What name should we use for 1939-45 deportation of Polish to Siberia?

Thank you for the artical its very interesting. Carol

Look at Monte Cassino, English and Americans couldn't conquer the hill in "130 day", Polish soldiers made it in "2nd Attempt".





I give you what you gave me, "one instance" look above at message #103 for more. I hope you understand how it hurts the families that were deported to make it sound as if they had a choice. Carol

These deportations were crimes against humanity...but, of course, Hollywood makes no movies about them...I would like to see a good Polish director make at least a contemporary documentary on these events...also, a Russian should make a film about the real events of the Bolshevik revolution, in addition to one about the Gulag and those criminals who ran them.

As with "Katyn" it's just a mater of time. I am trying to get a copy of, "The Lost Requiem", this just surfaced in Iran (see my other ques for the link). or question Look at "The impossiable escape", the producer is trying to locate the living suvivors.

I have the letter out to the President of Poland and USA I want Feb. 10, to be a day of remembrance for the people that were deported, I don't care if all they do is lower the flag. Its a start, right?

I want a name that our children can google and know the truth about what took place and by whom. Is this so much to ask? Any thoughts, "Our Forgotten Polish" really seems to fit. Carol, USA

Chamberlain was a PM then, you... you UFO.



BS. Just like attack on radio station.

Bolshevik revolution, can be google and people know about it. Carol

I would suggest you go to this website: URL..the woman who runs it is Dana Alvi, and she lives in Los Angeles...the site is dedicated to illuminating people on real Polish history, especially pertaining to events relating to WWII...she is a bit hard to get a response from if you email her...but I have heard her interviewed on certain 'alternative' news programs and she is very good.

and what do you think the falshirmjager defenders were doing in that "130" days Carol, drinking shnapps and sunning themselves under Roman skies? No,they were fighting and dying,and killing allied service men on a huge scale.Eventually,when down to a few dozen ,but still lethal,defenders the Poles arrived on the scene and took the hill. A great feat no doubt,but had they arrived there 130 days earlier there is no doubt they would have been slaughtered just as the other allies had been. The second world war was not won by any single action or by any one nations contribution,it was only won due to shifting alliances and the loss of blood on all sides.
If you ask any Polish ex serviceman who faught with Anders he would say he was fighting to crush Germany,and probably get back to Poland via Italy,through the reich and eastwards. You do them a great diservice by implying the were "dying for the english" as this is plainly not the case, even with those who stayed here and made a home after the war.Who were the english dying for in Italy ? I dont recal england getting anything out of that bloodycampain....
When hitler said,I know,lets play war today,we all lost.

So they took the hill all because of the fighting before them.

Polish were fighting for "Freedom". Not just theirs but France, Italy and Englands? We will never know if it was all due to 130 days of prior fighting but look at the other statistics. Fights that looking at numbers, seemed to be no win, yet they did.

This is so true. I must point out when everyone else had a home in the end Poland did not. They were shafted and left to fight their own war, even then they tried.

Who else lost their freedom, this was what Poland was fighting for?

Carol

So they took the hill all because of the fighting before them.

Polish were fighting for "Freedom". Not just theirs but France, Italy and Englands? We will never know if it was all due to 130 days of prior fighting but look at the other statistics. Fights that looking at numbers, seemed to be no win, yet they did.

This is so true. I must point out when everyone else had a home in the end Poland did not. They were shafted and left to fight their own war, even then they tried.

Who else lost their freedom, this was what Poland was fighting for?

Carol

You are right and you are wrong.

They took to fighting to get back to Poland, but they eneded up dying for the British. And yet, when it was time to honor those who defeated the Nazis, Poles were not even invited to the victory parade. The soldiers of the 4th largest allied army during WW2 were discarded like garbage.

Again, no matter how you spin and what little semantic games you go for, or how much you try to convince all that Brits offered some alleged favors to Poles and Poland, the truth is that those soldiers and their country were betrayed by Churchill and the British government.

This artical gives reference to cited material and begins with the mindset towards Poland.
Carol

Note: Please read the total report. I am in the process of reviewing and have not verified cuted material.



http://web.ku.edu/~eceurope/hist557/lect16.htm

Yes,but England had guaranteed polish independance.How was it supposed to have been guaranteed?If you do not have troops to attack,then do not guarantee to fight.It is simple.
Every decision also for advance of forces was made by both french and english marshalls.The English did never put pressure on French for offensive.They even denied to land in Normandy and it was Stalin's persistence for second front opening that forced Britain to participate in Normandy operation.It was also due to pressure by americans.

All soldiers in the allied forces fought and died for all the allies.
In the case of Poland, when it was discovered that the country was to be virtually handed over to the USSR as a result of the Yalta Agreement, there was a moment when the Polish soldiers refused to go on fighting seeing their country was already lost. They were then persuaded to continue to fight for the common cause which includes “dying for the British”. Like it or not, there is no getting away from this.

However, to go back a bit in the discussion, the betrayal of Poland has little to do with Britain and France attacking or not attacking the Germans in 1939. The betrayal becomes a real, tangible fact in Yalta.

But there was another betrayal in preparation, and that occurred when, at the end of the war, Churchill told General Anders to take his soldiers and his people back to their own country – the one Churchill had just sold to their enemy. He didn’t want the Poles in Britain. It was Prime Minister Atlee who decided that perhaps this was one deplorable lack of ethics too many and as such simply unacceptable: those Poles who came over to the UK at the end of the war are there thanks to him. Were it for Churchill they and their families would have spent their most fruitful years in the Gulags, in Siberia.

The non-invitation to the Victory Parade was a simple un-gentlemanly act of cowardice, but in comparison to Yalta it was and is a very small thing.

I don't understand some comments here. If UK and France had openly admitted that they don't want to fight then Poland would have to look for other allies, defiantely would not like to fight Germans alone and the only serious alternative alliance could be with Soviets against Germans or with Germans against the Soviets and after all the 2nd option seemed to be much better. Don't forget that nazis didn't start full scale extermination of civilians until 41/42, while It was known that Bolshevism is barbarian and genocidal system long before WW2 started.

Russia started on the eastern front. All Stalin wanted was Poland to be his puppet. In fact he stopped Britian and America from helping the Polish. Carol

Nothing new there then! TF



Churchilll was PM 1940 to 1945 you thick fek

Neville Chamberlain was PM 1937 to 1940.

and since the war in Europe didnt start until 1939 I would say that Churchill played bigger part in where Poland is concerned...and since our elections are generally in May time - Chamberlain was only in power for about 8 months....Dont try and tell me about the history of my country or about past PMs...stick to your own!

Not far from truth although the polish leadership was not particularly flexible and diplomatic at the moment.

Hitler's plans for Slavs were quite known.Poles would become a nation of slave labour and Russians would disappear to make room for german colonies.Hitler wanted Russia for its natural resources and Poland for its workforce.

Now that's an understatement. Being shot in the head on "Stalin's" orders in "Katyn" could make some of us unflexable and un diplomatic. Not to mention the Kresy families heading off to Siberia. No, I don't see the alternative alliance with Soviets.

Carol

How do you define "Full Scale" ?

The nazis started full scale extermination of Russians in 1941,the same time when invasion begann.
They executed only the members of polish intellect,like teachers,doctors,lawyers etc because they wanted to create a polish nation that would be capable only to work as slaves for the nazis.They wanted the level of education of polish workers to be confined to basic reading,writing some sentences like Hitler is great,the Germans are our rescuers,we have to obey the Germans and some basic calculation like adding and multiplying.This knowledge was enough for polish people according to Germans.
They stopped executing Poles in Auschwitz in 1943 when they had already exterminated the intellectuals.Poles only worked in Auschwitz.Jews continued to be executed till 1945 even till the last day of war in concentration camps that had not been captured by allied forces.

Katyn happened after the war begann and Poland was captured.I write about the time before the war,during the negotiations between Poland,France,Great Britain and Soviet Union which failed for many reasons and made the Soviets choose to sign the Ribentropp-Molotov treaty.
Great Britain's policy headed to turn Hitler against Soviet Union,so that both Hitler and Stalin get destroyed in the long term in a huge,massacre clash,resulting to them becoming weakened,so they can be overthrowned.
Hitler's policy centered on avoiding fighting in two fronts.He wanted to fight against Soviets without pressure from the West.
So Great Briatin had reasons to think Hitler would attack Soviet Union.But they miscalculated Stalin's reaction.
Stalin wanted to fight against Germany if a western front existed as well.Since the allies refused to cooperate with him,he chose to make treaty with Hitler,so he would capture Baltic States and eastern Poland in case of german attack.In this way he could more easily defend Soviet Union from the future german attack because german forces would have to advance first through Baltic States and eastern Poland,thus losing valuable time,losing surprise element and stretching their supply lines,so that their supply would become inadequate.
Moreover Stalin saw a great chance to completely destroy Germany and spread communism and soviet influence throughout Europe.
Churchill had understood that and wanted to make an agreement with Germans before their final collapse.He refused to start the operations in Normandy in 1942,in 1943 and wanted to cancel in in 1944 while Stalin insisted.Stalin pressed for the western front because he was afraid that the allies would make agreement with Germans to stop him if they were not forced to fight against Germans.

And which year we were talking about, you fat ass ?

That's because believed in effectivness of alliance with France and UK.



In this case - millions of murdered civilians.

It did, what date are you going by?

I am refering to the period 1938-1939 till August 1939 and the agreement Ribbentropp-Molotov.When the soviets tried to build common alliance with England and France and were rejected.
Katyn happened because Stalin was afraid that the polish army would cooperate with the Germans and build units in eastern front.
Second reason was that he wanted that only red army would exist in Poland when the soviet troops entered the teritorry.
Third reason that he thought very possible that polish army officers would cooperate with London and try to build up resistance against Soviet Union.He wanted the ground clear to fill Poland with communitsts.
Fourth reason was eagerness for revenge for the defeat of red army in front of Warsaw in 1922 by Pilduski troops.Stalin was in part responsible for this crucial defeat of the red army,Trotsky had openly accused him for bad strategy and lack of military ability.He wanted to punish the Poles for that defeat,that caused the general defeat of Bolshekivism in Germany and any more european countries.

Poland was not captured then. Carol

it was hunt on slaves and my heart bleeding when I see how deeply my kind had fallen

Like that isn`t enough that some hostile foreigners hunt us ...

It is great truth that Russian state of that time was just a tool of those who wanted to spread communism in Slavic world (Russian intelligentsia and ordinary Russians were among biggest victims) but it is also great truth that only modern Russian state can solve consequences of this enormous pogrom and heal the rift between Poles and Russians.

God help you both- Poles and Russians

You do not understand?I am refering too the period just before the war,what the Soviets,the British and the French did.How everybody tried to manipulate the situation.
Poland's fate was determined in Molotov-Ribbentropp treaty.