Tilea, Memel & the Anglo-Polish treaty 1939

Discussions on the Holocaust and 20th Century War Crimes. Note that Holocaust denial is not allowed. Hosted by David Thompson.
ljadw
Member
Posts: 10469
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Tilea, Memel & the Anglo-Polish treaty 1939

Post by ljadw » 03 Jul 2012 11:44

What was the PM saying (in the cabinet,not to the Polish) :we should have to come to their help=we will be forced to help them .That does NOT mean that Britain was chosing the side of Poland in the conflict about Danzig .
A year before (the Sudeten problem),Chamberlain said publicly that Britain was going ineluctably for a war with Germany,although it was about people no one in Britain knew about (thus did not care about) .
It was the same in 1939:Chamberlain said that if there was a war between Germany and Poland,Britain would have no alternative than to intervene .
BTW:is there ANY British statement about Danzig? Was Britain saying
a) our POV is that the legal status of Danzig must remain inchanged?
b)our POV is that Danzig must return to Germany ?
c)our POV is that Danzig must go to Poland?
Of course not:no one in Britain did gave a damn about Danzig,no one was willing to put his nose in this hornets'nest.
Danzig was a problem between Germany and Poland,not the business of Britain .

Boby
Member
Posts: 2599
Joined: 19 Nov 2004 17:22
Location: Spain

Re: Tilea, Memel & the Anglo-Polish treaty 1939

Post by Boby » 03 Jul 2012 11:56

Thanks for your irrelevant, unsourced post. But sorry for you, because Britain was prepared to go to war over Danzig if Poland considered it a "threat" to his independence and tried to resist it by the force of arms.
Asked by the Chancellor of
the Exchequer whether he drew a distinction between a
seizure of Danzig by Germany, and a German attack on the
rest of Poland, the Foreign Secretary said that he thought
it was difficult to find any better test than the decision
by Poland whether to regard such an attack as a threat
to her independence which she must resist by force.
British Cabinet 30.3.1939, 11.0 a.m. in: TNA, CAB 23/98, fol. 160

User avatar
LWD
Member
Posts: 8584
Joined: 21 Sep 2005 21:46
Location: Michigan

Re: Tilea, Memel & the Anglo-Polish treaty 1939

Post by LWD » 03 Jul 2012 14:03

Boby wrote:False.
Actually he's correct. I think there may be an English comprehension problem here.
PM is saying exactly what is saying: if Poland "regarded the Danzig issue as constituting a threat to
their independence, and weere prepared to resist by force".
I.e. if Poland considers the issue a threat to their sovereignty then Britain will come to thier aid because it's a threat to their soverignty not because of the "Danzig issue" per se.
There was no need of war, just a reunification of Danzig "by force".
In this case a "reunification by force" was, at least from what we can tell considered a serious enough breach to justify war. You may not like it but that's irrelevant.
Just a decision of Danzig senate.
No. The Danzig senate didn't have the authority to change the sovereignty of Danzig. "Reunfication by force" rather emplies the use of German troops does it not?
If Poland considered this a "threat", Britain would help Poland.
And give Hitler's track record quite rightly so.
Your thesis wholly collapsed.
His is significantly more intact than yours.

User avatar
LWD
Member
Posts: 8584
Joined: 21 Sep 2005 21:46
Location: Michigan

Re: Tilea, Memel & the Anglo-Polish treaty 1939

Post by LWD » 03 Jul 2012 14:06

Boby wrote:You are contradicting yourself.
...
2)A reunification of Danzig by force is NOT a peaceful return of Danzig
You said early in this thread that:
Britain did not care about Dantzig,it did not care if Dantzig became German again,or if it became Polish .Dantzig was a German-polish problem,not the business of Britain .
There is not contradiction there. If Poland and Germany could come to a peaceful resolution of the Danzig issue Britian would be perfectly happy whatever it was. "Reunification by force" however is not a peaceful resolution. Also if it threatened Polish sovereignty Britian was concerned.

User avatar
LWD
Member
Posts: 8584
Joined: 21 Sep 2005 21:46
Location: Michigan

Re: Tilea, Memel & the Anglo-Polish treaty 1939

Post by LWD » 03 Jul 2012 14:09

Boby wrote:Thanks for your irrelevant, unsourced post. But sorry for you, because Britain was prepared to go to war over Danzig if Poland considered it a "threat" to his independence and tried to resist it by the force of arms.
Asked by the Chancellor of
the Exchequer whether he drew a distinction between a
seizure of Danzig by Germany, and a German attack on the
rest of Poland, the Foreign Secretary said that he thought
it was difficult to find any better test than the decision
by Poland whether to regard such an attack as a threat
to her independence which she must resist by force.
British Cabinet 30.3.1939, 11.0 a.m. in: TNA, CAB 23/98, fol. 160
Again you are missinterpreting this. Britain isn't offering to go to war over the Danzig issue but over Polish sovereignty. If the Poles considered the "Danzig issue" a threat to their sovereignty then Britain would support them in that just like they would any other threat to their sovereignty.

little grey rabbit
Member
Posts: 745
Joined: 12 Mar 2010 04:26

Re: Tilea, Memel & the Anglo-Polish treaty 1939

Post by little grey rabbit » 04 Jul 2012 01:05

No. The Danzig senate didn't have the authority to change the sovereignty of Danzig
If I recall correctly the mechanism to rejoin Germany was a change in the constitution that needed 70 of the Senate seats to amend.
http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=r_ ... cite&hl=en

The Nazis got 61% of the seats, but were held up by the combined weight of the KPD, SPD, the Centre Party and the Polish Party. Once the anti-Nazi divide had been closed there is no doubt Danzig would have wished to reunify.

I think you are needlessly splitting hairs over the diplomatic language used in the Cabinet note - it is clear that the Brits were nominating Danzig as a casus belli despite the convoluted language: "decision
by Poland whether to regard such an attack as a threat
to her independence which she must resist by force."
this is saying nothing more if Poland is prepared to go war over Danzig, then so is Britain.

A similar example is the demands of NATO for Libyan forces to cease their attacks on "civilians" or else they would have to commence airstrikes to protect "civilians". NATO didn't tell the "civilians' they had to stop attacking Libyan forces and in fact encouraged them to do so.

The same repugnant doublespeak is being currently being deployed against the Syria. Twisting words is just the trade of politicians, as historians we can surely rise above that

User avatar
Terry Duncan
Forum Staff
Posts: 5816
Joined: 13 Jun 2008 22:54
Location: Kent

Re: Tilea, Memel & the Anglo-Polish treaty 1939

Post by Terry Duncan » 04 Jul 2012 01:51

The same language as used in this case can be cited to say Britain would simply refuse to support Poland by saying no more than the Polish actions had not been forced upon her and Britain would not aid Poland in self-aggrandizement. In that case we would see the same old 'perfidious Albion' line trotted out and claims Britain never intended to support Poland and simply used the agreement to lure Poland into a foolish action etc.

So far people seem to be focused on trying to make the wording say what they wish it to say, but for all the claims Britain was ready to go to war in support of Poland no matter what we have seen no actual proof that this was the case. The agreement was made with the expectation Germany would try to force the issue of Danzig and once again threaten war in order to gain concessions, not with the expectation Poland would herself simply annex Danzig in order to provoke a war with Germany.

Other than trying to twist words to reach a desired conclusion, is there any actual documented proof that Britain was trying to use Poland to start a war rather than to make it perfectly clear to Hitler no further 'concessions' under threat of force from him were going to happen and that war must result if he insists on following this policy?

Brumbar
Member
Posts: 93
Joined: 11 Jun 2005 12:35
Location: USA

Re: Tilea, Memel & the Anglo-Polish treaty 1939

Post by Brumbar » 04 Jul 2012 02:01

little grey rabbit wrote:
No. The Danzig senate didn't have the authority to change the sovereignty of Danzig
Twisting words is just the trade of politicians, as historians we can surely rise above that
You mean like this comment of yours regarding OSR 24:"It was dated early September, it was not dated at all...."

little grey rabbit
Member
Posts: 745
Joined: 12 Mar 2010 04:26

Re: Tilea, Memel & the Anglo-Polish treaty 1939

Post by little grey rabbit » 04 Jul 2012 02:41

Brumbar wrote:
little grey rabbit wrote:
No. The Danzig senate didn't have the authority to change the sovereignty of Danzig
Twisting words is just the trade of politicians, as historians we can surely rise above that
You mean like this comment of yours regarding OSR 24:"It was dated early September, it was not dated at all...."
I don't recall any such remark, although I concede it is possible.

Do you have a link so I can recall the context?

User avatar
waldzee
Banned
Posts: 1422
Joined: 03 Feb 2012 03:44
Location: Calgary Alberta

Re: Tilea, Memel & the Anglo-Polish treaty 1939

Post by waldzee » 04 Jul 2012 03:30

ljadw wrote:What was the PM saying (in the cabinet,not to the Polish) :we should have to come to their help=we will be forced to help them .That does NOT mean that Britain was chosing the side of Poland in the conflict about Danzig .
A year before (the Sudeten problem),Chamberlain said publicly that Britain was going ineluctably for a war with Germany,although it was about people no one in Britain knew about (thus did not care about) .
It was the same in 1939:Chamberlain said that if there was a war between Germany and Poland,Britain would have no alternative than to intervene .
BTW:is there ANY British statement about Danzig? Was Britain saying
a) our POV is that the legal status of Danzig must remain inchanged?
b)our POV is that Danzig must return to Germany ?
c)our POV is that Danzig must go to Poland?
Of course not:no one in Britain did gave a damn about Danzig,no one was willing to put his nose in this hornets'nest.
Danzig was a problem between Germany and Poland,not the business of Britain .
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Thank you for summing up what most of us have tried to 'get across'. I've decided to cease posting on this subject, as the 'Dark British Hidden Shadows od 1939' cult is pretty much immune to reason. :lol:

Hopefully you get read, my friend...

David Thompson
Forum Staff
Posts: 23384
Joined: 20 Jul 2002 19:52
Location: USA

Re: Tilea, Memel & the Anglo-Polish treaty 1939

Post by David Thompson » 04 Jul 2012 04:22

liitle grey rabbit:
A similar example is the demands of NATO for Libyan forces to cease their attacks on "civilians" or else they would have to commence airstrikes to protect "civilians". NATO didn't tell the "civilians' they had to stop attacking Libyan forces and in fact encouraged them to do so.

The same repugnant doublespeak is being currently being deployed against the Syria. Twisting words is just the trade of politicians, as historians we can surely rise above that
We can also surely rise above irrelevant modern political commentary. If you stay on topic and avoid obtruding your notions about current political events into your posts, I won't have to delete them.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 10469
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Tilea, Memel & the Anglo-Polish treaty 1939

Post by ljadw » 04 Jul 2012 09:04

I am reading these things since a lot of years,and,still,I am surprised by the willingness of the Homo Sapiens to believe conspiracy theories,and to stick to them,obstinately,theories as:
Kennedy being murdered by the CIA/KGB/,Castro,the Hunt Brothers,the Illuminati,the Bilderberg group,Rockefeller
09/11 being the work of the CIA/the Illuminati,the Mossad,the Bilderberg group,Rockefeller
the outbreak of WWII being the work of the Illuminati,of an international conspiracy(Roosevelt 8-) ),being the work of Vansittart,who was complotting in the Travellers Club :wink:
The facts OTOH being (but,what are facts for the believers?)
a)that informed people (that does mean :not journalists)knew that after the Sudeten,it would be the turn of Danzig
b)that informed people knew that there was no solution for the problem:Poland nor Germany would give up
c)that informed people knew that a war about Danzig was very unlikely
d)that we know that Britain could do nothing,unless warning Hitler that a German attack would start WWII,and hoping that this would be enough .
e)that nothing what Britain was saying /doing was influencing the attitude of Poland:Beck was not the footman,or the Jeeves of Lord Halifax.
f)that there is no proof al all that Britain was inciting Poland to take a hostile attitude to Germany.
g) the whole discussion about the Anglo-Polish Treaty is indicating a chauvinistic attitude :that Britain was almighty,that it was the gendarme of Europe,intervening everywhere,and obeyed by every one:Whitehall ruling Europe (we have seen the same attitude about Grey and WWI)
h)while the truth is that Britain was declining any commitment on the continent,that it had no offensive capacity ,with which it could intervene,that the role of Britain in the Danzig crisis and its outcome (=WWII) was neglectable .
i)that there was no change at all of British policy:a German attack on Czechoslowakia in 1938 would have the same results as the German attack on Poland in 1939.

Boby
Member
Posts: 2599
Joined: 19 Nov 2004 17:22
Location: Spain

Re: Tilea, Memel & the Anglo-Polish treaty 1939

Post by Boby » 04 Jul 2012 09:25

ljadw wrote:I am reading these things since a lot of years,and,still,I am surprised by the willingness of the Homo Sapiens to believe conspiracy theories,and to stick to them,obstinately,theories as:
Kennedy being murdered by the CIA/KGB/,Castro,the Hunt Brothers,the Illuminati,the Bilderberg group,Rockefeller
09/11 being the work of the CIA/the Illuminati,the Mossad,the Bilderberg group,Rockefeller
the outbreak of WWII being the work of the Illuminati,of an international conspiracy(Roosevelt 8-) ),being the work of Vansittart,who was complotting in the Travellers Club :wink:
The facts OTOH being (but,what are facts for the believers?)
a)that informed people (that does mean :not journalists)knew that after the Sudeten,it would be the turn of Danzig
b)that informed people knew that there was no solution for the problem:Poland nor Germany would give up
c)that informed people knew that a war about Danzig was very unlikely
d)that we know that Britain could do nothing,unless warning Hitler that a German attack would start WWII,and hoping that this would be enough .
e)that nothing what Britain was saying /doing was influencing the attitude of Poland:Beck was not the footman,or the Jeeves of Lord Halifax.
f)that there is no proof al all that Britain was inciting Poland to take a hostile attitude to Germany.
g) the whole discussion about the Anglo-Polish Treaty is indicating a chauvinistic attitude :that Britain was almighty,that it was the gendarme of Europe,intervening everywhere,and obeyed by every one:Whitehall ruling Europe (we have seen the same attitude about Grey and WWI)
h)while the truth is that Britain was declining any commitment on the continent,that it had no offensive capacity ,with which it could intervene,that the role of Britain in the Danzig crisis and its outcome (=WWII) was neglectable .
i)that there was no change at all of British policy:a German attack on Czechoslowakia in 1938 would have the same results as the German attack on Poland in 1939.
You are evading the crucial question: why Britain was prepared to go to war just because Danzig? What was Danzig for Britain? Gibraltar?

You said early in this thread:
Britain never would oppose a peaceful return of Dantzig to the Reich .
Obviously a Danzig senate declaration was "peaceful". But since Poland would oppose such a move, then it was not "peaceful" enough? I doubt Poland would offered much resistance without Britain backing it. Despite polish warnings to Germany in 1939 that a "coup" in Danzig means war, I don't think Poland would go so far. But with his new "friends", the situation changed.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 10469
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Tilea, Memel & the Anglo-Polish treaty 1939

Post by ljadw » 04 Jul 2012 11:47

I am evading nothing :Britain would go to war if Germany attacked Poland (the reason for such attack was irrelevant),it would go to war if Germany attacked Roumania (reason being irrelevant),it would have gone to war if Germany had attacked Czechoslowakia.
A unilateral declaration by the senate was not peaceful:the status of Danzig only could change with the consent of Poland .
About what you are doubting :you are wrong :already before Britain knew of the crisis,in november 1938,Poland said no to the German demands,and,it continued to do this even on 31 august .
Beck was not the footman of Halifax :Britain had no influence at Warsaw,it was powerless.The only possibility to prevent a war,was an agreement between Germany and Poland .
BTW:there was no German coup at Danzig,for the reason that Hitler was convinced that such a coup would result in a war with Poland,resulting in a partioning of Poland and this would demand Ribbentrop going to the Kremlin (=going to Canossa) with his hat in his hand .
And,this,Hitler was not prepared to do(later,he changed his attitude).
And,Britain ? It remained at the sideline:there was nothing,it could do,and,there was nothing it had the intention to do ,because ,it was convinced that there was no risk on a war .
Hitler had to choose(and decided):to have Danzig meaned to go to the Kremlin .

Boby
Member
Posts: 2599
Joined: 19 Nov 2004 17:22
Location: Spain

Re: Tilea, Memel & the Anglo-Polish treaty 1939

Post by Boby » 04 Jul 2012 12:01

Think about this, ljadw:

why Britain was prepared to go to war just because Danzig? What was Danzig for Britain?

Unless you are able to provide a rational explanation, your thesis doesn't make sense (as British policy).

Return to “Holocaust & 20th Century War Crimes”