Foreigners: Please don't buy the Polish Land!

See...my reference to fighting on the right side...for a just cause.....plus at times...trying to give their English masters a bloody nose in another war arena.....never mind fighting against fellow Irish men who fought for the English.....!


Confused...huh....?....lol

Frank, what do you mean by that 'short term gain' was in their [Poles'] grasp'? Was Poland's independence and freedom a 'short term gain'? If so, then why? So when you Irish fought unsuccessfully, numerous times, during 800 years, for Ireland's independence and freedom, also a 'short term gain' was in your 'grasp'? Were you 'misguided'? Did you have a 'history' o 'doing this'? How about the Greeks fighting the Turks for 500 years? 'Misguided'? 'Short term gain in their grasp'? Had 'a history of doing this'?

So, Frank, did the Poles fighting the Russkies on Napoleon's side fight for 'the just cause,' or for the unjust one? Why? Was our, Poles, trying to give the bloody nose to the Germans or Russkies a good thing to do, or not? Poles also fought other Poles in opposing foreign armies, e.g. during WWI, Poles fighting on the German side fought Poles fighting on the French and Russian side. There is a poem, by Slonski, on that.

Puzzler.....its a all relative isn't it.........gaining your independence is great...but being invaded, invading other countries, being de-constructed, re-constructed, liberated, ravished, genocide being committed against many countrymen...just all seems so very tragic...........

Daffy, you wrote: ' forgetting that poland is in iraq, there are polish descendants in america, like the irish also ' (sic). - So by that you meant that you were ' givin you [= me, Puzzler] a situation - trying to show you [= me, Puzzler] that there would be polish in iraw even if the polish army was not ' (sic)? If so, would you explain even further what you mean? Some clarity, please.

i m enjoying your post today!!!!

Frank you haven't answered my questions straightforward. Isn't it so that when the case is about Irish fighting for Ireland on somebody's side, it's a just cause for you, but when the Poles do it for Poland, is an unjust cause for you? Some double standard? If yes, then why?

Thanks, espana. How do you do?

sure. The topic we WERE discussing was the 'fenians' being irish, fighting for irish freedom invading canada in the US.

I said that, just because confederate and union soliders (of all backgrounds) from a new unit under the JUST created Unites States CALL themselves the fenians. Doesnt mean they were fighting for Ireland. They were fighting for America. so they gave themselves an irish name? alot of americans do that

To try illustrate the point, i wanted you to look at it from a polish perspective. there are Polish people in america who are now american. like the irish were. those polish people did what the irish did and some join the army. that army (the US army) went to iraq. does that mean those polish and irish are fighting for poland and ireland? no, they are fighting for america.

I asked you to ignore the fact the polish army was there JUST for the benefit of the example (as you could THEN say, that there ARE polish in Iraq fighting for poland - BUT they are polish, from poland by order of the polish gov't and i wanted you to see that even if they were not, there would still be polish people in iraq in the US army and they are not fighting for polands interest - just america.

does that help?

P...the problem is....Ireland......800 yrs of English rule...........the only real battles fought on its soil involved the loss of small numbers of the population.........leave out the potato famine...for now......

Poland, has been involved in endless....extremely damaging battles/wars/division/domination etc for many hundreds of years......some of its own doing...some as the result of pay back...your great neighbours....etc.....

Nothing like the same numbers or importantce were the wars/battles the Irish were ever involved in.........only 5 million in the country......and now 200000 are from Poland....

and your always

No it wont..........IMHO Daffy...

The irish fought with the english and some fought against them. during the napoleonic wars. napoleon promised ireland's aide when he conquered europe (which never happend) but he did give ireland little help before that. (all those failed)

and as i said, some fought for the english (25% of the english army was irish) - but it could be well argued it was not all by choice (a smaller minority was)

either way. fighting with or against england was of no use to ireland. It was only when the irish fought the english themselves, in ireland, guerilla warfare, did ireland finally gain its independance. not as spectacular as america or india - but england could nto keep them as they were so far away - ireland was always englands most troublesome coloney but also its nearest so they kept tight control of ireland - esp when napolean would find ireland a willing ally! (to invade england on two sides!)

As to the discussion with frank, im confused to the points your both making RE unjust causes???

Hm, daffy, really? In Canadian history books, if I remember it right, it's said that the Fenians were Irish who by fighting on US side against the English in Canada thought they were doing it for Ireland's freedom. Sounds pretty convincing, even more so in the light what you and Frank have said about Irish history, the 800 years of the often hopeless struggles.

Yes...they were at times...and it happened at regular intervals...up-risings, insurrections etc...but eventually as British power waned in the worls/Europe and people realised they had an opportunity to break free...they did to a degree...bar N ireland........its very confusing...Daffy /Puzzler....!

needless to say, they fought for america and lived in america. some were already well established american families of american descent

i dont deny that some were fresh in from ireland. but the fenian name in the US was a nickname, and two rebels setting up an irish republic in exile does not constitute the irish fighting for ireland.

as i said. two rebels, John O’Mahoney and James Stephens

Not unjust causes....Daffy...its the historical, long term reprecussions.......of being on the wrong side, making the wrong decisions...backing the people who can help you least........in the wrong place.....between two great powers.......etc

that makes sense, in that case, just to make it clear to puzzler, the irish too have also supported he wrong side, making the wrong decisions...backing the people who can help you least........in the wrong place.....between two great powers.......etc

napoleon for one! lets not overlook roger casements involved with ze germans. (operating under the enemy of my enemy is my friend. the irish people seriously condemn the nazis before you go into a rant....whoever may go into a rant )

Re: Napoleon. He's been evaluated quite critically in Poland. He promised us independence for fighting on his side. A huge chunk of the French army consisted of the Poles. Then he used us to do terrible disgraceful things, such as crushing the Spanish and San Domingo freedom fighters. Many of us perished in Spain and San Domingo. That was a big disgrace. Also, he gave us much less than he'd promised; he made deals behind our backs with the Russians and Germans. But at first, there was nothing 'misguided' about our joining him: he was the most powerful conqueror since the times of Julius Caesar and he seemed able to change totally the face of Europe, and even the world. We stood by his side to his very end, for the sake of honour.

Yes..Daffy....but the outcomes for Poland..when making those choices..were...10/20/30 times worse than it was for the Irish........

And in hindsight...it all ...largely went wrong....

Didn't Poland once have a French king...so disenchanted did they become with their own?

id have to say i think thats a matter of perspective. ie whats bad to one, is tragic to another.

I agree Poland, being on the continent and between Western Europe and Russia, got alot of unwanted attention for the Polish people. But I hardly think it was polands fault!!!

No matter what, west or east was always going to go through poland to attack one another. and napoleon nearly did that. So i can see puzzlers point on 'at the time it was not such a bad idea' and to be fair, he promised ireland the same.

yes, i agree poland came out MUCH worse than Ireland from the napoleonic wars. but from an irish perspective, it did not help irish goals of freedom.
(hence my 'perspective' point)

Daffy, have I ever said that the Irish people don't condemn 'the Nazis'? I've hoped that in spite of my occasional silliness you've thought me wiser than that. But it seems to me, e.g. from reading Irish literature, that you have always been much more friendly towards the Germans than we, just as we have been more friendly towards the English than you.

Yes...being in their geographical position......but Poland..also invaded.....also expanded.....plus backed the french ......oh dear......hacked off the Germans.....my point to being that these countries don't forget...then.....all hell is to pay for the sins of your grandfather...great grandfather etc....back 500 years!!!

a fair enough assement, it goes to 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend' attitude.

Addendum, that attitude for irish on english and vice versa is NULL AND VOID. that was a long time ago to us now. the past - irish and english are not enemies. friendly sporting rivals only.

However, the Poles and Irish themselves have got on famously! in my experiences and i think i can say, in Franks too!

See a previous Post Puzzler......."the saying in Ireland was "Englands enemy was our ( Irelands) friend..."...however misguided and perverse that now seems.

Puzzler...I only wish our new EU friends Poland/Estonia/Lithuania...all the very best.....

of course of course i agree with that.

you swine you! :P what about bulgaria? romania? the others???? joking bud, wiem to you meant them tez

Frank, how did you calculate it that the 'outcomes' (of Poland's joining Napoleon) were '10/20/30 times worse than ... for the irish' (sic)? What do you mean that 'in the hindsight it all went wrong'? Do you mean that we had a better choice than joining Napoleon, but we didn't make the choice?