Nothing was going to inculcate an offensive spirit in the French Army, that’s the terrible legacy of France’s agony in WW1. The time for an offfensive spirit was when Germany reoccupied the Rhineland and France did nothing. If I remember correctly that Drove the Belgian King to declare neutrality, thereby exposing the flank of the maginot line north of Longwy.I did say the idea was - im not disputing piss poor effort.
I stand by my point that Poland staying in the fight longer would have allowed more mobilisation which in Turn could have enabled (emboldened) the French to put more effort into the SAAR.
The rot really set in the late 20s early 30s - The handicapping of the British army by the 10 yr review and cuts to armour are nothing compared to what in hindsight was sabotage inflicted on the French armed forces by succsessive govs . Partly because they were so shortlived and unstable that they feared a right wing coup by them * Limiting size, funding - crippling interferance etc produced the army France wanted with leaders lacking initiative rather than what it needed (Glances at current UK)
*Ironic that the left always rants and shouts about the fascist police / Army / State and how it will be turned on us - when the left itself has never been shy in using the same organisations for just that purpose**
**Probably against the people that were previously agitating for revolution and declaring their fear of state security apparatus -( which didnt exist before the revolution) and are now seen as a problem by the new leadership
Technically it doesn't have to AIUI. The territories came under German and Russian control and they were responsible for the good order ( Yes I am fully fully aware of what that means and in this case it wasn't good )albeit the imposition of German/Russian Laws. I might just venture here that after Churchill had settled the sphere's of influence thing with Joe it came home to roost under the Russians. A government in being was worth diddly squat in the overall scheme of things.Poland never surrendered.
No it wasn't. It was inevitable in terms of the continuation of Tzarist Policy of expansion, but Russia didn't need to expand anymore than it needed to invade Finland. It was the deal hammered out between Molotov and Ribbentrop given that Germany would be marching into what it saw as Prussia. That was after all, the whole point of repudiating the Versailles treaty. But there was no inevitability given that the pact was primarily about exchange trade.The Soviet invasion in Poland was inevitable
Except for II Corps and your puppet LWP... over 270,000 menThe Soviet invasion in Poland was inevitable and was the only logical action in that situation. Without it the Soviet union could lose the war with Germany and its allies.
Without the invasion whole Poland would be soon occupied by Germany and Hitler's offensive toward Moscow would be much easier.
Also take into account that most of Polish soldiers and officers would be captured as POWs and captured by Germany. So hardly any significant Polish troops could fight after 1939 during WW2.
During Soviet invasion in PolandExcept for II Corps and your puppet LWP... over 270,000 men
Alas, Stalin's regime executed 20 thousands of Poles in the Katyn massacre. But remaining hundreds thousands were able to fight against Hitler on different fronts ironically namely due to the Soviet invasion.320,000–450,000 captured
Er yeah. Then they tried to blame Katyn on the Germans And the Allies wouldn’t wear it. Unfortunately it left a lot of unanswered questions, though they are rather nuanced. One is of the Poles who wound up fighting the Germans, wasn’t that under duress. Another is how many died as retribution for having survived. We know that after the German retreats in Russia, Russians killed their own for having collaborated, I.e survived and it was quite convenient to blame the Germans, after all who would believe them?During Soviet invasion in Poland
Alas, Stalin's regime executed 20 thousands of Poles in the Katyn massacre. But remaining hundreds thousands were able to fight against Hitler on different fronts ironically namely due to the Soviet invasion.
If Moscow didn't send troops to Eastern Poland then the Germans captured them. So both Anders army and LWP would not exist.
The problems of the French army were large and deeply rooted. I doubt that anything that Poland could have done would have made any ultimate difference to the result in France.(...) I stand by my point that Poland staying in the fight longer would have allowed more mobilisation which in Turn could have enabled (emboldened) the French to put more effort into the SAAR. (...)
Rather the other way around. But as we know that didn’t happen.The problems of the French army were large and deeply rooted. I doubt that anything that Poland could have done would have made any ultimate difference to the result in France.
At $US8.5m per each better make sure they come fitted with a BV.Rather the other way around. But as we know that didn’t happen.
Hence Poland’s current efforts to increase its own defence capabilities. It appears it is close to finalising a deal with Hyundai-Rotem for technology transfer and the manufacture in Poland of about 800 K2PL “Wilk” (Wolf) tanks, which will be locally modified and upgraded versions of the K2.
He quotes extensively from “Bloodlands” by Timothy Snyder. I highly recommend this book for its well researched and lucid presentation of the horrors perpetrated on the people living in the lands between Berlin and Moscow, by BOTH Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany.I found this video informative although @KGB resident wont like it.
The film contains a lot of well know facts. For example - Eastern Poland was ethnically predominantly not Polish.I found this video informative although @KGB resident wont like it.
Feeble attempt at glossing over Moscow’s State directed ethnic cleansing and mass murder campaigns. Soviet Russia had behaved much worse in regard to its enslaved Belarusian and (especially) Ukrainian populations. There was no “Holodomor” on the Polish side of the border.The film contains a lot of well know facts. For example - Eastern Poland was ethnically predominantly not Polish.
Soviet judges in Lwow were shown. One of them is a former political prisoner Golda Mirle, imprisoned by Polish authorities for 13 years. Another political prisoner is mentioned Ernestina Birnbaum.
Let's recall the question in the title of this thread.Feeble attempt at glossing over Moscow’s State directed ethnic cleansing and mass murder campaigns. Soviet Russia had behaved much worse in regard to its enslaved Belarusian and (especially) Ukrainian populations. There was no “Holodomor” on the Polish side of the border.
Yes, of course between the wars Poland had imprisoned Soviet supported Communist agitators. The very same were rehabilitated by the invading Soviet Army and used as propaganda tools.
Tellingly they were still there to fulfil this function, as they had not been summarily executed as per Soviet Russian norms. They also didn’t have the haunted and undernourished appearance of the Poles who managed to get out of the Gulag after Barbarossa.
Of course the invasion of the Soviet Union and seizing their land, food, oil, iron, and coal for Germany was the whole point of starting the war in the first place and was the central pillar of Hitler's plans for the future of Germany.Let's recall the question in the title of this thread.
So was Hitler right? Of course unleashing WW2 he made a grave mistake. However, as for Poland then he didn't make any mistake. The reaction of France/UK was weak. Stalin did what Hitler expected. Poland had any chances to struggle longer.
Hitler made mistakes later. One of the most serious was invasion into the Soviet union.