![]() | About 17 september 1939 Page 10 |
![]() |
| | #91 | |
| | Quote:
Declarations alone do not change the nature of their treason, if you're in an alliance you fight, France and UK did not untill the fight came to them. | |
![]() | |
| |
| | #92 | |||
| | Quote:
Quote:
Please quote the promises in the gaurantee given to Poland where a specific act of agression is made in relation to a ground offensive into Germany. Quote:
| |||
| | #93 | |||
| | Quote:
Quote:
His Majesty's Government would feel themselves bound at once to lend the Polish Government all support in their power Similar clause was given by the French,needless to say both countries performed well below their capacity. Quote:
Yet the French contented themselves with occupying several villages, UK did not send a single tank battalion to France or Poland months prior. Thats betrayal. | |||
| | #94 | ||
| | Quote:
Quote:
destruction to both France and the UK. Please be so kind as to give details of the SPECIFIC military actions promised as per my original request. What you BELIEVE was promised does not count. | ||
| | #95 | ||
| | Quote:
Quote:
Word for word, they did not engage with anything but token actions. | ||
| | #96 | ||
| | Quote:
Why did Stalin not attack Germany in the summer of 1941? Japan signaled well in advance her intentions in the Pacific. Why did the USA not invade Japan in December 1941? Quote:
| ||
| | #97 | |
| | Quote:
Pledge given in April 1939. Military Assistance pact on August 1939 War declared in September 1939.. So within a space of 6 months Britain and France entered the most destructive event in the 20th Century, one that effectively bankrupted them, because they had 'no honour'? | |
| | #98 |
| | I think that the problem is the Polish expectations and the exaggerated capabilities of the French and British. The French mobilization was not complete until early October and In Britain only 1 in 40 men were mobilized (compared to 1 in 10 in France). Also the French army was superior to the German in numbers only. It lacked the offensive doctrines, mobilization schemes, and offensive spirit necessary to attack Germany. The presumption that "something could have been done but wasn't" overlooks the basic fact that France and Britain was ill-equipped to fight Germany even with the majority of German forces engaged in the east In the Agreement of Mutual Assistance between the United Kingdom and Poland.-London, August 25, 1939. ARTICLE I.it says: “Should one of the Contracting Parties become engaged in hostilities with a European Power in consequence of aggression by the latter against that Contracting Party, the other Contracting Party will at once give the Contracting Party engaged in hostilities all the support and assistance in its power”. That’s what the British had promised. I would call it a “betrayal of necessity”. I saw a ghost behind the door, when the kids were coming home from the war, with broken dreams and nothing more! Kim. Larsen. |
| | #99 |
| |
Then why enter a pact if you're not ready? Why delay polish mobilisation if you're not ready? Last i checked entering a pact and laying down specific promises means you're ready to fulfill them, not only that but the French lied to Poland outright claiming they're performing an all out assault. |
| | #100 |
| | Because politics is a dirty game. Far dirtier than war. And backstabbing is part of the game. |
![]() |