My position (for those who care)

Discussions on the Holocaust and 20th Century War Crimes. Note that Holocaust denial is not allowed. Hosted by David Thompson.
User avatar
Scott Smith
Member
Posts: 5602
Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 22:17
Location: Arizona
Contact:

Re: WHY CRUSADE?

#46

Post by Scott Smith » 06 Apr 2002, 02:55

General Anders wrote:<<In fact, I'm sure they'd get a lot of help from Poles against the Bolsheviks. So tell me, why the Nazis choose to go along that path? >>

++Because the Nazis, if not the German people as a whole, already had a siege mentality--having fought, and lost, a worldwide coalition of superior forces arrayed against Germany--a conspiracy which had reemerged as a border war was thus instantly transformed into a World War, with even greater stakes.++

<<You're trying to equate a siege mentality with sheer stupidity. And that won't wash.>>
It's only stupid in retrospect. We know that the Germans could not have won and therefore should not have tried to win. It was much more reasonable from their point of view.
After having occupied Poland, there was no reason to go around shooting thousands of people, who weren't even invloved in any resisitance whatsoever at that point. Try again...
Methinks your atrocity tales are exaggerated, but that would require looking at the subject on a case-by-case basis, which I am not prepared to do. Regardless, the Polish nationalists were not going to be Germany's friends, and Germany was not going to be able to feed and arm them anyway, so that leaves exploitation, which was done. I think that may have been a short-sighted policy, but understandable under the circumstances.
++Remember that the original Nazis were mostly ex-soldiers and ex-Freikorps men, and they had fought the grabby Versailles Polish state before in border areas and districts with dispossessed German minorities, and with lingering resentments.++

<<If Prussia hadn't annexed all these lands from Poland in the first place, we wouldn't have all these complications. So maybe someone should've taught these Germans some history. But of course, no one cared about history in Nazi Germany, they were happy with oodles of propaganda instead.>>
What shall we have, Silesian nationalism, Poznan nationalism, Krakow nationalism, too? You are going back to the 18th century here with your revanchism, even before the time of the emergence of modern nationalism, which did not really come to the fore until after the French Revolution and the Napoleonic wars. Polish nationalism circa Versailles consisted of the old nobility, the clergy, and the Polish language.

Had the Germans won the war, your people would no doubt be vociferously claiming to be German “for hundreds of years.” And hundreds of years from now, your descendants most-likely will primarily speak English, assuming they still even know Polish. That’s called change. I don't support German revanchism east of the Oder-Neisse line, either, btw, because there are no oppressed German minorities in East Prussia as far as I know. The Allied ethnic cleansing of Potsdam took care of that for good. No warcrimes trials for them.

The Versailles Polish State was one of the least successful petty-nationalisms created. It was utterly corrupted by the Allies who had created it and meant it that way. The only hope at Polish independence was neutrality and not antagonizing the superpowers. Of course, this meant giving up precious German Danzig, which Poland was NOT going to do.
++By 1939, Poland should have tread very lightly with Germany, emphasizing their similarities not their differences, and absolutely not making crass deals with foreign powers as Israel with Egypt in the sixth century B.C., which was then utterly wasted by Babylon when Egypt couldn't help.++

<<Still doesn't explain why the Germans went bereserk in Poland after the country capitulated. Maybe they were still offended because Poland spurned their overtures? Well, what are we talking about here, international relations, or a love relationship? >>
Lots of paranoia all around. The Poles grossly overestimated the Allies’ flattery and willingness to help them, let alone the hard realities. On to Berlin! But no need for too much sentiment regarding the old nobility, the political priests, and the Allied coterie which was instantly swept away forever once the Russians signed a deal with the Germans. Only fools could not see the mene tekel on the wall and that's exactly what the Polish leaders were. The Germans made a mistake too but they almost rectified it skillful force of arms.
++Anyway, the German government didn't care if the Polish people rebelled or not; the only thing dangerous about the partisans was that they were armed by the worldwide enemy.++

<<Well they should've. Firstly because they lost any sort of support from the Polish population, and secondly because when the war turned the Poles went after the German people.>>
The Poles were already "going after" the German people. Only German minorities had no self-determination or rights, and that was seen by everyone, a burning issue that Hitler was sworn to make good, and a propapanda weapon that he was able to exploit initially until his patience ran out.
I doubt the German casualties in the east would've been as high, both civilians and military, if the Polish population was treated with respect in the first place. The Nazis gamlbed it all on a vistory, and the German people paid the price.
I think you greatly overestimate the Polish contribution to Allied victory. Yes, the Germans paid the price, and are still paying. And so did the Poles pay.
++And the Germans had little reason to respect the Poles as friends, who would have sold themselves handily to their Capitalist and Communist enemies had war not ensued.++

<<Right, that's why Poland was the first nation to go after the Bolsheviks. And that's why we didn't compromise with the Germans or the Soviets in '39. That statement makes no sense. If anything, Poland wanted to be an independent nation, and THAT was the problem.>>
Neutrality is always the best way to preserve independence. The ersatz Polish State was puffed with pride. So were the Germans, for sure, but they were able to back it with force and keep at bay an entire world in arms for many years.
So what are you saying with this map?
Just the obvious. That the Allies had no intention of restoring old fascist Poland. They had their own reasons for fighting Germany. Poland was just their catspaw, which ceased to exist as soon as the ink was dry on Molotov-Ribbentrop. However, there was still some chance for Poland, even then, if she had told the Allies to bugger-off and starting talking to Germany at that point. Hindsight is 20/20.
:)

Davey Boy
Member
Posts: 1504
Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 14:51
Location: Australia

#47

Post by Davey Boy » 06 Apr 2002, 06:10

Scott,

"Methinks your atrocity tales are exaggerated, but that would require looking at the subject on a case-by-case basis, which I am not prepared to do."

Oh, no they're not. Meet some Poles who survived German occupation, I'm sure there's plenty of them in the States. That wil give you a whole new perspective on the issue.

"What shall we have, Silesian nationalism, Poznan nationalism, Krakow nationalism, too? You are going back to the 18th century here with your revanchism, even before the time of the emergence of modern nationalism, which did not really come to the fore until after the French Revolution and the Napoleonic wars. Polish nationalism circa Versailles consisted of the old nobility, the clergy, and the Polish language."

All I'm saying is that those Prussian swines started the whole problem when they annexed western Poland. Please note that before that time, relations between Poles and Germans were excellent. In fact, it was hard to tell who was Polish or German in western Poland. In fact, no one gave a toss whether they were one of the other.

"Had the Germans won the war, your people would no doubt be vociferously claiming to be German “for hundreds of years.” And hundreds of years from now, your descendants most-likely will primarily speak English, assuming they still even know Polish. That’s called change."

See, there's your problem right there. Nothing wrong with change, but it does matter how this change is brought about. There is a massive difference between pointing a gun at someone's head and telling them to start speaking German (which is what the Prussians did to us), and letting them make that choice. How you get there, Scott, is as important as where you're going....or something like that, I can't quite remember the saying, sorry.

"I don't support German revanchism east of the Oder-Neisse line, either, btw, because there are no oppressed German minorities in East Prussia as far as I know. The Allied ethnic cleansing of Potsdam took care of that for good."

Oops...

"The Versailles Polish State was one of the least successful petty-nationalisms created. It was utterly corrupted by the Allies who had created it and meant it that way. The only hope at Polish independence was neutrality and not antagonizing the superpowers. Of course, this meant giving up precious German Danzig, which Poland was NOT going to do."

No excuse for a war though. I think Poland would've eventually matured into a democracy and given up Danzig. Better to wait a bit than unleash hell on earth for one city, which was flattened in the fighting anyway.

"Only fools could not see the mene tekel on the wall and that's exactly what the Polish leaders were."

You get that. No excuse to go and burn the whole damn country though.

"The Poles were already "going after" the German people. Only German minorities had no self-determination or rights, and that was seen by everyone, a burning issue that Hitler was sworn to make good, and a propapanda weapon that he was able to exploit initially until his patience ran out."

Hey, no Prussian imperialism, no Polish/German conflict...


"Neutrality is always the best way to preserve independence."

Scott, it's a pity you weren't around back then. I'm sure if you dropped the word neutrality to both Hitler and Stalin these two tyrants would drop everything and work for the betterment of mankind.

Look, Poland was screwed no matter what. Neutrality? Ha! It works for Switzerland cos they're way up in the Alps, with no history to haunt them. Poland, on the other hand, is on the north European plain, and with plenty of historical baggage. I think the very best Poland could've hoped for was to be a Nazi vassal. And even then, the Soviets may have won the war and flattened us as well as Germany. Neutrality, Scott? He, he...yeh, good one.

"Just the obvious. That the Allies had no intention of restoring old fascist Poland. They had their own reasons for fighting Germany. Poland was just their catspaw, which ceased to exist as soon as the ink was dry on Molotov-Ribbentrop."

I wouldn't want a fascist Poland either. A democracy would've been quite nice thank you very much.

"However, there was still some chance for Poland, even then, if she had told the Allies to bugger-off and starting talking to Germany at that point. Hindsight is 20/20."

Like I said, I wouldn't want a fascist Poland...


User avatar
Scott Smith
Member
Posts: 5602
Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 22:17
Location: Arizona
Contact:

REALPOLITIK...

#48

Post by Scott Smith » 06 Apr 2002, 10:03

David wrote:Scott, it's a pity you weren't around back then. I'm sure if you dropped the word neutrality to both Hitler and Stalin these two tyrants would drop everything and work for the betterment of mankind.
He he. Actually, I think I could have done a much better job. And yes, I would rather deal with Hitler or Stalin because I would know exactly where they stood.

Plutocratic systems are capable of deferring gratification so far into the future that it is difficult to know exactly what they really want; thus, their foreign policy, while perhaps rational in the long term, is very frustratingly obtuse and puerile in the offing, given toward cant and sanctimony, fraught with danger, and oozing with obdurance. Scary stuff.

Solving Poland's diplomatic problems in 1939 would have been child's play compared to negotiating a labor contract with an American corporation.
:wink:

I don't think that I would've needed to go to war with Hitler against Russia "to keep Poland sovereign." But I would have to show willingness to work things out with my neighbors, including taking the best and safest offer that Hitler offered. Remember that the Allies could not help or hurt Poland but Germany and Russia certainly could; that is just not something to be forgotten in such dealings. Saber-rattling in a card game with such stakes, when you actually have shit for a hand (and everybody else knows it but you) is the last thing that I would have done. Of course, I have benefit of hindsight and few strong passions about the matter to cloud my judgment. One thing is for sure, the Junker "heroes" that later tried to kill Hitler were so anxious to settle accounts with Poland in 1939 that they could taste it.
:wink:

Ovidius
Member
Posts: 1414
Joined: 11 Mar 2002, 20:04
Location: Romania

Scott Smith

#49

Post by Ovidius » 06 Apr 2002, 19:30

Scott Smith has written:
Just the obvious. That the Allies had no intention of restoring old fascist Poland. They had their own reasons for fighting Germany. Poland was just their catspaw, which ceased to exist as soon as the ink was dry on Molotov-Ribbentrop. However, there was still some chance for Poland, even then, if she had told the Allies to bugger-off and starting talking to Germany at that point. Hindsight is 20/20.
And further:
I don't think that I would've needed to go to war with Hitler against Russia "to keep Poland sovereign." But I would have to show willingness to work things out with my neighbors, including taking the best and safest offer that Hitler offered.
Right.

Despite the babbling from some Polish nationalists about their "glorious past", glory stood just there - in the past. Poland in 1939 was just a pawn in the hands of the British and American oligarchy, openly allied among themselves for decades and secretly allied with the Soviet Union since 1929(when the US government had not yet even officially recognized the Soviet one). The Brits and Americans, not willing to repeat the 1938 mistake, had just taken the chestnuts from the oven with Polish hands. They wanted a pretext to destroy the Reich, and they took it. If they wanted only to "preserve Polish independence", they would have begun negotiations soon after Poland was defeated. But some guy in London, one Winston Churchill, had already started the hollow babbling about the "defense of Christian civilization".
I think Poland would've eventually matured into a democracy and given up Danzig. Better to wait a bit
Sure. They were so eager to give up Danzig, that the Polish civilian officials had fought like hell in 1939 to preserve the Polishdom of the German Free City of Danzig, according to the quotes from the same General Anders, former DPWES.

~Ovidius

Davey Boy
Member
Posts: 1504
Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 14:51
Location: Australia

#50

Post by Davey Boy » 06 Apr 2002, 21:31

That's right, it was a conspiracy against those poor Germans, who don't share any blame whatsoever for all the shit that went down. They were such decent people, but those evil Amis and Brist just couldn't leave them alone, could they? They should have just let them wipe Poland off the map, kill all Jews, and burn Russia. Then Ovidius, at least, would sleep better.

Ovidius
Member
Posts: 1414
Joined: 11 Mar 2002, 20:04
Location: Romania

#51

Post by Ovidius » 07 Apr 2002, 01:16

1. If Britain, France and USA were just waging war to help Poland, why didn't they begin negotiations with Germany after was no Poland to help anymore?

2. If the same powers were just seeking their own business, then why did they allied themselves with USSR against Germany?(which USSR had from 1939 to 1941 a non-aggresion pact, not an alliance with Germany, therefore slightly more than a truce or just a delayed promise of conflict)

3. If USA was not undermining the German position in the world since the early 1930s, then how can our enlightened fellow member explain the 'secret'(le secret de Polichinelle) cooperation USA-USSR stretched over more than a decade?

4. How can the same enlightened fellow member explain the venomous propaganda made in the USA against the Germans, ridiculing everyone who traveled on German liners or bought German goods as 'Nazi'?

5. Finally, if Poland was so important that the Allies had fought a World War to help her, then why were the Poles abandoned both in 1939 and 1945 to the Soviets?

I expect a conclusive answer.

~Ovidius

Ovidius
Member
Posts: 1414
Joined: 11 Mar 2002, 20:04
Location: Romania

'For those who care'

#52

Post by Ovidius » 07 Apr 2002, 01:35

And a few comments from me, while waiting for the answers:

A certain member has opened the thread stating: 'My position(for those who care)'. Well, I don't care. Neither that member, nor anyone else on the forum, including myself, can be totally sincere. None of us is really committed to unbiased research, and none of us is really displaying the facts as they are, but as he/she sees them, in support of his/her views.

Most of those raised in the Holocaust-culture of the modern West see every aspect of the Third Reich through a deformed looking-glass that twists everything in aberrant ideas. They seem to be convinced(or just want to fit in the mainstream) that Hitler himself and his regime were the Absolute Evil incarnate, and anyone figthing them is excusable, therefore they twist anything to fit in their bubble. Any word or action of a Third Reich figure is deformed to look as bad as possible, because an 'evil Hitler who does good things' does not fit in their frame. So the Autobahn network has been built 'for waging war', while the firestorms in Dresden or Hamburg, or the crimes against the Germans are thrown away with a 'Shit happens'. :roll:
:?

~Ovidius

User avatar
Scott Smith
Member
Posts: 5602
Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 22:17
Location: Arizona
Contact:

THE ALLIES

#53

Post by Scott Smith » 07 Apr 2002, 02:17

General Anders wrote:They [Allies] should have just let them [Germans] wipe Poland off the map, kill all Jews, and burn Russia.
Isn't that what they DID let them do? (Or so I've heard.)
:wink:

Image

User avatar
Landser
Member
Posts: 1157
Joined: 16 Mar 2002, 20:28
Location: Sunnyland only

#54

Post by Landser » 07 Apr 2002, 02:29

Ovi

Suppose the outcome of the war was reversed,I can see how the chastising ones would be the praisers of AH to the gilt.These are usually the ones who see everything only in black and white and gray colors don,t exist for them.
A winner can never be wrong in this PC world, see USSR,ISRAEL etc
PS I think I have a solution for this ongoing ME conflict because there will NEVER be any peace between the fighting factions.
Why don't the EU and UN designate, lets see the former majority homeland of the jews"Galicia" and mayby East=and West Prussia to the jews as their new homeland.As it stands now this is nothing but a vast wasteland and sparsely populated. They could use some new blood injected to get the region out of their misery.
Another offer could be the former german provinces of Silesia and Pomerania they would be even better
suited for the jews because they still have some infrastructure intact from the good old days.Otherwise they're in no better shape and also very sparsly populated,rundown and every thing deteriorated.
What do you think?

Davey Boy
Member
Posts: 1504
Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 14:51
Location: Australia

#55

Post by Davey Boy » 07 Apr 2002, 04:47

Landser wrote:Ovi

Suppose the outcome of the war was reversed,I can see how the chastising ones would be the praisers of AH to the gilt.These are usually the ones who see everything only in black and white and gray colors don,t exist for them.
A winner can never be wrong in this PC world, see USSR,ISRAEL etc
PS I think I have a solution for this ongoing ME conflict because there will NEVER be any peace between the fighting factions.
Why don't the EU and UN designate, lets see the former majority homeland of the jews"Galicia" and mayby East=and West Prussia to the jews as their new homeland.As it stands now this is nothing but a vast wasteland and sparsely populated. They could use some new blood injected to get the region out of their misery.
Another offer could be the former german provinces of Silesia and Pomerania they would be even better
suited for the jews because they still have some infrastructure intact from the good old days.Otherwise they're in no better shape and also very sparsly populated,rundown and every thing deteriorated.
What do you think?
I've got a better idea. Since it was the Germans who wanted to wipe out the Jews, then maybe that new homeland you're talking about should be in the former DDR. Much like the former East Prussia, Pomerania and Silesia, this part of Europe (apart from Berlin of course) is very sparsly populated, rundown and deteriorated. And the people here are mostly fat, redneck hicks, so maybe some of that new blood would help out.
Last edited by Davey Boy on 07 Apr 2002, 15:00, edited 1 time in total.

Davey Boy
Member
Posts: 1504
Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 14:51
Location: Australia

#56

Post by Davey Boy » 07 Apr 2002, 05:05

Ovidius wrote:1. If Britain, France and USA were just waging war to help Poland, why didn't they begin negotiations with Germany after was no Poland to help anymore?

2. If the same powers were just seeking their own business, then why did they allied themselves with USSR against Germany?(which USSR had from 1939 to 1941 a non-aggresion pact, not an alliance with Germany, therefore slightly more than a truce or just a delayed promise of conflict)

3. If USA was not undermining the German position in the world since the early 1930s, then how can our enlightened fellow member explain the 'secret'(le secret de Polichinelle) cooperation USA-USSR stretched over more than a decade?

4. How can the same enlightened fellow member explain the venomous propaganda made in the USA against the Germans, ridiculing everyone who traveled on German liners or bought German goods as 'Nazi'?

5. Finally, if Poland was so important that the Allies had fought a World War to help her, then why were the Poles abandoned both in 1939 and 1945 to the Soviets?

I expect a conclusive answer.

~Ovidius

Ok, I've been out all night, and I'm still drunk. But I'll attempt to answer your very searching questions Ovi:

1) They weren't waging war JUST to help Poland. Helping Poland was a secondary motive, if that. However, considering Stalin was a friggin madman and a serial killer to boot, I think that Poland's continued existance after the war, in any form, was something of a success for the allies. Many Poles would spit on me for such a comment, but I'm just being prgmatic. I mean, Stalin could've scattered us all over Siberia if he wanted to. Yet Poland survived, and Soviet brutality was nowhere near as extreme as in other eastern block countries and certainly the USSR itself. Sure, the communist system did us no favors, and we're still paying the price for that, but hey, we're here.

2) I don't understand the question. Not because I'm all boozed up on Zubrowka, but because it was worded badly. However, if you're asking why the western allies went into bed with a communist tyrant, then maybe it was the only way to get rid of another tyrant, Hitler. Please note that Hitler was already occupying western countries, while the Soviets were in the east, and not yet strong enough to go all the way up to the English coast. In other words, the west was being pragmatic.

3) See answer to question 2.

4) See answer to question 2.

5) Poland was not important. Poland was an after-thought to the allies' aims of defeating Hitler (who was already getting stuck into them with his teeth) and securing themselves against the future threat of Stalin (who was beginning to chomp away at their heels).

So there's your conclusive answer. Hmm, I guess those questions weren't as searching as I thought.

And another thing, friend, if you don't give a toss what my position is then don't read the friggin thing.

User avatar
mike262752
Member
Posts: 174
Joined: 13 Mar 2002, 11:35
Location: California, USA

#57

Post by mike262752 » 07 Apr 2002, 17:18

Landser wrote:Ovi

Why don't the EU and UN designate, lets see the former majority homeland of the jews"Galicia" and mayby East=and West Prussia to the jews as their new homeland.As it stands now this is nothing but a vast wasteland and sparsely populated. They could use some new blood injected to get the region out of their misery.
Another offer could be the former german provinces of Silesia and Pomerania they would be even better
suited for the jews because they still have some infrastructure intact from the good old days.Otherwise they're in no better shape and also very sparsly populated,rundown and every thing deteriorated.
What do you think?
I dont think the Jews are going to get anymore land unless they do it with force. And I definetly dont think Europe will welcome them with open arms, after all, America is Isreils only friend.
General Anders- "this part of Europe (apart from Berlin of course is very sparsly populated, rundown and deteriorated. And the people here are mostly fat, redneck hicks, so maybe some of that new blood would help out."
Is someone a little jealous of their neighbors? A little upset about his country's loss in 39? Just a guess....

Poles use the term red neck hicks? Is Foxworthy just hitting Poland or something?

mike

User avatar
Marcus
Member
Posts: 33963
Joined: 08 Mar 2002, 23:35
Location: Europe
Contact:

#58

Post by Marcus » 07 Apr 2002, 17:31

This has gone far enough off topic.

/Marcus

Locked

Return to “Holocaust & 20th Century War Crimes”