Poland and Polish Discussion Group and Forum

Welcome to the original English language Poland and Polish discussion group board. This message forum is a place where English-speaking Poles, foreigners (expats) living in Poland, and anyone with a genuine interest in Poland can discuss and read the views of others concerning Poland. Subjects include: Polish news and current affairs; Life in Poland; politics; genealogy research; Polish culture and history; advice and tips on visiting Poland; Polish property and investment issues. The aim of our group is to increase awareness of wonderful Poland using the English language and allow and foster the honest debate and exchange of opinions on anything vaguely related to Poland and Polish - positive, negative and/or neutral! To state the obvious: all opinions and views expressed on this site are solely those of their respective authors and are not necessarily those of anyone else! Messages consisting of ads will be deleted.

Links:  Poland Directory; Polish Language Forum; Factbook Poland; Photographs of Poland; Polish TranslationA Town in Poland; Map

Poland and Polish Discussion Group and Forum
Start a New Topic 
Author
Comment
View Entire Thread
Re: Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War

Controversial?

Re: Re: Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War

It's one view. This guy is an anti war writer. it's his hobbyhorse.

At the end of the day whether Britain had entered the war when it did or later it would have had in the long term no choice but to enter, either that or become a puppet state of the third reich. That's the plan hitler had for the brits. He wasn't planning to just leave Britain be if those in power didn't agree with him (although of course there were those who did...). Do you think the brits as a nation would have tolerated swastikas hanging from buck palace? Or would they be more like captain von trapp in the sound of music ripping them down? Had britain not gone to war would they have been another france or Norway? Who knows. But I doubt they or the empire would have remained unscathed by any means.

I haven't read a great deal about pilsudski's government, but don't see the difference a stable or unstable government in Poland would have made to the outcome. Much like other countries in Europe they were totally unprepared for a war with germany who had secretly been making arms for many years pouring much of the gdp into this. Poland never officially surrendered. They say austrians are still screwed up over the anschluss. Who can say what would have been the right thing to do even now. With so many variables.

The comment about stalin is interesting. It's ironic that what the nazis did is known to all and sundry but what stalin did is still almost a dirty secret known to few in comparison. I think he is credited by some as having caused 50million+ fatalities of many nationalities.

Re: Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War

A solid article.

Re: Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War

Pat Buchanan is a laughing stock in his native country. He is marginal and inconsequential.

His facts are skewed as much as his anti-Churchill rants. Nazi Germany had been gearing up for war since 1935 and while he is correct in asserting that Hitler initially sought an anti-Soviet alliance with Poland, the truth is that it was simply unattainable politically. Polish leaders would have never signed off on such a pact.

Stating that “Poland was a creature of the Versailles Treaty” is just outright ignorant. Poland became a nation in 966 AD and lost her independence in the late 18th century, followed by a string of uprisings and wars for independence. Political borders didn’t change the fact that Poles continued to fight to reconstruct their nation. Versailles Treaty sought to end a perpetual state of war on Polish territories. Unintended consequences of the Treaty are just an academic discussion.

Buchanan’s theorizes that Britain should have stood idly by while Hitler gobbled up Europe and then we would have had “peace in our time”. He is delusional.

Re: Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9803EFDB1F31E03ABC4951DFBE66838B639EDE

Re: Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War

There is a consideration in geo politics referred to as a “hinge of history”. This refers to points where if things go one way then the course of events changes direction. Not to be confused with the popularly used argument of “shifting paradigm” which is basically the evolution of events; hinge of history moments utterly alter subsequent options. Buchanan’s thesis fails because he labels the wrong point as a hinge of history; the March 1939 British-Polish mutual defense pact. The true hinge of history events which precipitated WWII and the following fifty years of world politics and war was the failure of France and Britain to enforce the provisions of the Versailles Treaty preventing German rearmament and conscription in 1935 and subsequently the re-militarization of the Rhineland in March 1936. After that, war was inevitable.

Re: Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War

Slepowron - couldn't agree more. Also that political failure underlines something which is true for all of us in our everyday lives - don't box yourself into a corner and half-try to defend the indefensible.

If you don't believe strongly in something, don't even attempt it if the price of failure is going to be high. It's like this in our personal relationships too.