WW2: Britain Declares War on Germany to Save Poland

its obvious that propaganda demonized Serbs to provide excuse for actions of so called West on Balkan

If BBC/CNN are true media, people of world would know that some individuals from all sides involved in Civil War in former Yugoslavia committed crimes in some cases but that only Serbian side didn`t had ideological background for crimes. People of world would know that Serbs were first attacked from Bosnian Muslim, Croatian and Albanian extremists, together with Arabic/Al Qaeda mujaheedines and NATO forces.

We defended ourselves in agony, in retreat, defending our civilians who were crucial target of our foes!

You know, I think that NATO has great fear from Serbs because NATO is aware of our moral advantage.


Serbs don`t have where to retreat anymore. We have more then 500.000 of Serbs (and not only Serbs) from all over of Balkan which were ethnicaly clensed.

all who ride with mujaheedines down there on Kosovo would found meaning of real fear when our wrath reach them


O, brothers! and, you would one day ask yourself what you doing in alliance with evil soldiers of Muhamed and why you needed that shame to ride with them against Racowie!

Then, your heart would tell you what to do


not true

some love us, some hate us

we don`t hate nobady

Allright, allright, Soviets turned towards Germany, because they had been turned down by Great Britain and France before - Stalin recognized Red Army's utter weakness in '39 and wanted to gain some time to build it up after he purged it in '36. After Russians suggested some interest of diplomatic reapprochment, the Brits send some low-rank diplomats for the talks. Being given these signals, Soviets tried to approach Germans - with success. Hitler was afraid of war on two fronts, and securing Eastern flank after expected defeat of Poland fitted his business perfectly, for France was the next in the queue for conquer. Fuehrer was a cunning player and he expected Poland to attack Germany in case France was invaded first, and on the other hand he was anticipating that France nad GB wouldn't make any action against him. Although he was wrong - these countries declared war on him on the 3rd September - all that ensued was only 'phoney war', so he had the time to defeat Poland, replace losses with new 'war material' and resume war in '40.

how the hell has the bleedin' balkan conflict crept into this thread aswell?
Wroclaw Boy...Your patriotism is comendable,your grasp of history is however attrocious. You do us all a disservice arguing the defense for Britains actions while spouting nonsence regarding finland and operation barrbarosa.
BTW, happy Indipendance Day Finland :) (not sure from who your celebrating about but,ho hum...)
Harry,you are nearer the point,but, the tone taken with Carol was not very sporting, mis informed rather than lies would be closer to the "truth". She has obviously come to the topic with a passion and speaks like one just really getting deeper into the history. While here in europe refferences to WW2 are practically part of the language Im sure things are different in the States so her rather preaching tone may be more appropriatte for a less well informed American audiance.
As to the actual debate,this will continue to go round in circles, illinformed "experts" from all sides will chip in with heir two penneth worth and countless others will be "offended" by these remarks. Puzzler seemed to answer the questions initially posed by the thread topic with the simple and true statements that Britain,while going to war with Germany only because they invaded Poland was just not in any tactical or physical condition to retaliate untill weeks after Poland had been crushed,by which time,as far as was known in the west what was the hurry. "We" knew that hitler would eventually play his hand westwerds,the French,the larger of the 2 allies,were convinced they would smash the nazis on the Maginot line then proceed through defeated Germany whence all the huns would leave Poland like good little boys and go back to their barracks in der heimat. Bare in mind that the attrocities being played out in Poland,though very real,were A, not known about by the allies for some time due to lack of confirmed inteligence reports and B, even if they had been known,who would belive them,the british had been fed garbage about "le Bosche" bayoneting babies and raping nuns for the first 2 years of WW1,all of which had turned out to be lies and black propaganda,why should they belive the stories again? Just think, would you belive GW Bush again if he spoke about WMDs?
So in short. Britain only declared war on Germany because it invaded Poland. Poland was crushed within 3 weeks to all intents and purposes ceasing to exist under two invading empires. By this time the French army was still mobilizing and the British army was still on boats heading to France. What more could britain have done under the circumstances? Remember we are 3 years from thousand bomber raids and such like and we share no borders with germany. Very sorry you were invaded and all that but please, look at history like grown ups and stop blaming Britain for all your troubles.

just follow the steps of British perfidy schemes and you would learn

Crow.

Osiol, I would now calm down. Thanks for reminding me about me. i just needed to inform public about facts or i would implode and explode

but while i know what is with me, I mean Serbs are `a little` under pressure but, what is with those Brits... they are **** like a bucket of the frogs (is it OK grammatically/spelling?)

that would imply we were ever allied to serbia, Im pretty that has NEVER been the case,well at least since about 1914 anyway .
Crow, you do realise you are single handedly setting back Serbias inclusion in the world of non totally bonkers kill crazy blame every b ugger else for your problems nations, cripes,your more mussleman than the muslims :)

:) he, he, he ... said one who is proud son of Britain which was/is overrun by Semitic ideological delusions and genetics since Roman times

My God you even abandoned your native European language, while Serbs pushed back their Semitic oppressor, on behalf of whole Europe.

But, Britain seams don`t like that Turks were pushed. Turks were good to hold Serbs, Poles and Russians (Slavs in general) far from warm sees and you now restoring Turkish influence on Balkan. Turks were good for British/English bussines.

Listen to me Brit! Forget about Turkish influence on Balkan. Serbs are in the move

do you mean we are not a nation of inbred hillbilly cousin sh aggers? Yep,proud of that:)


Er, English is one of the Germanic languages origionationg in central and northern europe.
What are you rabbiting on about now, go rent Galipoli or lawrence of Arabia and see Britains relationship with the turks in full bloom. BTW Serbs were the bleedin ottomans jannissirees,so ner. The only time weve been chummy with the Turks is against the Russians,our Kings a Greek,not exactly turks best mate.....

Good,Im sure the rest of the Balkans will breath a sigh of relief,where are you all going, Africa,you lot will fit in right well in Somalia or Rwanda....

I dont think it's a matter of blaming GB for all our troubles. The lack of action by GB at all as seen in the beginning of WW2 can be seen as symptomatic of their general disposition toward the Poles for much if not all of WW2. The fact is, if GB knew they couldnt mount any assault from the West why did they contract with the Poles at all and form an alliance? I'll let you answer that.

The 'anger' directed toward GB I think moreso comes from the notion that GB had all of the rest of WW2 to do something positive to assist the Poles, but nothing happened. Poles looked to GB for support and got none. The balance sheet of what Poles did for GB as opposed to what GB did for Poles is heavily stacked in Poland's favour. That gives the Poles the standing to question what GB did for them.

I agree - GB really couldnt have done anything more. They really tried and the results speak for themselves.

He was not wrong at all.He expected that allied army would not attack him if he invaded Poland and that is why he had left very weak forces in the western front moving the bulk of his army for the operations in Poland.In fact many marshalls were against a campaign in Poland without first securing the west border from possible allied attack.Mannstein wrote after the war that he was sure that if the french army invaded Germany when almost all troops were engaged in Poland,they had serious chances to penetrate the front and cause a phenomenal defeat to german army.It was a risk that Hitler personally undertook who for some reason was convinced that allied forces will not attack his troops in the West.

I think this was done as a deterent , which i am sure they believed they would not have to back up with action....When Poland was invaded the UK was in no position to do very much at all.....If it hadn,t been for that signed agreement with the Poles then i am pretty sure the Uk would have made lots of protests , but would not have declared war , and would have hoped Hitler would stop at Poland and not cause any more bother....After the slaughter of the first war there was no great desire to go at it again with Germany , and had it not been for that agreement we would have stayed out of the war untill France was attacked...

interesting discussion...

what GB missed to do for poland?
they could have forgotten about appeasement earlier and act. which on the other hand they could not do as the danger would have been that hitler turns against them first...

a little story on the side:
right before the war there was a military parade in england and the german ambassador was present. as the GB army was very small at that time they simply let the parade pass twice to give the germans the impression of a strong military...
clever! ;)

is GB to blame for the above?
certainly not. poland was overrun by the germans within a couple of days. impssible to send troops from GB on time...

what GB did for poland?
very simple...
if they would not have been marching together with their allies people in poland would speak german today...

not good...

why do people have to argue for the sake of an argument again in this thread of a simple thing remains unclear to me...

I Would NEVER Dream of downplaying the sacrifices your Countrymen made.
In an attempt to hold of the Full might of a Fresh and Fully equipped German War machine.

It wasnt called a Blitkrieg for nothing..
Poland Held out Much longer than Most european countries.
Its also true that Many Polish Were Slaughtered. Just for having the Guts to defend their homeland against invasion.

And Yes.
They were treated like ****.
Left to be slaughtered by a Watching Russian Army.
Then Conscripted to Help them Push back and defeat the Germans.
And then Arrested for taking up arms.

Ahh Wonderful Russia. LOL
Sold out by the Americans to Appease the Red Army. ( Against Churchills Wishes and Hopes )
But by the time this Part of the Treaty was agreed.
Churchill Was Powerless to Stop it.

It was he who said. ( An Iron curtain has been drawn across Europe )
True. Our Government Could have done more.
But we had a ( Clement Attlee ) ***** for a Prime minister.

Nothing surprising, right ?...



Not only in Poland...

Of course we should not forget that the UK would have been even closer to defeat in the battle of britain if it had not been for the Polish squadrens in the R.A.F....and the many Polish soldiers who fought in the British army in British uniform...My father was in the tank regiment in the desert , most of his comrades were Poles.....By contrast when i was in the Army Poland was a potential enemy as part of the warsaw pact , thankfully it never came to that.....A Polish friend of mine who was in the Army assured me that they would have turned on the Russians first....Thank goodness we never had to put it to the test....

Who inspired them to uprise and organized their uprising?Who gave them weapons to stand two months resistance against the german forces?



So what could Churchill do?Would he stop the advance of english forces in the West?What a big deal.

They were slaughtered because Germans wanted to build a nation of slave workers,so they had to exterminate the intellectuals.French were not slaughtered despite their ''resistance''.

There is Just no easy route with people like you is there.?

Praise the Courage of the Polish People. And Compliment their Strength.
And you still find ways to Sling Mud.
And cause ill feeling.

Thats the Last i will say on this subject.

The bomb in Serajevo market square that launched the NATO operations was put by Muslims in order to achieve sympathy and military intervention from the West.It was proved by a french journalist some months after the event but the western media managed to silence all these voices.After all the NATO bombing had already begunn.



They faced heavily equipped,very experienced mujachentin forces with great ability in guerilla war,the same kind of forces which now causes all this embarassement of americans in Iraq.Plus all these forces took great weapon offers from the West.Their equipment was western.



NATO forces should try to invade Serbia and see first hand the bravement of serbian soldiers.Did they try to?I wonder why.



Now the american forces in Iraq have to conduct genocide of the same soldiers of Muhamed who use the weapons they gave them themselves when they were regarded western allies.However this is called war against insurgents or guerilla war or war against terror while the war in Bosnia was called ethnic cleansing,bosniak resistance etc.

That's odd, the Polish army were quite happy to invade Czechoslovakia.

Liar. The heroic Serb Stanislav Galić has been convicted of ordering the market place attacks. Investigation revealed a total of six possible locations from which the shell in the first Markale massacre could have been fired, of which five were under VRS and one under ARBiH control. The ARBiH site in question was visible to UNPROFOR observers at the time, who reported that no shell was fired from that position. Furthermore, certain components of the projectile could only have been produced in one of two places, both of which were under the control of the Army of Republika Srpska.
But nice try all the same.

Want to show me the mass graves of 8,000 civilians from a single town who were all killed by US forces in Iraq? I can point out for you the graves of the 8,000 civilians your boys bravely murdered.

Well i can,t speak for the whole Polish army , my friend is just one person....But i suspect many Polish soldiers were not so happy about invading their neighbours...

But wasn,t this thread supossed to be about ww2...?

After the attack of US forces in Fallujah two years ago there were 3000 civilians dead in a four day operation.You cannot conduct war against guerillas without civilian losses.American troops have orders to kill civilians in cases of doubt.
Guerillas want americans to kill as many civilians as possible in order to turn the world against them.They also kill civilians if american victims are not enough.

Please, don't give up.

That is what they hope for, that way they can never give credit where credit is due.[
quote=Firestorm] Praise the Courage of the Polish People. And Compliment their Strength [/quote]
Many voices make light work. The track record for the Polish speaks for it self, yet others refuse to see. Stand tall Poland, history cannot be denied forever.

Carol

Yes,only Romania and Yugoslavia refused to participate.Causesku was such a humanist.

This was the national tragedy.There were polish soldiers in british uniform,polish soldiers in german uniform and polish soldiers in soviet uniform.There were not many choices these years.

It was the other way around. Churchill told Roosevelt he no longer wanted to upset Stalin (Uncle Joe) and he was done trying to talk Stalin into letting them help Poland. This is confirmed in telegrams between them. Original copies can be seen on line Pres. Roosevelt library. At this point what was the USA to do, I guess they could have gone in alone and taken the risk of Russia's threat. Then God forbid Stalin does react, where would the USA and Poland stand. Between fighting Russia and Germany. Churchill dropped the ball and Roosevelt complied. Carol

How much misinformation can you spread!

The reality of the situation was exactly the opposite of what you claim: Churchill wanted to support the Poles Roosevelt didn’t want to upset Uncle Joe! Look at the communication about the Warsaw Uprising and use of the USAAF bases in Ukraine to supply the Home Army in Warsaw
“The Soviet refusal launched a crescendo of telegrams between Churchill, Roosevelt and Stalin. August 20th, Churchill and Roosevelt send a joint message to Stalin urging him to let their planes land.

August 22nd, Stalin responds with a denunciation of the handful of criminals in Warsaw.

August 35th, Churchill asks Roosevelt to join him in another impassioned plea to Stalin. To Roosevelt he proposes to send the planes and see what happens.

It is at this moment that Roosevelt makes a fateful decision. August 26th, Roosevelt to Churchill. "I do not consider it advantageous in the long term general war prospect for me to join you in the proposed message to Uncle Joe." ”
Read it for yourself at http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0507/24/cp.01.html

More from that same source
“DAVIES: Roosevelt's refusal to act is probably the key political moment in the writing. The western allies had a lot of cards they could have played. They were supplying the Soviet Union with colossal amounts of transport, ammunition, military supplies, and if the president had intervened he may have well had a response.

They didn't even try it.

Whether the effort would have succeeded, whether Stalin would have backed down, we'll never know. What we do know is that Roosevelt wouldn't even support Churchill in some half-hearted efforts to put pressure on Stalin. But Roosevelt was preoccupied with beating the Nazis on the Western Front and he knew that Soviets had so far borne the brunt of the battle against the Germans. He did not want to risk losing them.

KENNEDY: This is very much on Roosevelt's mind that he cannot really afford to antagonize the Soviet Union in any way. The basic strategy of the United States, a war of attrition where most of the attritting would be done by the Soviets. And indeed, the Second World War took over 20 million Soviet lives. Took fewer than half a million American lives.”

Even after the end of WWII Churchill was planning an attack on the Soviet Union to liberate Poland!


BTW: what could the USA have done? Well which was the only country in the world with nuclear weapons in 1945? If the USA had said “All Soviet troops out of Poland or Moscow gets nuked” might something have happened?

Go read some history books before you come here dragging names through mud and making the USA out to be the heroes of every situation.

I stand corrected. Thank you, Carol