"We didn't win the Second World War" - Peter Hitchens

The bottom line is the UK went to war in 1939 because Poland had been invaded. In 1945 Poland was still in an "invaded" state all be it by Russia rather than Germany at that point. So had a sovereign and democratic Poland been restored? No. War aim achieved? No.


The invasion of Poland was the casus belli for Britain and France - a final line in the sand. The aim of the war was to defeat Germany and roll back Hitlers conquests. That aim was achieved. The war absolutely was not conducted with the intention of liberating Poland.
 
The invasion of Poland was the casus belli for Britain and France - a final line in the sand. The aim of the war was to defeat Germany and roll back Hitlers conquests. That aim was achieved. The war absolutely was not conducted with the intention of liberating Poland.
well not by 1945 and no one told the Poles that.
 
MYTH 8: BRITISH BOMBING OF GERMANY WAS JUSTIFIED
Revisionist twaddle: Adam Tooze (Wages of Destruction), Richard Overy and others have demolished the "bombing was ineffective" claims peddled post-war. British bombing of German war industry brought Albert Speer's "production miracles" to a screeching halt.
The only thing I would disagree with with there is the conflict between those claiming that civilians should ,where possible, remain unmolested in accordance with the Geneva conventions is disputable. Guernica put paid to that concept. The fact was that the philosophy that the bomber would get through was originally for strategic targets, the concept of strategic targets was later shifted and was adopted by all sides. In fact we had reverted to the middle ages concept of siege. Other wise really no gripes.
 
The bottom line is the UK went to war in 1939 because Poland had been invaded. In 1945 Poland was still in an "invaded" state all be it by Russia rather than Germany at that point. So had a sovereign and democratic Poland been restored? No. War aim achieved? No.
You have been asked to present evidence to support your claims and so far you have failed to show us anything. Others who have countered your claims have provided documentary evidence from primary sources as the nature of the defence treaty and the obligations of each party. Repeatedly making the same unsupported claims that are contradicted by all the written evidence we have seen isn't going to convince anyone.

The defence treaty between Poland and the UK explicitly said that it applied only to mutual defence against Germany. The UK went to war to defeat the threat of Germany and in doing so fulfilled their obligations under the treaty as well as their own war aims.
 
Well this was hardly the fault of the UK was it?
Very true not the fault of the U.K. but demonstrated we were in no position to restore Polands sovereignty in 1945 any more han we were in 1939. A previous poster stated the Anglo/Polish treaty was designed to stop Germany invading Poland well that failed also. The UKs policy vis a vis Poland in WWII as nothing short of abject failure.
 
The production capability was never there; either to build up the force of Mosquitoes required, or to build enough Oboe sets to equip them. In addition, Oboe was only effective for 280 miles outside of the UK. Beyond that, the Mosquitoes were back to blind bombing.

Wordsmith
That was only one aspect of the Mosquito vs Lancaster problem. The main one was that the RAF could not train enough pilots in the training schools to fly the Mosquitos that would be required at the rate of 2-3 to 1 Lancaster for a similar weight of bombs.
 
Did they not read the treaty then? Because it explicitly said that the defence clauses only covered attack by Germany. The specific treaty clauses covering this were quoted in a previous post.
The treaty was one thing, however the treaty did not say that Poland would be turned over to the Russians
 

Wordsmith

LE
Book Reviewer
That was only one aspect of the Mosquito vs Lancaster problem. The main one was that the RAF could not train enough pilots in the training schools to fly the Mosquitos that would be required at the rate of 2-3 to 1 Lancaster for a similar weight of bombs.
On the other hand, the Lancaster took a 4% loss rate - the Mossies 0.5%. You wouldn't have needed so many pilots.

Wordsmith
 
The invasion of Poland was the casus belli for Britain and France - a final line in the sand. The aim of the war was to defeat Germany and roll back Hitlers conquests. That aim was achieved. The war absolutely was not conducted with the intention of liberating Poland.
Arguably that point came with the repudiation of the Versailles treaty, which in effect meant that all the territories of the previous German and Austrian Governments would be open to be reclaimed. Poland as you say was the trigger, however all of Hitlers "conquests" had been bloodless up to that point. The repudiation of Versailles also meant -as far as he was concerned- the re imposition of Brest Litovsk and strangely with echos of today IIRC Brest Litovsk made Germany a guarantor of the Ukraine, which a snidey little Joseph S interfered in the elections of 1922 and created a Soviet state. Not that the West was going to interfere in that as they'd just lost their incursion into Russia to topple the Soviets. Plus ca change.
 

seaweed

LE
Book Reviewer
The only thing I would disagree with with there is the conflict between those claiming that civilians should ,where possible, remain unmolested in accordance with the Geneva conventions is disputable. Guernica put paid to that concept. The fact was that the philosophy that the bomber would get through was originally for strategic targets, the concept of strategic targets was later shifted and was adopted by all sides. In fact we had reverted to the middle ages concept of siege. Other wise really no gripes.
Guernica? The Germans invented using aeroplanes to bomb civilians (and neutral ones at that) in Belgium in August 1914.
 
So you want us to keep fighting, only with the Russians this time, from about 10th of May 1945? How long a list of why that wouldn't work do you want?
Hey I don't write history, only read it. The long and the short was we fought the war for the wrong reason, got the wrong result, it's not my fault, that every so often the Russians show their true colours and their mentality and it doesn't accord with what the PR says. Yes we defeated a nasty regime, but they tend to be the defeatable ones.
 
Guernica? The Germans invented using aeroplanes to bomb civilians (and neutral ones at that) in Belgium in August 1914.
Course they did, silly me. :mrgreen: But of course in 14 it was all in it's infancy so we followed suit. I have also long given up in pretending that Belgium was neutral. Tin hat on.
 
Hey I don't write history, only read it. The long and the short was we fought the war for the wrong reason, got the wrong result, it's not my fault, that every so often the Russians show their true colours and their mentality and it doesn't accord with what the PR says. Yes we defeated a nasty regime, but they tend to be the defeatable ones.

Yep, you read it and like to twist it in your mind, but then again, it's not your fault that you old man married a German bint either, wasn't she some kind of teenage SS typist? - and then they had you, who always manages to bring anti Brit BS into most of your posts on the WW2.

Some of it blatant and loud - like an oompah band , when you feel brave, some snidey, when you try to slip in anti brit comments under the Radar ....just like a true a Boxhead, but they all equally biased.
 
Course they did, silly me. :mrgreen: But of course in 14 it was all in it's infancy so we followed suit. I have also long given up in pretending that Belgium was neutral. Tin hat on.
Yeah, I see a pattern of some kind....

The neutral powers were countries that remained neutral during World War II. ... Several countries suffered invasions in spite of their efforts to be neutral. These included Nazi Germany's invasion of Denmark and Norway on 9 April 1940—then Belgium, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg on 10 May 1940.
 
We didn't Win the First World War.... we just lost slower than the enemy.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top