerent, chauvinistic, lying (as m0st governments now), etc. etc. and would not discuss any reasonable plan with the Germans.

    You can fulminate all you want but the diplomatic dispatches of the times (British, French, Polish, etc.) bear me out.

    Calling me names does not change anything; remember: Ad hominem attacks are the final refuge of the out-argued scoundrel.

    Over and out. HdC
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  100. AP says:
    @annamaria
    "...Banderists were not targeting and slaughtering ethnic Ukrainian villages, but political rivals and those accused of collaborating with Soviets..."
    In late 1942, Bandera's organization, the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists, was involved in a campaign of ethnic cleansing of Volhynia, and in early 1944, these campaigns began to include Eastern Galicia. It is estimated that about 100,000 Poles, mostly women and children along with unarmed men, were killed during the spring and summer campaign of 1943 in Volhynia by the OUN-Bandera..."
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stepan_Bandera

    Um…your quote doesn’t contradict what I wrote.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  101. HdC says:
    @szopen

    One of the reasons Poland did not do this is that hey were promised all sorts of benefits by the British and Americans
     
    No. The reason was that Hitler broke all his promises before. He said Gdańsk is not an issue (And when Germany had no standing army and when Polish army was much larger and could easily overwhelm Germany without any problems). He was lying all the time saying there are absolutely no issues with Poland.

    Then he said he would stop after Anschluss. Then he said Sudetenland would be last step. Then, just few months later, he annexed Bohemia. This meant that any promise he made would be broken and there is no point in giving up on anything, since within few months he would come back with another demand. Why should Polish government believe in anything Hitler would say?
    And why you ignore this context?

    IF, I say IF, he would start negotiations two years earlier, and if he would limit himself to Gdańsk - yes, then I would say his demands would be reasonable and Polish government would be unreasonable not to negotiate. But in 1939? No way.

    Once again, we would fight no matter what the British would do. We would fight with no chances of victory.

    But, of course, as all nazi apologetics, deep down you believe that we, Slavic subhumans, should happily accept anything German ubermenschen offer us, and one should not apply the same rules to us and to Westerners.

    Now I get it! Poles always tell the truth! Gee whillikers, why didn’t I realize this all along???

    I’m afraid that your very own newspaper headlines of the times contradict your assertions; further, I have pointed out references that contradict everything you claim.

    The Polish government between the wars was belligerent, chauvinistic, lying (as m0st governments now), etc. etc. and would not discuss any reasonable plan with the Germans.

    You can fulminate all you want but the diplomatic dispatches of the times (British, French, Polish, etc.) bear me out.

    Calling me names does not change anything; remember: Ad hominem attacks are the final refuge of the out-argued scoundrel.

    Over and out. HdC

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  102. Thirdeye says:
    @szopen
    You do realise that Nazis offered us an alliance against USSR and we refused, and that we signed non-aggression pact with USSR shortly after similar pact with Hitler? "Policy of equal distances" was a dogma for Beck (e.g. the same relations with USSR and Germany).

    As for Riga, come on: during peace talks Soviet negotiators offered us more territories (e.g. Minsk) that we finally decided to receive.

    Yes, I realize that. Poland did not want to become a vassal state of Nazi Germany, which is certainly understandable. The “Policy of equal distances” was based on a misplaced faith in the ability of Britain and France to guarantee Poland’s security. All Britain and France could do, in the absence of some working arrangement with the Soviet Union (which they demonstrated time and again that they were not interested in) was bluff.

    After the rise of Nazi Germany, Stalin was seeking “anti-Fascist” alliances with western powers. He briefly achieved one with Czechoslovakia, before the Czech government was lured away from it by France. The result was the Munich sellout. The Soviet Union would have been a more reliable partner in facing the Germans than the British and the French turned out to be, for both Czechoslovakia and Poland. That should have been obvious to the Beck government after Munich. The Soviet Union would have had an objective interest in defending a government that they had some constructive relationship with, rather than in just sweeping up the remaining debris after one hostile government was destroyed by another hostile government.

    The territorial concessions made by the Soviet Union at Riga were a ratification of Polish-conquered territory, not some concession made out of the goodness of the Bolsheviks’ hearts.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  103. Thirdeye says:
    @szopen
    And Soviets committed terrible crimes against local populations, shooting local Poles, making pogroms and so on.

    There was however no ethnic cleansing policy and Polish army officials were trying to investigate the crimes, stop the perpetrators and introduce discipline. No organised effort, in contrast to Soviet terror campaign, which caused thousands of Poles to flee west.

    As for western Belarus, my family lived there under hostile (Russian or Soviet) rule for quite a some time. In 1860 some members were deported deep into Siberia. I am quite sure that I have my family there.

    Nonsense. The Bolsheviks weren’t driven by an ethnic-nationalist ideology. They were seeking to gain support for the revolution throughout eastern Europe and into Germany, among Russian and non-Russian ethnicities alike. They were actually harsher towards ethnic Russians than they were towards other nationalities. On the Soviet side at least, the conflict with the Polish government was political, not ethnic.

    Ethnic cleansing within the Polish-conquered territories did not stop with the end of the Polish-Soviet War. It continues to be a grievance of Ukrainians against Poland to this day.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  104. Jim says:
    @schmenz
    A very informative article. I admit I do not understand Poland's fear of today's Russia, and I do know they are unfortunately susceptible to US propaganda, but it does seem their actions of inviting in US weapons and keeping the hatred of Russia alive is rather like shooting yourself in the foot.

    If you knew more about Poland’s history you would better be able to understand their feelings toward Russia.

    Read More
    • Replies: @schmenz
    Thanks, Jim.

    What I think most people who have responded to my comment have overlooked is the operative word in that post: "today's". In other words, what is it about TODAY'S Russia that bothers TODAY'S Poland? That is what I would like to know.

    Since I have seen no aggressive moves by Russia against Poland in the current news I would like to be informed what the trouble is about, these days, that continues this Polish and Russian distrust for each other.

    I am aware that many Polish farmers are enraged at the sanctions imposed against Russia which has lowered their income considerably, but I would imagine these farmers would be directing their anger not at Russia but the EU/USA.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  105. Thirdeye says:
    @AP


    "Also Banderists were not targeting and slaughtering ethnic Ukrainian villages, but political rivals and those accused of collaborating with Soviets. Those were different phenomena."

    That’s the standard excuse by Bander-apologists for the slaughter of Jews and culturally Russian Ukrainians. The Banderite ideology saw Russian-speaking Orthodox Ukrainians as a different race that invaded “their” territory.
     
    Banderist apologists actually deny that UPA slaughtered large numbers of people.

    Most of Banderist crimes occurred in Volhynia, where the local Ukrainian population who slaughtered Poles are Orthodox.

    Are you just inventing your nonsense as you go along, or do some sources in Russia actually write such nonsense?

    No part of Poland was in the southwestern Russian Empire. Chelm is barely in the southern half of Poland.
     
    Here is a map for Chelm:

    https://www.google.com/maps/place/Chelm,+Poland/@51.1355623,23.4196661,12z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m2!3m1!1s0x47239a58521ea5df:0x52be7d50d032f9f6

    It is directly west of modern Ukraine, which is southwest of Russia. Chelm is slightly south of Saratov and Kursk, the site of Russia's Southwestern State University.

    Banderist apologists actually deny that UPA slaughtered large numbers of people.

    So in your Banderite ass-kissing you propose to meet them halfway. You agree that they slaughtered large numbers of ethnic Poles, but deny that they slaughtered large numbers of Jews and ethnic Ukrainians. And the ones that did get slaughtered deserved it because they were probably Commies. Got it.

    The Banderites were overwhelmingly Uniate. They viewed Orthodox as an anti-Ukrainian religion of eastern “invaders.” That attitude persists among west-Ukrainian Uniate Fascists. “Украина Европа!”

    [Chelm] is directly west of modern Ukraine, which is southwest of Russia.

    All but a small portion of Ukraine is south of Chelm and parts of Russia are south of Ukraine. Anyway, this has become a “tomayto” vs “tomahto” argument.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    So in your Banderite ass-kissing
     
    Point out what I wrote was "ass-kissing."

    You agree that they slaughtered large numbers of ethnic Poles, but deny that they slaughtered large numbers of Jews and ethnic Ukrainians.
     
    Unlike you, who invents things like Latvian Catholics, Polish ethnic cleansing of Ukrainians in 1919, I stick with known facts. It is known and the consensus that UPA and its peasants slaughtered 80,000 - 100,00 ethnic Poles. One source claims a similar number of Ukrainian victims, but this is an outlier. I haven't mentioned Jewish victims, why do you lie by claiming I denied that UPA slaughtered large numbers of Jews?

    The Banderites were overwhelmingly Uniate. They viewed Orthodox as an anti-Ukrainian religion of eastern “invaders.”
     
    An analysis of "official" UPA members shows about 60% were Uniate and 30% Orthodox. The peasant-killers who joined UPA in Volyn were almost all Orthodox, as Volyn was Orthodox territory.

    You really are clueless, aren't you.

    And the ones that did get slaughtered deserved it because they were probably Commies. Got it.
     
    UPA slaughtered Commie informers, Melnyks followers, people who hid Poles, etc. They even murdered a Greek Catholic (Uniate) priest who condemned the anti-Polish murders from his pulpit.

    [Chelm] is directly west of modern Ukraine, which is southwest of Russia.

    All but a small portion of Ukraine is south of Chelm and parts of Russia are south of Ukraine. Anyway, this has become a “tomayto” vs “tomahto” argument.
     
    We were discussing southwest of the Russian Empire, not southwest of Ukraine. Chelm, like the Ukrainian territory to the east of it, was in the southwestern part of the Russian Empire.

    What argument can we expect next from you? That the sky isn't blue on a sunny day?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  106. The Kulak says:
    @AP

    The Banderites did not stage a “typical peasant revolt.” They identified with the Nazis’ vision of ethnic purity, free from Poles, “Moskals,” and Jews.
     
    The peasants who did most of the slaughtering were not Banderist ideologues. UPA-Banderists helped organize and coordinate their activities but the Ukrainian villagers hacking to death Poles and pillaging their villages were acting out much more ancient patterns that preceded Banderism. These events occurred in a similar region, in an earlier time:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koliyivshchyna


    I can’t fathom what is behind your desire to minimize the crimes of the west Ukrainian Fascists
     
    Please provide a quote where I attempt to minimize the slaughter of up 100,000 Polish civilians by west Ukrainian peasants and fascists.

    You know AP, there’s a Polish film called ‘Volyn’ coming out, right? You’ve seen the videos of Polish soccer hooligans chanting, “Vilna and Lvov are Polish, Bandera is a d-ck” probably emphasizing the latter epithet in the Ukrainian style of huil-o when a Galician squad comes to play in Poland?

    Yes we know the Poles who went to Donetsk and said they too, sympathized with the struggle against Banderism were a tiny minority. So what? That doesn’t mean many of your countrymen would be very happy with your attempts to downplay the viciousness and thuggishness of the UPA or to pretend that the current U.S./IMFer funded Kiev regime glorifying them and Bandera isn’t a problem. The older Poles I’ve spoken with in the U.S. don’t like that legacy very much at all. Trying to pretend all the hipsters and State Dept. sponsored tech camp participants you’d meet in Kiev or Lvov are typically representative of Ukraine as a whole is one technique the RFE/RL and MSM propaganda use. The other is to simply not talk about Ukrainian war crimes while endlessly playing up stupid propaganda stories that made into Russian media, so that somehow if the boy was never crucified in Slavyansk that means that all of the civilians shot there were killed by Strelkov and co rather than the Right Sector Nazis, and we can forget about Banderites burning people to death in Odessa and Kiev not prosecuting a single one of them, massive indiscriminate punishment shelling of civilian areas, and Poroshenko declaring Ukraine will win the war by forcing Donbass kids to hide in basements.

    I was raised on the ‘Christ between two thieves’ narrative of Polish history that by and large prevailed after WWII because it was politically convenient during the Cold War. Things like the Poles somewhat dealing with the OUN pre-WWII like the Brits dealt with the IRA, or taking a piece of Slovakia as part of the Munich agreement, did not really become known to me until well into my 30s. Nor did I learn about a few of the postwar Polish progroms of Jews, though the claim that Poles killed as many Jews as the Germans is laughable (with that said many of the SS Totenkopf guards were western Ukrainian greater Galicia Nazis and like the Utsashe Croats many of them were more sadistic than the Germans ever were).

    So yes, you can try insisting on your ‘Poles and Ukrainians are one big happy family and anybody who suggests otherwise has bought the Kremlin propaganda’ rhetoric. But I doubt that many Polish nationalists themselves buy it. And they’d probably be disgusted with your whataboutism comparing massacres of a few thousand people in a Ukrainian peasants revolt to a Nazi-abetted modern ethnic cleansing/terror campaign that claimed the lives of over 100,000 Poles.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  107. AP says:
    @Thirdeye

    Banderist apologists actually deny that UPA slaughtered large numbers of people.
     
    So in your Banderite ass-kissing you propose to meet them halfway. You agree that they slaughtered large numbers of ethnic Poles, but deny that they slaughtered large numbers of Jews and ethnic Ukrainians. And the ones that did get slaughtered deserved it because they were probably Commies. Got it.

    The Banderites were overwhelmingly Uniate. They viewed Orthodox as an anti-Ukrainian religion of eastern "invaders." That attitude persists among west-Ukrainian Uniate Fascists. "Украина Европа!"

    [Chelm] is directly west of modern Ukraine, which is southwest of Russia.
     
    All but a small portion of Ukraine is south of Chelm and parts of Russia are south of Ukraine. Anyway, this has become a "tomayto" vs "tomahto" argument.

    So in your Banderite ass-kissing

    Point out what I wrote was “ass-kissing.”

    You agree that they slaughtered large numbers of ethnic Poles, but deny that they slaughtered large numbers of Jews and ethnic Ukrainians.

    Unlike you, who invents things like Latvian Catholics, Polish ethnic cleansing of Ukrainians in 1919, I stick with known facts. It is known and the consensus that UPA and its peasants slaughtered 80,000 – 100,00 ethnic Poles. One source claims a similar number of Ukrainian victims, but this is an outlier. I haven’t mentioned Jewish victims, why do you lie by claiming I denied that UPA slaughtered large numbers of Jews?

    The Banderites were overwhelmingly Uniate. They viewed Orthodox as an anti-Ukrainian religion of eastern “invaders.”

    An analysis of “official” UPA members shows about 60% were Uniate and 30% Orthodox. The peasant-killers who joined UPA in Volyn were almost all Orthodox, as Volyn was Orthodox territory.

    You really are clueless, aren’t you.

    And the ones that did get slaughtered deserved it because they were probably Commies. Got it.

    UPA slaughtered Commie informers, Melnyks followers, people who hid Poles, etc. They even murdered a Greek Catholic (Uniate) priest who condemned the anti-Polish murders from his pulpit.

    [Chelm] is directly west of modern Ukraine, which is southwest of Russia.

    All but a small portion of Ukraine is south of Chelm and parts of Russia are south of Ukraine. Anyway, this has become a “tomayto” vs “tomahto” argument.

    We were discussing southwest of the Russian Empire, not southwest of Ukraine. Chelm, like the Ukrainian territory to the east of it, was in the southwestern part of the Russian Empire.

    What argument can we expect next from you? That the sky isn’t blue on a sunny day?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  108. anon • Disclaimer says:

    What I find so baffling is how seriously the Poles took the ludicrous British offer of a territorial guarantee. It should have been perfectly obvious that it was only a bluff and there was no way they could make good on it. But the dim-witted Polish leaders took it at face value and fully expected a vigorous Franco-British offensive on the Rhine as soon as the Germans attacked. Actually not only was there never any ‘attack’ but once the Soviet Union joined Germany in the devouring of Poland, the British government desperately looked over their statement to ensure that it would not legally require any similar war declaration against the USSR.

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    It was poetic justice. To get the guarantee, Beck had claimed to the British that there was no present problem with Germany at all, though in fact Hitler was already pressing his demands. Just as they had taken these statements of his at face value without probing them, so the Poles proceeded to accept the western promises of effective military support without investigating or dissecting them at all in a practical sense. Their own deceptions made them prey to being deceived.
    , @szopen
    British gvt need not to seek "desperately", because it was clearly said in the secret addendum, that guarantee was only against German aggression. As for French, they were our allies, dammit. And offensive in September, when most of German forces was committed to the east was the best option from the military point of view. What the French did - wait until Germans finish second front, rebuilt their forces and prepare - was the stupidest possible move. Who could expect they would do something such stupid?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  109. 5371 says:
    @anon
    What I find so baffling is how seriously the Poles took the ludicrous British offer of a territorial guarantee. It should have been perfectly obvious that it was only a bluff and there was no way they could make good on it. But the dim-witted Polish leaders took it at face value and fully expected a vigorous Franco-British offensive on the Rhine as soon as the Germans attacked. Actually not only was there never any 'attack' but once the Soviet Union joined Germany in the devouring of Poland, the British government desperately looked over their statement to ensure that it would not legally require any similar war declaration against the USSR.

    It was poetic justice. To get the guarantee, Beck had claimed to the British that there was no present problem with Germany at all, though in fact Hitler was already pressing his demands. Just as they had taken these statements of his at face value without probing them, so the Poles proceeded to accept the western promises of effective military support without investigating or dissecting them at all in a practical sense. Their own deceptions made them prey to being deceived.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SZOPEN
    One of those days you will read some memoires of Polish diplomats and soldiers instead of creating ad hoc hypothesis of what they thought.

    Especially the claim that "Beck had claimed to the British that there was no present problem with Germany at all" is ridiculous even after reading Henderson's report and knowing that Hitler made public announcement months before British guarantees, and British envoy was travelling between Berlin and Warsaw all the time.

    As for taking French and British offers - while British offers were indeed ridiculous, French offer was believeable and in fact doable. French were able to start military actions within the limits the imposed and, if they would want to, they could start offensive in September 1939. British surely could not sent the carrier to Baltic of Black Sea, but they surely could do at least limiting bombing campaign instead of just flying propaganda cards over Germany.

    And remember that _we had military alliance with France_, alliance which was created years before 1939 (though France has also alliance with Czechoslovakia).

    You really, really should read some Polish sources.

    In fact, if we really had believe British, the military plan would be completely different. However, because we have suspected British and French would use any pretext to abandon their promises, the decision was for example to defend Pomorze, even though it was clearly indefensible. The plan was to fight there and then withdraw after few days. If there would no fight, the thinking went, Hitler could just claim that Poland does not really want Pomorze and he stops offensive, at which point British would happily say "well, OK, another success of our diplomacy - we stopped war", and then we would be alone. Whole defense plan was dictated more by politics, than by military needs.

    It's easy to think some of Polish decisions in 1939 were stupid from our point of view. But politicians and generals in 1939 had no access to our knowledge and they tried to make best of knowledge they possessed.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  110. SZOPEN says:
    @5371
    It was poetic justice. To get the guarantee, Beck had claimed to the British that there was no present problem with Germany at all, though in fact Hitler was already pressing his demands. Just as they had taken these statements of his at face value without probing them, so the Poles proceeded to accept the western promises of effective military support without investigating or dissecting them at all in a practical sense. Their own deceptions made them prey to being deceived.

    One of those days you will read some memoires of Polish diplomats and soldiers instead of creating ad hoc hypothesis of what they thought.

    Especially the claim that “Beck had claimed to the British that there was no present problem with Germany at all” is ridiculous even after reading Henderson’s report and knowing that Hitler made public announcement months before British guarantees, and British envoy was travelling between Berlin and Warsaw all the time.

    As for taking French and British offers – while British offers were indeed ridiculous, French offer was believeable and in fact doable. French were able to start military actions within the limits the imposed and, if they would want to, they could start offensive in September 1939. British surely could not sent the carrier to Baltic of Black Sea, but they surely could do at least limiting bombing campaign instead of just flying propaganda cards over Germany.

    And remember that _we had military alliance with France_, alliance which was created years before 1939 (though France has also alliance with Czechoslovakia).

    You really, really should read some Polish sources.

    In fact, if we really had believe British, the military plan would be completely different. However, because we have suspected British and French would use any pretext to abandon their promises, the decision was for example to defend Pomorze, even though it was clearly indefensible. The plan was to fight there and then withdraw after few days. If there would no fight, the thinking went, Hitler could just claim that Poland does not really want Pomorze and he stops offensive, at which point British would happily say “well, OK, another success of our diplomacy – we stopped war”, and then we would be alone. Whole defense plan was dictated more by politics, than by military needs.

    It’s easy to think some of Polish decisions in 1939 were stupid from our point of view. But politicians and generals in 1939 had no access to our knowledge and they tried to make best of knowledge they possessed.

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    [One of those days you will read some memoires of Polish diplomats and soldiers instead of creating ad hoc hypothesis of what they thought.]

    News flash: it's not just German diplomats and soldiers who had to rewrite history in their memoirs to make themselves seem more foresighted than they had been.

    [the claim that “Beck had claimed to the British that there was no present problem with Germany at all” is ridiculous]

    Tell that to the British who were there at the meeting in the Foreign Office with him and recorded his remarks in detail at the time. He said that what the Germans really wanted was overseas colonies (back then the Poles hoped to be allowed to grab some themselves).

    [though France has also alliance with Czechoslovakia]

    Indeed.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  111. szopen says:
    @anon
    What I find so baffling is how seriously the Poles took the ludicrous British offer of a territorial guarantee. It should have been perfectly obvious that it was only a bluff and there was no way they could make good on it. But the dim-witted Polish leaders took it at face value and fully expected a vigorous Franco-British offensive on the Rhine as soon as the Germans attacked. Actually not only was there never any 'attack' but once the Soviet Union joined Germany in the devouring of Poland, the British government desperately looked over their statement to ensure that it would not legally require any similar war declaration against the USSR.

    British gvt need not to seek “desperately”, because it was clearly said in the secret addendum, that guarantee was only against German aggression. As for French, they were our allies, dammit. And offensive in September, when most of German forces was committed to the east was the best option from the military point of view. What the French did – wait until Germans finish second front, rebuilt their forces and prepare – was the stupidest possible move. Who could expect they would do something such stupid?

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    My source for saying the British government "desperately" tried to make sure they were not legally obligated to fight the Soviet Union over its transgressions against Poland is from the book; Stalin and the shaping of the Soviet Union, by Alex De Jonge. He also writes about how the British were afraid they could not legally honor the Yalta agreement ceding 100,000 square miles of pre-1939 Polish territory to the USSR in 1944 for the same reason.

    As far as the French being 'allies' before the war, whatever the treaty may have said, any intelligent eastern European diplomat or general should have realized once France built the Maginot line, it was clear they had no intention to move beyond it. France had taken huge casualties during the Great war and was not going to repeat that experience. France saw its eastern "allies" only as cannon fodder to draw German troops away from an attack on France. The French never seriously considered leaving the Maginot wall (thus negating it) to come to the aid of any country in east Europe.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  112. 5371 says:
    @SZOPEN
    One of those days you will read some memoires of Polish diplomats and soldiers instead of creating ad hoc hypothesis of what they thought.

    Especially the claim that "Beck had claimed to the British that there was no present problem with Germany at all" is ridiculous even after reading Henderson's report and knowing that Hitler made public announcement months before British guarantees, and British envoy was travelling between Berlin and Warsaw all the time.

    As for taking French and British offers - while British offers were indeed ridiculous, French offer was believeable and in fact doable. French were able to start military actions within the limits the imposed and, if they would want to, they could start offensive in September 1939. British surely could not sent the carrier to Baltic of Black Sea, but they surely could do at least limiting bombing campaign instead of just flying propaganda cards over Germany.

    And remember that _we had military alliance with France_, alliance which was created years before 1939 (though France has also alliance with Czechoslovakia).

    You really, really should read some Polish sources.

    In fact, if we really had believe British, the military plan would be completely different. However, because we have suspected British and French would use any pretext to abandon their promises, the decision was for example to defend Pomorze, even though it was clearly indefensible. The plan was to fight there and then withdraw after few days. If there would no fight, the thinking went, Hitler could just claim that Poland does not really want Pomorze and he stops offensive, at which point British would happily say "well, OK, another success of our diplomacy - we stopped war", and then we would be alone. Whole defense plan was dictated more by politics, than by military needs.

    It's easy to think some of Polish decisions in 1939 were stupid from our point of view. But politicians and generals in 1939 had no access to our knowledge and they tried to make best of knowledge they possessed.

    [One of those days you will read some memoires of Polish diplomats and soldiers instead of creating ad hoc hypothesis of what they thought.]

    News flash: it’s not just German diplomats and soldiers who had to rewrite history in their memoirs to make themselves seem more foresighted than they had been.

    [the claim that “Beck had claimed to the British that there was no present problem with Germany at all” is ridiculous]

    Tell that to the British who were there at the meeting in the Foreign Office with him and recorded his remarks in detail at the time. He said that what the Germans really wanted was overseas colonies (back then the Poles hoped to be allowed to grab some themselves).

    [though France has also alliance with Czechoslovakia]

    Indeed.

    Read More
    • Replies: @szopen

    Tell that to the British who were there at the meeting in the Foreign Office with him and recorded his remarks in detail at the time. He said that what the Germans really wanted was overseas colonies (back then the Poles hoped to be allowed to grab some themselves).
     
    Link to the remarks, please. That would mean that Beck considered British total idiots.
    , @Regnum Nostrum

    Tell that to the British who were there at the meeting in the Foreign Office with him and recorded his remarks in detail at the time. He said that what the Germans really wanted was overseas colonies (back then the Poles hoped to be allowed to grab some themselves).
     
    Hitler made it abundantly clear what he wanted in Mein Kampf and it was not overseas colonies. What he wanted was Lebensraum in the East.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  113. szopen says:

    TO ALL:
    Here is a primer of Polish point of view from 1939. Consider all the following facts and opinions, and then think what you would do in Polish place in 1939.

    (1) For the last 20 years Poland was preparing to defend against Soviet invasion. Almost all fortification were made in the east; all military plans and exercises considered invasion from the east; structure of the army (proportion of cavalry units or naval units which had only sense when considering war with USSR) was prepared only with a thought of defensive war with the USSR.

    (2) The dogma of Polish diplomacy was created by Pilsudski. His authority overshadowed all his followers; he had such an authority, that no one dared to doubt his words. He created dogma of “equal distances” – that Poland should strive to have the same relationship with Germany and USSR and never allied with one against the other, as that would inevitably lead to the loss of sovereignty. Just before his death Pilsudski supposedly said, that he can only guarantee 5 more years of peace; and he urged his minions to seek alliance with Great Britain, as only this alliance could save Poland from the destruction. He also supposedly said that the first symptom of German aggression would be German stance on Gdańsk (Danzig).

    (3) Poland just came to existence after more than 120 years of servitude. Preserving independence was prime factor in thinking of every Polish politician. Satellite status is not an option; it’s unthinkable. A government which would agree to satellite state could be toppled by social unrest.

    (4) Western borders are indefensible. No natural barriers, no fortresses.

    (5) Up to 1934 or so Polish army was larger than German (Since German army was non-existant in practice). Up to 1933, maybe even to 1934 we could easily capture Berlin. In 1934 Pilsudski even suggested to France a preventive war against Germany. Polish historians think this was a bluff, as no military plans survived, and from other memos it’s quite clear that Polish politicians thought French would say no; general opinion is that this was solely to get some military credit to boost the army.

    (6) Another dogma of Polis diplomacy was that Poland is not “minor state”, and that no “concert of Great Powers” should be allowed to exist. Poland torpedoed all eforts to create such “concerts”. When Great Powers came to Munich, which was exactly against Polish diplomacy and which created the danger of creating such a “concert”, Polish answer was immediate. In Munich western diplomats said that “other issues” Czechoslovakia had with its neighbours will be solved in another meeting. Poland immedietely decided to destroy all chances of such meeting and took Zaolzie – to show that it will not suffer any pretense of Great Powers to dictate their will in this part of Europe.

    (7) During Czech crisis, France many times probed whether Poland would attack Germany in order to defend Czechs – from Polish memo you can see that clearly. Beck clearly refused. In that time Poland would have more chances in fight with Germany, as German army was weaker, and Poland could count on having Czech ally AND possibly French. Yet supposedly belligerent Poland refused. Also, supposedly belligerent Poland had military plans in which no offensive was prepared, only attack into Gdańsk in case Germans would attack there, and minor action in east Prussia. Otherwise the military plan was to defend along the border and withdraw slowly (yeah, not very intelligent, but those planners had experiences of WWI in the mind).

    Now, consider this:
    (A) Hitler rearm Rheinland.
    (B) Hitler assured Poland that it has absolutely no issues with Gdańsk and wants to have peaceful relations with Poland
    (c) Hitler takes Anschluss and assures, that he wants only peace
    (d) Hitler take sudetenland and assures, that it’s over.
    (e) within months Hitler consumes the rest of Bohemia.
    (f) within months, multiple borders incident starts, shootouts, attacks on Polish border patrols and so on.

    Now Hitler starts to post demands to Poland. He assures that once those “reasonable” demands are met, it would be over. But seeing (a) to (e) it’s clear there is no reason to believe him. Once his demands are met, he would start with another demands, and so on; in Polish memoires it’s clear that Polish politicians thought that agreeing to German demands is ust a first step on slippery slope to losing independency.

    Would you really, being in skin of Polish diplomats, believe Hitler? Would you really agree to his demands, knowing that he broke all his promises before?

    In addition, think about Hitler’s demands. Imagine that it would be Poland demanding from Germany, that Germany should withdraw its officials and army from Silesia and Masuria, a referendum would be made there under control of League of Nations, but Poland would dictate who could vote in referendum, excluding good chunk of Germans. Do you really think those would be reasonable demands?

    I really think that you all (HdC and Third Eye) are simply unable to put themselves in our boots and think from our point of view AT THAT TIME.

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    (5) More importantly, it was to have an excuse for signing the non-aggression treaty with Germany.
    , @anon
    You make some interesting points but I still say the Polish government was completely idiotic in seriously believing Britain's bluff about guaranteeing her borders - a "guarantee" that couldn't possibly be honored.

    Also, Hitler aside, the pre-1939 border between Germany and Poland was unworkable and would have led to some kind of conflict sooner or later. Danzig was unquestionably a German city, over 2,000,000 Germans lived in the Polish border regions and the bisection of Germany and East Prussia by Poland couldn't have been tolerated forever.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  114. szopen says:
    @5371
    [One of those days you will read some memoires of Polish diplomats and soldiers instead of creating ad hoc hypothesis of what they thought.]

    News flash: it's not just German diplomats and soldiers who had to rewrite history in their memoirs to make themselves seem more foresighted than they had been.

    [the claim that “Beck had claimed to the British that there was no present problem with Germany at all” is ridiculous]

    Tell that to the British who were there at the meeting in the Foreign Office with him and recorded his remarks in detail at the time. He said that what the Germans really wanted was overseas colonies (back then the Poles hoped to be allowed to grab some themselves).

    [though France has also alliance with Czechoslovakia]

    Indeed.

    Tell that to the British who were there at the meeting in the Foreign Office with him and recorded his remarks in detail at the time. He said that what the Germans really wanted was overseas colonies (back then the Poles hoped to be allowed to grab some themselves).

    Link to the remarks, please. That would mean that Beck considered British total idiots.

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    Library is closed today, will have chapter and verse for you in a couple of days.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  115. 5371 says:
    @szopen

    Tell that to the British who were there at the meeting in the Foreign Office with him and recorded his remarks in detail at the time. He said that what the Germans really wanted was overseas colonies (back then the Poles hoped to be allowed to grab some themselves).
     
    Link to the remarks, please. That would mean that Beck considered British total idiots.

    Library is closed today, will have chapter and verse for you in a couple of days.

    Read More
    • Replies: @szopen
    Thank you very much. The timing is also crucial (whether it was really in july-august to get guarantee, or earlier).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  116. 5371 says:
    @szopen
    TO ALL:
    Here is a primer of Polish point of view from 1939. Consider all the following facts and opinions, and then think what you would do in Polish place in 1939.

    (1) For the last 20 years Poland was preparing to defend against Soviet invasion. Almost all fortification were made in the east; all military plans and exercises considered invasion from the east; structure of the army (proportion of cavalry units or naval units which had only sense when considering war with USSR) was prepared only with a thought of defensive war with the USSR.

    (2) The dogma of Polish diplomacy was created by Pilsudski. His authority overshadowed all his followers; he had such an authority, that no one dared to doubt his words. He created dogma of "equal distances" - that Poland should strive to have the same relationship with Germany and USSR and never allied with one against the other, as that would inevitably lead to the loss of sovereignty. Just before his death Pilsudski supposedly said, that he can only guarantee 5 more years of peace; and he urged his minions to seek alliance with Great Britain, as only this alliance could save Poland from the destruction. He also supposedly said that the first symptom of German aggression would be German stance on Gdańsk (Danzig).

    (3) Poland just came to existence after more than 120 years of servitude. Preserving independence was prime factor in thinking of every Polish politician. Satellite status is not an option; it's unthinkable. A government which would agree to satellite state could be toppled by social unrest.

    (4) Western borders are indefensible. No natural barriers, no fortresses.

    (5) Up to 1934 or so Polish army was larger than German (Since German army was non-existant in practice). Up to 1933, maybe even to 1934 we could easily capture Berlin. In 1934 Pilsudski even suggested to France a preventive war against Germany. Polish historians think this was a bluff, as no military plans survived, and from other memos it's quite clear that Polish politicians thought French would say no; general opinion is that this was solely to get some military credit to boost the army.

    (6) Another dogma of Polis diplomacy was that Poland is not "minor state", and that no "concert of Great Powers" should be allowed to exist. Poland torpedoed all eforts to create such "concerts". When Great Powers came to Munich, which was exactly against Polish diplomacy and which created the danger of creating such a "concert", Polish answer was immediate. In Munich western diplomats said that "other issues" Czechoslovakia had with its neighbours will be solved in another meeting. Poland immedietely decided to destroy all chances of such meeting and took Zaolzie - to show that it will not suffer any pretense of Great Powers to dictate their will in this part of Europe.

    (7) During Czech crisis, France many times probed whether Poland would attack Germany in order to defend Czechs - from Polish memo you can see that clearly. Beck clearly refused. In that time Poland would have more chances in fight with Germany, as German army was weaker, and Poland could count on having Czech ally AND possibly French. Yet supposedly belligerent Poland refused. Also, supposedly belligerent Poland had military plans in which no offensive was prepared, only attack into Gdańsk in case Germans would attack there, and minor action in east Prussia. Otherwise the military plan was to defend along the border and withdraw slowly (yeah, not very intelligent, but those planners had experiences of WWI in the mind).

    Now, consider this:
    (A) Hitler rearm Rheinland.
    (B) Hitler assured Poland that it has absolutely no issues with Gdańsk and wants to have peaceful relations with Poland
    (c) Hitler takes Anschluss and assures, that he wants only peace
    (d) Hitler take sudetenland and assures, that it's over.
    (e) within months Hitler consumes the rest of Bohemia.
    (f) within months, multiple borders incident starts, shootouts, attacks on Polish border patrols and so on.

    Now Hitler starts to post demands to Poland. He assures that once those "reasonable" demands are met, it would be over. But seeing (a) to (e) it's clear there is no reason to believe him. Once his demands are met, he would start with another demands, and so on; in Polish memoires it's clear that Polish politicians thought that agreeing to German demands is ust a first step on slippery slope to losing independency.

    Would you really, being in skin of Polish diplomats, believe Hitler? Would you really agree to his demands, knowing that he broke all his promises before?

    In addition, think about Hitler's demands. Imagine that it would be Poland demanding from Germany, that Germany should withdraw its officials and army from Silesia and Masuria, a referendum would be made there under control of League of Nations, but Poland would dictate who could vote in referendum, excluding good chunk of Germans. Do you really think those would be reasonable demands?

    I really think that you all (HdC and Third Eye) are simply unable to put themselves in our boots and think from our point of view AT THAT TIME.

    (5) More importantly, it was to have an excuse for signing the non-aggression treaty with Germany.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  117. @5371
    [One of those days you will read some memoires of Polish diplomats and soldiers instead of creating ad hoc hypothesis of what they thought.]

    News flash: it's not just German diplomats and soldiers who had to rewrite history in their memoirs to make themselves seem more foresighted than they had been.

    [the claim that “Beck had claimed to the British that there was no present problem with Germany at all” is ridiculous]

    Tell that to the British who were there at the meeting in the Foreign Office with him and recorded his remarks in detail at the time. He said that what the Germans really wanted was overseas colonies (back then the Poles hoped to be allowed to grab some themselves).

    [though France has also alliance with Czechoslovakia]

    Indeed.

    Tell that to the British who were there at the meeting in the Foreign Office with him and recorded his remarks in detail at the time. He said that what the Germans really wanted was overseas colonies (back then the Poles hoped to be allowed to grab some themselves).

    Hitler made it abundantly clear what he wanted in Mein Kampf and it was not overseas colonies. What he wanted was Lebensraum in the East.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  118. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @szopen
    British gvt need not to seek "desperately", because it was clearly said in the secret addendum, that guarantee was only against German aggression. As for French, they were our allies, dammit. And offensive in September, when most of German forces was committed to the east was the best option from the military point of view. What the French did - wait until Germans finish second front, rebuilt their forces and prepare - was the stupidest possible move. Who could expect they would do something such stupid?

    My source for saying the British government “desperately” tried to make sure they were not legally obligated to fight the Soviet Union over its transgressions against Poland is from the book; Stalin and the shaping of the Soviet Union, by Alex De Jonge. He also writes about how the British were afraid they could not legally honor the Yalta agreement ceding 100,000 square miles of pre-1939 Polish territory to the USSR in 1944 for the same reason.

    As far as the French being ‘allies’ before the war, whatever the treaty may have said, any intelligent eastern European diplomat or general should have realized once France built the Maginot line, it was clear they had no intention to move beyond it. France had taken huge casualties during the Great war and was not going to repeat that experience. France saw its eastern “allies” only as cannon fodder to draw German troops away from an attack on France. The French never seriously considered leaving the Maginot wall (thus negating it) to come to the aid of any country in east Europe.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  119. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @szopen
    TO ALL:
    Here is a primer of Polish point of view from 1939. Consider all the following facts and opinions, and then think what you would do in Polish place in 1939.

    (1) For the last 20 years Poland was preparing to defend against Soviet invasion. Almost all fortification were made in the east; all military plans and exercises considered invasion from the east; structure of the army (proportion of cavalry units or naval units which had only sense when considering war with USSR) was prepared only with a thought of defensive war with the USSR.

    (2) The dogma of Polish diplomacy was created by Pilsudski. His authority overshadowed all his followers; he had such an authority, that no one dared to doubt his words. He created dogma of "equal distances" - that Poland should strive to have the same relationship with Germany and USSR and never allied with one against the other, as that would inevitably lead to the loss of sovereignty. Just before his death Pilsudski supposedly said, that he can only guarantee 5 more years of peace; and he urged his minions to seek alliance with Great Britain, as only this alliance could save Poland from the destruction. He also supposedly said that the first symptom of German aggression would be German stance on Gdańsk (Danzig).

    (3) Poland just came to existence after more than 120 years of servitude. Preserving independence was prime factor in thinking of every Polish politician. Satellite status is not an option; it's unthinkable. A government which would agree to satellite state could be toppled by social unrest.

    (4) Western borders are indefensible. No natural barriers, no fortresses.

    (5) Up to 1934 or so Polish army was larger than German (Since German army was non-existant in practice). Up to 1933, maybe even to 1934 we could easily capture Berlin. In 1934 Pilsudski even suggested to France a preventive war against Germany. Polish historians think this was a bluff, as no military plans survived, and from other memos it's quite clear that Polish politicians thought French would say no; general opinion is that this was solely to get some military credit to boost the army.

    (6) Another dogma of Polis diplomacy was that Poland is not "minor state", and that no "concert of Great Powers" should be allowed to exist. Poland torpedoed all eforts to create such "concerts". When Great Powers came to Munich, which was exactly against Polish diplomacy and which created the danger of creating such a "concert", Polish answer was immediate. In Munich western diplomats said that "other issues" Czechoslovakia had with its neighbours will be solved in another meeting. Poland immedietely decided to destroy all chances of such meeting and took Zaolzie - to show that it will not suffer any pretense of Great Powers to dictate their will in this part of Europe.

    (7) During Czech crisis, France many times probed whether Poland would attack Germany in order to defend Czechs - from Polish memo you can see that clearly. Beck clearly refused. In that time Poland would have more chances in fight with Germany, as German army was weaker, and Poland could count on having Czech ally AND possibly French. Yet supposedly belligerent Poland refused. Also, supposedly belligerent Poland had military plans in which no offensive was prepared, only attack into Gdańsk in case Germans would attack there, and minor action in east Prussia. Otherwise the military plan was to defend along the border and withdraw slowly (yeah, not very intelligent, but those planners had experiences of WWI in the mind).

    Now, consider this:
    (A) Hitler rearm Rheinland.
    (B) Hitler assured Poland that it has absolutely no issues with Gdańsk and wants to have peaceful relations with Poland
    (c) Hitler takes Anschluss and assures, that he wants only peace
    (d) Hitler take sudetenland and assures, that it's over.
    (e) within months Hitler consumes the rest of Bohemia.
    (f) within months, multiple borders incident starts, shootouts, attacks on Polish border patrols and so on.

    Now Hitler starts to post demands to Poland. He assures that once those "reasonable" demands are met, it would be over. But seeing (a) to (e) it's clear there is no reason to believe him. Once his demands are met, he would start with another demands, and so on; in Polish memoires it's clear that Polish politicians thought that agreeing to German demands is ust a first step on slippery slope to losing independency.

    Would you really, being in skin of Polish diplomats, believe Hitler? Would you really agree to his demands, knowing that he broke all his promises before?

    In addition, think about Hitler's demands. Imagine that it would be Poland demanding from Germany, that Germany should withdraw its officials and army from Silesia and Masuria, a referendum would be made there under control of League of Nations, but Poland would dictate who could vote in referendum, excluding good chunk of Germans. Do you really think those would be reasonable demands?

    I really think that you all (HdC and Third Eye) are simply unable to put themselves in our boots and think from our point of view AT THAT TIME.

    You make some interesting points but I still say the Polish government was completely idiotic in seriously believing Britain’s bluff about guaranteeing her borders – a “guarantee” that couldn’t possibly be honored.

    Also, Hitler aside, the pre-1939 border between Germany and Poland was unworkable and would have led to some kind of conflict sooner or later. Danzig was unquestionably a German city, over 2,000,000 Germans lived in the Polish border regions and the bisection of Germany and East Prussia by Poland couldn’t have been tolerated forever.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  120. Anon 2 says:
    @Regnum Nostrum
    I had no idea that it takes just a short visit to become an authority on Poland. The whole article is disjointed hotchpotch of observations. Is it about Poland, Czech republic, Vietnamese restaurant, immigration, basketball, EU or something else?

    “For a thousand years, Czechoslovakia was part of the West. Today, it is part of the empire to the east.”

     

    Since Czechoslovakia was created after the end of WW1 it could not have been part of the West for a thousand years. Before its creation the Czechs were for roughly 150 years part of Austro-Hungarian empire which of course was part of the West but the Czechs did not like it. Which makes me wonder if they know what they want.

    Like the Poles, their fellow Slavs, Czechs also see an affinity and allegiance with the West, not Russia.
     
    Perception is one thing and reality another. There are very few similar qualities, ideas, or interests shared between Slavs and the West. Whether the Poles and the Czechs like it or not they are part of the larger Slavic family with a mentality which has nothing to do with the mentality of their western idols. The scene with a Polish waitress is a prime example of that and the shabbiness of the towns another. The Slavs are a rather unruly lot pretty much unable to rule themselves. That is why they like to invite somebody else to do that. The first unification of Slavic tribes was accomplished by a Frankish merchant Samo at their invitation. Another example is a Varangian called Rurik who was invited by the Slavic tribes around Novgorod to re-establish order between various warring tribes. See the Slavs spend more time fighting each other than their enemies. The Slavs are also unreliable, often too naive, undisciplined, sloppy, lack drive, dislike progress and prefer status quo. As far as their infatuation with the West is concerned it only applies to money.

    While we’re comparing peoples, it must be heartbreaking
    for the Germanics that despite being the largest group in
    Europe (the Russians are partly in Asia), they, unlike the
    Brits and the French, failed completely to create a great
    civilization. There are 100 million German speakers in
    Europe, and then add 15 million Dutch and 20
    million Scandinavians for a total of 135 million Germanics,
    all squeezed into an unimpressive territory while the Brits
    and the French spread their great civilizations and beautiful
    languages all over the globe. The Spanish and the Portuguese,
    while failing to create great civilizations, at least spread out
    over an enormous territory. The Slavs, about 300 million strong,
    also failed to create a great civilization but to their credit
    control an enormous expanse stretching from the Oder to
    Vladivostok – the largest continuous territory occupied by
    the Europeans.

    Contrast this with the Germans. Almost no one today is
    interested in studying the German language (which Mark
    Twain mercilessly satirized in one of his stories). You only
    have to hear a German shout …Raus! (what’s with the Germans
    and the shouting?) to instantly lose interest in the German
    language or culture. Germans are still seen as inherently violent
    and warlike people (see the book “Genius for War”), and that
    doesn’t gain them any friends. NATO was created to “keep the
    Germans down and the Russians out,” and to this day there are
    over 300 military installations on German territory. In this
    sense, Germany continues to be humiliated by being an occupied
    country, but most Europeans can sleep easier at night as a result
    of Germany being a vassal state to the U.S.

    So how come the verdict of history proclaims the Germans such a
    conspicuous failure in that they failed to create a great civilization
    and failed to expand their culture globally? That’s a topic for an
    academic treatise but let me make at least several points.
    1. They failed to develop as a democratic state, and instead
    insisted on their Sonderweg with the result that democracy had
    to be rammed down their throats after WW I and II. In this
    sense they’re like the Russians – they love strong-man rule a
    little too much. In contrast, the Polish-Lthuanian Commonwealth
    was a republic for at least 300 years; 2. They were consistently
    behind England in industrial development. The Industrial Revolution
    was delayed in Germany by about 50 years; 3. They failed to develop
    a powerful Navy until it was too late; 4. They failed to develop soft
    power – great food, great wine, joie de vivre, etc; 5. They failed to
    produce a skeptical philosophical culture. There was no German
    Descartes or David Hume.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon 2
    An addendum: Instead of creating a skeptical philosophical
    culture, Germany gave us instead two violent antidemocratic
    philosophies of life: Marxism and Nazism, that resulted in the
    combined deaths of at least 100 million people.
    , @anon
    Probably the biggest reason was that the Germans were never part of the Roman empire. Had Germany been Romanized, criss-crossed with roads, bridges etc, things would have been different.
    , @Regnum Nostrum

    Contrast this with the Germans. Almost no one today is
    interested in studying the German language (which Mark
    Twain mercilessly satirized in one of his stories).
     
    I am glad you have mentioned Mark Twain, one of my favorite American writers. Since I have read everything he has ever written I am familiar with that particular story as well. Mark Twain was still at his hilarious best, later on he became embittered and generally dissatisfied with humanity. My favorite story of his from that later stage is Mysterious Stranger. As far as Germanic tribes in Roman times are concerned a good read is the Roman historian Tacitus. Edward Gibbon used some of his descriptions of Germans in his book Decline and fall of the Roman Empire.
    , @HdC
    Prussia / Germany were / are the most peaceful country in Europe, along with Russia.

    The top price for war mongering goes to Britain, with France and Spain following close behind.

    I managed to locate 4 studies conducted during and after WWI that conclusively proved this point; 2 were conducted by Brits and 2 by Americans. I wrote about this in Chronicles, a Magazine of American Culture a few years ago.

    As I pointed out to friends jokingly, what would Hollywood, the MSM, or the chattering classes for that matter, do without Hitler and Germany? HdC
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  121. Anon 2 says:
    @Anon 2
    While we're comparing peoples, it must be heartbreaking
    for the Germanics that despite being the largest group in
    Europe (the Russians are partly in Asia), they, unlike the
    Brits and the French, failed completely to create a great
    civilization. There are 100 million German speakers in
    Europe, and then add 15 million Dutch and 20
    million Scandinavians for a total of 135 million Germanics,
    all squeezed into an unimpressive territory while the Brits
    and the French spread their great civilizations and beautiful
    languages all over the globe. The Spanish and the Portuguese,
    while failing to create great civilizations, at least spread out
    over an enormous territory. The Slavs, about 300 million strong,
    also failed to create a great civilization but to their credit
    control an enormous expanse stretching from the Oder to
    Vladivostok - the largest continuous territory occupied by
    the Europeans.

    Contrast this with the Germans. Almost no one today is
    interested in studying the German language (which Mark
    Twain mercilessly satirized in one of his stories). You only
    have to hear a German shout ...Raus! (what's with the Germans
    and the shouting?) to instantly lose interest in the German
    language or culture. Germans are still seen as inherently violent
    and warlike people (see the book "Genius for War"), and that
    doesn't gain them any friends. NATO was created to "keep the
    Germans down and the Russians out," and to this day there are
    over 300 military installations on German territory. In this
    sense, Germany continues to be humiliated by being an occupied
    country, but most Europeans can sleep easier at night as a result
    of Germany being a vassal state to the U.S.

    So how come the verdict of history proclaims the Germans such a
    conspicuous failure in that they failed to create a great civilization
    and failed to expand their culture globally? That's a topic for an
    academic treatise but let me make at least several points.
    1. They failed to develop as a democratic state, and instead
    insisted on their Sonderweg with the result that democracy had
    to be rammed down their throats after WW I and II. In this
    sense they're like the Russians - they love strong-man rule a
    little too much. In contrast, the Polish-Lthuanian Commonwealth
    was a republic for at least 300 years; 2. They were consistently
    behind England in industrial development. The Industrial Revolution
    was delayed in Germany by about 50 years; 3. They failed to develop
    a powerful Navy until it was too late; 4. They failed to develop soft
    power - great food, great wine, joie de vivre, etc; 5. They failed to
    produce a skeptical philosophical culture. There was no German
    Descartes or David Hume.

    An addendum: Instead of creating a skeptical philosophical
    culture, Germany gave us instead two violent antidemocratic
    philosophies of life: Marxism and Nazism, that resulted in the
    combined deaths of at least 100 million people.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bliss

    Germany gave us......Marxism and Nazism, that resulted in the
    combined deaths of at least 100 million people.
     
    Interesting perspective.

    Das Kapital and Mein Kampf, the two most influential books written in the german language.
    , @HdC
    How convenient of you to neglect that until WWII the great majority of scientific publications originated in Germany and were published in German.

    With the latest fanfare of computer development (forgot the name of the movie), go to wikipedia and read up on the shenanigans of one Konrad Zuse. "World's first programmable computer" springs to mind. HdC
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  122. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon 2
    While we're comparing peoples, it must be heartbreaking
    for the Germanics that despite being the largest group in
    Europe (the Russians are partly in Asia), they, unlike the
    Brits and the French, failed completely to create a great
    civilization. There are 100 million German speakers in
    Europe, and then add 15 million Dutch and 20
    million Scandinavians for a total of 135 million Germanics,
    all squeezed into an unimpressive territory while the Brits
    and the French spread their great civilizations and beautiful
    languages all over the globe. The Spanish and the Portuguese,
    while failing to create great civilizations, at least spread out
    over an enormous territory. The Slavs, about 300 million strong,
    also failed to create a great civilization but to their credit
    control an enormous expanse stretching from the Oder to
    Vladivostok - the largest continuous territory occupied by
    the Europeans.

    Contrast this with the Germans. Almost no one today is
    interested in studying the German language (which Mark
    Twain mercilessly satirized in one of his stories). You only
    have to hear a German shout ...Raus! (what's with the Germans
    and the shouting?) to instantly lose interest in the German
    language or culture. Germans are still seen as inherently violent
    and warlike people (see the book "Genius for War"), and that
    doesn't gain them any friends. NATO was created to "keep the
    Germans down and the Russians out," and to this day there are
    over 300 military installations on German territory. In this
    sense, Germany continues to be humiliated by being an occupied
    country, but most Europeans can sleep easier at night as a result
    of Germany being a vassal state to the U.S.

    So how come the verdict of history proclaims the Germans such a
    conspicuous failure in that they failed to create a great civilization
    and failed to expand their culture globally? That's a topic for an
    academic treatise but let me make at least several points.
    1. They failed to develop as a democratic state, and instead
    insisted on their Sonderweg with the result that democracy had
    to be rammed down their throats after WW I and II. In this
    sense they're like the Russians - they love strong-man rule a
    little too much. In contrast, the Polish-Lthuanian Commonwealth
    was a republic for at least 300 years; 2. They were consistently
    behind England in industrial development. The Industrial Revolution
    was delayed in Germany by about 50 years; 3. They failed to develop
    a powerful Navy until it was too late; 4. They failed to develop soft
    power - great food, great wine, joie de vivre, etc; 5. They failed to
    produce a skeptical philosophical culture. There was no German
    Descartes or David Hume.

    Probably the biggest reason was that the Germans were never part of the Roman empire. Had Germany been Romanized, criss-crossed with roads, bridges etc, things would have been different.

    Read More
    • Replies: @HdC
    Germany is criss-crossed with roads, bridges, and railroads. The latest and uniquely German development being the Autobahn.

    As to the Germans being responsible for 100 million deaths, I'm afraid that the blame for that must be put at the feet of your heroes Churchill, Roosevelt, and Stalin.

    Hollywood, History channel, and comic books are not sources for historical accuracy. Neither, for that matter, are books written by court historians or the "hallelujah chorus" of neocons and their hangers-on.

    The best information are original diplomatic dispatches and governmental inter-departmental memoranda. HdC
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  123. Bliss says:
    @Anon 2
    An addendum: Instead of creating a skeptical philosophical
    culture, Germany gave us instead two violent antidemocratic
    philosophies of life: Marxism and Nazism, that resulted in the
    combined deaths of at least 100 million people.

    Germany gave us……Marxism and Nazism, that resulted in the
    combined deaths of at least 100 million people.

    Interesting perspective.

    Das Kapital and Mein Kampf, the two most influential books written in the german language.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  124. This was a good read. From the perspective of somebody living here, I’d say you have a pretty accurate overall impression of the country.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  125. szopen says:
    @5371
    Library is closed today, will have chapter and verse for you in a couple of days.

    Thank you very much. The timing is also crucial (whether it was really in july-august to get guarantee, or earlier).

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    It's in "Documents on British Foreign Policy" 3rd series, volume V (London, 1952) and the relevant documents are nos. 1,2,10,11, dealing with Beck's visit to London of April 4-6. Beck's statement that "if he was to go by what the Germans themselves said, he would say that the gravest question was the colonial question" is in no.2, actually from a conversation not in the Foreign Office but in Chamberlain's room in the House of Commons. Apart from the principles of equidistance which you sum up well in comment 113, the Polish FM repeats in these documents that no negotiations over Danzig are going on, that German demands are purely a hypothetical scenario and that Poland relies on her own strength and military preparedness for defence. In document 11, Beck adds in conversation with Eden that he is far from convinced of the efficiency of the German army and has private information which confirms him in this. As document 12 shows, British military experts were well aware that Poland had no prospect of offering effective resistance.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  126. schmenz says:
    @Jim
    If you knew more about Poland's history you would better be able to understand their feelings toward Russia.

    Thanks, Jim.

    What I think most people who have responded to my comment have overlooked is the operative word in that post: “today’s”. In other words, what is it about TODAY’S Russia that bothers TODAY’S Poland? That is what I would like to know.

    Since I have seen no aggressive moves by Russia against Poland in the current news I would like to be informed what the trouble is about, these days, that continues this Polish and Russian distrust for each other.

    I am aware that many Polish farmers are enraged at the sanctions imposed against Russia which has lowered their income considerably, but I would imagine these farmers would be directing their anger not at Russia but the EU/USA.

    Read More
    • Replies: @HdC
    That Poland is hitching its wagon to an entity created and backed by the USA, Britain, and France (NATO), is beyond belief, as these worthies sold Poland down the river to the communists (Soviet Union) after WWII.

    Some people are just natural gluttons for punishment I suppose. HdC
    , @szopen
    Here's one example
    Elbląg is a Polish Seaport. However, the ships which sail to Elbląg need to pass through Cieśnina Pilawska, which is in Russia's territory. Russians constantly were creating obstacles. When DOnald Tusk had a short honeymoon with Russia and all media was about how good relationship he has with Putin, Putin said "sure, we will open this strait for your ships". So every ship can pass the strait... after it will get a permit for a Russian office. As you may imagine, it does not do much for increasing ship movement into Elbląg.

    Another ones are Russia banning some Polish trade items, seemingly randomly. Sometimes it's a repercussion for some Polish politics, but sometimes there seems to be absolutely no logic in that.

    Another one is when a Russian philosopher, who is widely associated with Putin, admits in interview with Polish newspaper that Russia wants to be superpower again and Poland surely will one day return to Russian sphere of influence.

    Another one is Nordstream, which will block chances of development for Szczecin, another Polish port.

    Another one is when some Russian general spits in interview, that there are rockets targeted on POland, so we should beware what we say.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  127. @Anon 2
    While we're comparing peoples, it must be heartbreaking
    for the Germanics that despite being the largest group in
    Europe (the Russians are partly in Asia), they, unlike the
    Brits and the French, failed completely to create a great
    civilization. There are 100 million German speakers in
    Europe, and then add 15 million Dutch and 20
    million Scandinavians for a total of 135 million Germanics,
    all squeezed into an unimpressive territory while the Brits
    and the French spread their great civilizations and beautiful
    languages all over the globe. The Spanish and the Portuguese,
    while failing to create great civilizations, at least spread out
    over an enormous territory. The Slavs, about 300 million strong,
    also failed to create a great civilization but to their credit
    control an enormous expanse stretching from the Oder to
    Vladivostok - the largest continuous territory occupied by
    the Europeans.

    Contrast this with the Germans. Almost no one today is
    interested in studying the German language (which Mark
    Twain mercilessly satirized in one of his stories). You only
    have to hear a German shout ...Raus! (what's with the Germans
    and the shouting?) to instantly lose interest in the German
    language or culture. Germans are still seen as inherently violent
    and warlike people (see the book "Genius for War"), and that
    doesn't gain them any friends. NATO was created to "keep the
    Germans down and the Russians out," and to this day there are
    over 300 military installations on German territory. In this
    sense, Germany continues to be humiliated by being an occupied
    country, but most Europeans can sleep easier at night as a result
    of Germany being a vassal state to the U.S.

    So how come the verdict of history proclaims the Germans such a
    conspicuous failure in that they failed to create a great civilization
    and failed to expand their culture globally? That's a topic for an
    academic treatise but let me make at least several points.
    1. They failed to develop as a democratic state, and instead
    insisted on their Sonderweg with the result that democracy had
    to be rammed down their throats after WW I and II. In this
    sense they're like the Russians - they love strong-man rule a
    little too much. In contrast, the Polish-Lthuanian Commonwealth
    was a republic for at least 300 years; 2. They were consistently
    behind England in industrial development. The Industrial Revolution
    was delayed in Germany by about 50 years; 3. They failed to develop
    a powerful Navy until it was too late; 4. They failed to develop soft
    power - great food, great wine, joie de vivre, etc; 5. They failed to
    produce a skeptical philosophical culture. There was no German
    Descartes or David Hume.

    Contrast this with the Germans. Almost no one today is
    interested in studying the German language (which Mark
    Twain mercilessly satirized in one of his stories).

    I am glad you have mentioned Mark Twain, one of my favorite American writers. Since I have read everything he has ever written I am familiar with that particular story as well. Mark Twain was still at his hilarious best, later on he became embittered and generally dissatisfied with humanity. My favorite story of his from that later stage is Mysterious Stranger. As far as Germanic tribes in Roman times are concerned a good read is the Roman historian Tacitus. Edward Gibbon used some of his descriptions of Germans in his book Decline and fall of the Roman Empire.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  128. HdC says:
    @Anon 2
    While we're comparing peoples, it must be heartbreaking
    for the Germanics that despite being the largest group in
    Europe (the Russians are partly in Asia), they, unlike the
    Brits and the French, failed completely to create a great
    civilization. There are 100 million German speakers in
    Europe, and then add 15 million Dutch and 20
    million Scandinavians for a total of 135 million Germanics,
    all squeezed into an unimpressive territory while the Brits
    and the French spread their great civilizations and beautiful
    languages all over the globe. The Spanish and the Portuguese,
    while failing to create great civilizations, at least spread out
    over an enormous territory. The Slavs, about 300 million strong,
    also failed to create a great civilization but to their credit
    control an enormous expanse stretching from the Oder to
    Vladivostok - the largest continuous territory occupied by
    the Europeans.

    Contrast this with the Germans. Almost no one today is
    interested in studying the German language (which Mark
    Twain mercilessly satirized in one of his stories). You only
    have to hear a German shout ...Raus! (what's with the Germans
    and the shouting?) to instantly lose interest in the German
    language or culture. Germans are still seen as inherently violent
    and warlike people (see the book "Genius for War"), and that
    doesn't gain them any friends. NATO was created to "keep the
    Germans down and the Russians out," and to this day there are
    over 300 military installations on German territory. In this
    sense, Germany continues to be humiliated by being an occupied
    country, but most Europeans can sleep easier at night as a result
    of Germany being a vassal state to the U.S.

    So how come the verdict of history proclaims the Germans such a
    conspicuous failure in that they failed to create a great civilization
    and failed to expand their culture globally? That's a topic for an
    academic treatise but let me make at least several points.
    1. They failed to develop as a democratic state, and instead
    insisted on their Sonderweg with the result that democracy had
    to be rammed down their throats after WW I and II. In this
    sense they're like the Russians - they love strong-man rule a
    little too much. In contrast, the Polish-Lthuanian Commonwealth
    was a republic for at least 300 years; 2. They were consistently
    behind England in industrial development. The Industrial Revolution
    was delayed in Germany by about 50 years; 3. They failed to develop
    a powerful Navy until it was too late; 4. They failed to develop soft
    power - great food, great wine, joie de vivre, etc; 5. They failed to
    produce a skeptical philosophical culture. There was no German
    Descartes or David Hume.

    Prussia / Germany were / are the most peaceful country in Europe, along with Russia.

    The top price for war mongering goes to Britain, with France and Spain following close behind.

    I managed to locate 4 studies conducted during and after WWI that conclusively proved this point; 2 were conducted by Brits and 2 by Americans. I wrote about this in Chronicles, a Magazine of American Culture a few years ago.

    As I pointed out to friends jokingly, what would Hollywood, the MSM, or the chattering classes for that matter, do without Hitler and Germany? HdC

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  129. HdC says:
    @anon
    Probably the biggest reason was that the Germans were never part of the Roman empire. Had Germany been Romanized, criss-crossed with roads, bridges etc, things would have been different.

    Germany is criss-crossed with roads, bridges, and railroads. The latest and uniquely German development being the Autobahn.

    As to the Germans being responsible for 100 million deaths, I’m afraid that the blame for that must be put at the feet of your heroes Churchill, Roosevelt, and Stalin.

    Hollywood, History channel, and comic books are not sources for historical accuracy. Neither, for that matter, are books written by court historians or the “hallelujah chorus” of neocons and their hangers-on.

    The best information are original diplomatic dispatches and governmental inter-departmental memoranda. HdC

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    'Germany is criss-crossed with roads, bridges and railroads.'

    It is NOW. It WASN'T historically. Major-General J.F.C. Fuller considers the reason for German division the lack of Roman roads beyond the Rhine. This is why medieval Germany was a hodgepodge of hundreds of little mickey-mouse states. It was the need to avoid "the chaos of the small states" that led to a recurring theme in German political philosophy for a "strong leader" exemplified by the Kaiser and later Hitler.

    I don't know why you attribute those other comments to me as I didn't say them. For the record I think FDR was a tool, second only to Woodrow Wilson.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  130. HdC says:
    @schmenz
    Thanks, Jim.

    What I think most people who have responded to my comment have overlooked is the operative word in that post: "today's". In other words, what is it about TODAY'S Russia that bothers TODAY'S Poland? That is what I would like to know.

    Since I have seen no aggressive moves by Russia against Poland in the current news I would like to be informed what the trouble is about, these days, that continues this Polish and Russian distrust for each other.

    I am aware that many Polish farmers are enraged at the sanctions imposed against Russia which has lowered their income considerably, but I would imagine these farmers would be directing their anger not at Russia but the EU/USA.

    That Poland is hitching its wagon to an entity created and backed by the USA, Britain, and France (NATO), is beyond belief, as these worthies sold Poland down the river to the communists (Soviet Union) after WWII.

    Some people are just natural gluttons for punishment I suppose. HdC

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  131. szopen says:
    @schmenz
    Thanks, Jim.

    What I think most people who have responded to my comment have overlooked is the operative word in that post: "today's". In other words, what is it about TODAY'S Russia that bothers TODAY'S Poland? That is what I would like to know.

    Since I have seen no aggressive moves by Russia against Poland in the current news I would like to be informed what the trouble is about, these days, that continues this Polish and Russian distrust for each other.

    I am aware that many Polish farmers are enraged at the sanctions imposed against Russia which has lowered their income considerably, but I would imagine these farmers would be directing their anger not at Russia but the EU/USA.

    Here’s one example
    Elbląg is a Polish Seaport. However, the ships which sail to Elbląg need to pass through Cieśnina Pilawska, which is in Russia’s territory. Russians constantly were creating obstacles. When DOnald Tusk had a short honeymoon with Russia and all media was about how good relationship he has with Putin, Putin said “sure, we will open this strait for your ships”. So every ship can pass the strait… after it will get a permit for a Russian office. As you may imagine, it does not do much for increasing ship movement into Elbląg.

    Another ones are Russia banning some Polish trade items, seemingly randomly. Sometimes it’s a repercussion for some Polish politics, but sometimes there seems to be absolutely no logic in that.

    Another one is when a Russian philosopher, who is widely associated with Putin, admits in interview with Polish newspaper that Russia wants to be superpower again and Poland surely will one day return to Russian sphere of influence.

    Another one is Nordstream, which will block chances of development for Szczecin, another Polish port.

    Another one is when some Russian general spits in interview, that there are rockets targeted on POland, so we should beware what we say.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  132. 5371 says:
    @szopen
    Thank you very much. The timing is also crucial (whether it was really in july-august to get guarantee, or earlier).

    It’s in “Documents on British Foreign Policy” 3rd series, volume V (London, 1952) and the relevant documents are nos. 1,2,10,11, dealing with Beck’s visit to London of April 4-6. Beck’s statement that “if he was to go by what the Germans themselves said, he would say that the gravest question was the colonial question” is in no.2, actually from a conversation not in the Foreign Office but in Chamberlain’s room in the House of Commons. Apart from the principles of equidistance which you sum up well in comment 113, the Polish FM repeats in these documents that no negotiations over Danzig are going on, that German demands are purely a hypothetical scenario and that Poland relies on her own strength and military preparedness for defence. In document 11, Beck adds in conversation with Eden that he is far from convinced of the efficiency of the German army and has private information which confirms him in this. As document 12 shows, British military experts were well aware that Poland had no prospect of offering effective resistance.

    Read More
    • Replies: @szopen
    Thank you very much. I really appreciate your effort.

    Now, you said Beck did that in order to secure British guarantee. As the memos are from April, and the guarantee was issued in March 31st 1939 , could you please elaborate a bit how Beck silly ramblings could possibly result in influencing British decision of giving the guarantee?

    Moreover, given that Germans were increasing their pressure on Poland for several months, and it was well-known, it seems that Beck either was an idiot, or thought British were idiots. Or both.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  133. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @HdC
    Germany is criss-crossed with roads, bridges, and railroads. The latest and uniquely German development being the Autobahn.

    As to the Germans being responsible for 100 million deaths, I'm afraid that the blame for that must be put at the feet of your heroes Churchill, Roosevelt, and Stalin.

    Hollywood, History channel, and comic books are not sources for historical accuracy. Neither, for that matter, are books written by court historians or the "hallelujah chorus" of neocons and their hangers-on.

    The best information are original diplomatic dispatches and governmental inter-departmental memoranda. HdC

    ‘Germany is criss-crossed with roads, bridges and railroads.’

    It is NOW. It WASN’T historically. Major-General J.F.C. Fuller considers the reason for German division the lack of Roman roads beyond the Rhine. This is why medieval Germany was a hodgepodge of hundreds of little mickey-mouse states. It was the need to avoid “the chaos of the small states” that led to a recurring theme in German political philosophy for a “strong leader” exemplified by the Kaiser and later Hitler.

    I don’t know why you attribute those other comments to me as I didn’t say them. For the record I think FDR was a tool, second only to Woodrow Wilson.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  134. HdC says:
    @Anon 2
    An addendum: Instead of creating a skeptical philosophical
    culture, Germany gave us instead two violent antidemocratic
    philosophies of life: Marxism and Nazism, that resulted in the
    combined deaths of at least 100 million people.

    How convenient of you to neglect that until WWII the great majority of scientific publications originated in Germany and were published in German.

    With the latest fanfare of computer development (forgot the name of the movie), go to wikipedia and read up on the shenanigans of one Konrad Zuse. “World’s first programmable computer” springs to mind. HdC

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  135. szopen says:
    @5371
    It's in "Documents on British Foreign Policy" 3rd series, volume V (London, 1952) and the relevant documents are nos. 1,2,10,11, dealing with Beck's visit to London of April 4-6. Beck's statement that "if he was to go by what the Germans themselves said, he would say that the gravest question was the colonial question" is in no.2, actually from a conversation not in the Foreign Office but in Chamberlain's room in the House of Commons. Apart from the principles of equidistance which you sum up well in comment 113, the Polish FM repeats in these documents that no negotiations over Danzig are going on, that German demands are purely a hypothetical scenario and that Poland relies on her own strength and military preparedness for defence. In document 11, Beck adds in conversation with Eden that he is far from convinced of the efficiency of the German army and has private information which confirms him in this. As document 12 shows, British military experts were well aware that Poland had no prospect of offering effective resistance.

    Thank you very much. I really appreciate your effort.

    Now, you said Beck did that in order to secure British guarantee. As the memos are from April, and the guarantee was issued in March 31st 1939 , could you please elaborate a bit how Beck silly ramblings could possibly result in influencing British decision of giving the guarantee?

    Moreover, given that Germans were increasing their pressure on Poland for several months, and it was well-known, it seems that Beck either was an idiot, or thought British were idiots. Or both.

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    The guarantee offered at the end of March was purely provisional and dependent on those negotiations. As you know, the actual signing of a treaty took months. It is clear from those documents themselves that the British were only thinking of a political construction, hoping to get Poland, Romania, the USSR, France and themselves all on the same page, and did not take a military alliance seriously.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  136. 5371 says:
    @szopen
    Thank you very much. I really appreciate your effort.

    Now, you said Beck did that in order to secure British guarantee. As the memos are from April, and the guarantee was issued in March 31st 1939 , could you please elaborate a bit how Beck silly ramblings could possibly result in influencing British decision of giving the guarantee?

    Moreover, given that Germans were increasing their pressure on Poland for several months, and it was well-known, it seems that Beck either was an idiot, or thought British were idiots. Or both.

    The guarantee offered at the end of March was purely provisional and dependent on those negotiations. As you know, the actual signing of a treaty took months. It is clear from those documents themselves that the British were only thinking of a political construction, hoping to get Poland, Romania, the USSR, France and themselves all on the same page, and did not take a military alliance seriously.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  137. Sean says:

    Young Poland is not only looking West, it is leaving for the West. Poland is simply backward, the east if Europe has been backward for half a millennium.

    There is a country in Western Europe that owes (French) banks more than even Germany could cope with. It is not really western, the ex prime minister was convicted of murder, and uniquely it does not have gay marriage : Italy.

    http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/italy-remote-mountain-town-ostana-welcomes-its-first-baby-28-years-1540846

    Italy is fundamentally unstable.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Linh Dinh Comments via RSS