17 september 1939

Conclusion

Thus by September 1, 1939, the pieces were in place for the beginning of a general European war. It would be a war for which Great Britain and France were egregiously unprepared. Meanwhile, Poland would pay in untold lives. France and Great Britain did indeed honor their signatures and declare war on Germany on September 3, 1939. Nevertheless, this proved to be a hollow declaration that provided no help to the Poles. From the evidence presented here is is clear that neither France nor Great Britain had the slightest intention of actually coming to the assistance of their Polish ally.

What transpired is by now well known. The RAF did not even attempt to bomb German military installations because, as the Air Staff concluded on September 20: "Since the immutable aim of the Allies is the ultimate defeat of Germany, without which the fate of Poland is permanently sealed, it would obviously be militarily unsound and to the disadvantage of all, including Poland, to undertake at any given moment operations ... unlikely to achieve effective results, merely for the sake of maintaining a gesture."

The Chiefs of Staff agreed, informing 10 Downing Street that "nothing we can do in the air in the Western Theatre would have any effect of relieving pressure on Poland." And so the RAF decided instead to drop propaganda leaflets.

For its part, the French army did launch a diversionary offensive into the Saar region. German defenses quickly stopped the attack, however, and it was never resumed. In fact, France and Great Britain would never launch an combined offensive during the first year of the war, preferring instead to await the German attack, which came in May 1940 and ended in disastrous defeat for both nations.

As General Ironside commented in 1945, after much of Europe was in ruins, "Militarily we should have gone all out against the German the minute he invaded Poland. ... We did not ... And so we missed the strategical advantage of the Germans being engaged in the East. We thought completely defensively and of ourselves." And so they did.
 
Last edited:
Now the RAF Bombers where the Bombay and Whitley bombers with a few Blenheim's thrown in and they would not have much of an impression on Germany even if they got there. The Wellington had not come into service and there were no four engine bombers in service with the RAF.
 
Now the RAF Bombers where the Bombay and Whitley bombers with a few Blenheim's thrown in and they would not have much of an impression on Germany even if they got there. The Wellington had not come into service and there were no four engine bombers in service with the RAF.

I know, and I believe that the British Air Staff made the right conclusion:

"Since the immutable aim of the Allies is the ultimate defeat of Germany, without which the fate of Poland is permanently sealed, it would obviously be militarily unsound and to the disadvantage of all, including Poland, to undertake at any given moment operations ... unlikely to achieve effective results, merely for the sake of maintaining a gesture."

But the fact is that the British politicians had promised the Poles that the Royal Air Force would attack industrial, civilian, and military targets in Germany.
 
Panzercracker, love your stuff, but you need to check on the geography a bit more. To get to Poland from England or France (by sea) you need to traverse the Skaggerak Strait & Kattegat Bay, notoriuosly treachorous waters. These waters are enclosed like a set of giant pincers by Norway, Sweden & Finland to the north & Denmark & Germany to the south, or you can choose the German Kiel Canal - either way best of luck with that expedition matey.
 
Panzercracker, love your stuff, but you need to check on the geography a bit more. To get to Poland from England or France (by sea) you need to traverse the Skaggerak Strait & Kattegat Bay, notoriuosly treachorous waters. These waters are enclosed like a set of giant pincers by Norway, Sweden & Finland to the north & Denmark & Germany to the south, or you can choose the German Kiel Canal - either way best of luck with that expedition matey.
Ok for the sake of argument lets say UK could not get to Poland, what stopped the Brits from going to France? Heck why did Abbeville even happen?

Here's Poland not broken, not lost and suddenly those fockers meet at Abbeville and decide "its over there's no point helping."

WW2 France was a bunch of cowardly cunts and no amount of political correctness can change the fact that they were sh*ting their pants behind the M-line.

Brits however despite the small size of their army had an effective, highly motivated fighting force, given that between September 1-20 Germany in the west was defended by 200.000 guys with little more then their dicks a 60.000 strong regular british force would collapse entire german defence in hours.

I'm not bitching that French and Brits didnt do something specific, i'm bitching that they did not do anything, this was the moment when Germany was completely pants down in Poland and the largest armies and navies in the West just f*ck around doing nothing.

Now the RAF Bombers where the Bombay and Whitley bombers with a few Blenheim's thrown in and they would not have much of an impression on Germany even if they got there. The Wellington had not come into service and there were no four engine bombers in service with the RAF.

Lee that is exactly the chamberlain-esque bullshyt that made Germans fock the hell out of french peasant chicks for 4 years and make Brits eat rationed food for 7 years.

Germans didnt expect the West to do zip for Poland, if Brits bombed the f*ck out of a couple of dozen small factories and rolled alone or with french towards Berlin the entire German plan would end up in a shitter since suddenly Germans would be forced to re-evaluate.

Tanks, infantry and planes would have to be withdrawn to face the West, polish Bzura offensive would still happen but even if it wouldnt be 100% succesfull it wouldnt get ground to dust after a week due to overwhelming amount of equipment Germans had and suddenly you have a stalemated Germany.

Poland may or may not get invaded by Russia but what it means for France is no German occupation, no Bob for UK, no bombed London etc.

The amazing fact is that this was the only time when Germany really was pants down defencless, barring moronic sci-fi claims of IIjadw Germans in the West were guys with rifles and that was it, no guns, no tans, no mortars, just bolt-****ing-action rifles against piles of heavy french and british equipment.

Lets assume 50.000 Brits go through France or Low countries with their tanks and mechanized components, what are the German defenders going to do? Headbutt the tanks to submission? 100% of Wehramcht is tied in combat by 15 Sept so Germany had no reserves, no possibility to relocate major troops, a single armored division would've made the difference in the West.
 
Last edited:
Britain and France stood by their obligations and went to war, so okay you wont accept that Germany had rearmed, and had an Army running into millions of of well trained and well equipped men. These man had fought for Franco, retaken Austria and several other places, now there was no way that we were in a position to go to the aid of Poland at this time but we did got to war to try and free them. Now there were a lot of other countries around who just sat on their hands and made a fortune selling weapons to any one that had cash. Now I can't see the point in trying to discuss this any further with you as you have your mind set on what you think happened and my mind is set on what I can remember of these days. It took the might of Russia, America, Britain and it's Commonwealth Allies to defeat Germany and even then it took a lot of blood and guts to do that, so if any one thinks Germany could have been smashed when it invaded Poland really is a couple sandwiches short of a picnic.
 
Britain and France stood by their obligations and went to war,
No, they declared war and did absolutely nothing beyond declaring war, thats outright focking treason.
so okay you wont accept that Germany had rearmed, and had an Army running into millions of of well trained and well equipped men.
That sir is a lie, normally in case of a moron like lldjaw i'd say its a mistake but you're smart enough to say you're lying.

Lets be done with blanket statements, Germany had roughly 2900 tanks, 1100 armored and recon cars and about 2.4 milion men worth of active troops.

Germany attacked Poland with 1.8 milion men, 2700 tanks and 1000 armored cars as well as 10.000 artillery pieces.

In the West Germany had roughly 350.000-370.000 men with about 300 artillery pieces, 30-50 pz Is and an unknown number of armored cars (not exceeding 100).

We can run the sources and do the add/subbstract game and the end effect will still be the same, virtually 100% of effective german forces were in Poland, the 350.000 men in the west had between them a brigade worth of heavy equipment and there were no reserves.
well equipped men.
Since 2 fast divisions had armored cars instead of tanks and allies outnumbered Germans in trucks and artillery, regular soldiers were equipped the same as their Polish or French counterparts.

In 1939 everything that could drive, run or walk and shoot was in Poland, there were no "millions" of men, there were just about 2 milion men and the name of the game was shortage, Germany didnt have enough tanks, trucks, guns which is why all of the active hardware was in Poland and none if it in the West let alone in reserve.
These man had fought for Franco,
Please tell me you're f*cking with me? Those couple of thousands of Germans in the Condor Legion are supposed to count for what?
retaken Austria and several other places,
Without a shot.
now there was no way that we were in a position to go to the aid of Poland
Land your army in France, roll over the pathetic militias defending the Western border of Germany, do not betray Poland in Abbeville and put pressure on the French to move with you, yeah there were ways but they required actually fighting instead of declaring war and meeting with France over tea and crumpets deciding arbitraly that Poland has fallen.
at this time but we did got to war to try and free them.
Nope, you declared war and did nothing, going to war involves actuall fighting and beyond a few token actions absolutely meaningless for the war effort neither UK nor France did anything.
Now there were a lot of other countries around who just sat on their hands and made a fortune selling weapons to any one that had cash.
You were not in the position to do that, Churchill was smart enough to know that despite Hitlers sympathetic outlook towards UK once Europe gets bent over there's no way Germany would allow independent power like UK at its doorstep.
It took the might of Russia, America, Britain and it's Commonwealth Allies to defeat Germany and even then it took a lot of blood and guts to do that, so if any one thinks Germany could have been smashed when it invaded Poland really is a couple sandwiches short of a picnic.
The difference between Germany of 1939 and Germany of 1944 is gigantic, Germany of 1943 or 44 is Germany thats economically many times larger then it was in 1939, 39 was the only time when Germans did not have effective reserves on a strategic level or any chance to shift troops.

This is another reason why Polish war effort is skimmed over, betraying Poland the West (UK and France) rewrote their history completely ignoring the fact that Poles completely tied the Wehrmacht, this made the franco-british treason at Abbeville seem logical.

Of course you could, instead of issuing blanket statements tell us why did Germans have only 200 guns to oppose the French at Ruhr, why werent there any armored or mechanized reserves in Germany? Where were the units Germans could shift to face the Anglo-French invasion if it happened?

Germany 1939, no reserves, 100% forces tied in combat for 3 weeks, 20% of their motorised forces destroyed or inoperational by the second week and militias defending their western border, those are the facts that no amount of your blanket statements can shift or change, the only thing that was lacking was guts and honour by French and British.

Also Lee could you explain to us the phenomenon of Abbeville? On 12th of September Brits and French meet in Abbeville and decide not to help Poland on the grounds that it has lost the war already.

At the same time French inform the Poles that they are attacking and Germans are withdrawing their forces to meet the french threat.

So thats treason of Poland by both UK and France right there.

At the same time Poland which supposedly already lost the war launches the offensive that will become the battle of Bzura, from 9 to 22 September 250.000 Poles tie 500.000 Germans along with entire German armored, mechanized and airforce elements.

Polish army is succesfull throught the initial 7 days of the battle, from 9 to 16th Sept.

So not only did UK and France betray Poland and decided Poland has lost while polish troops were massacring 5 german infantry divisions, not only did they lie to Poles so Poles pushed their offensive well past their offensive capacity, the French and Brits fully aware of the opportunity Poles created still decided to sit it out.

Stop issuing blanket statements Lee and argue with facts, Britian and France betrayed Poland in a bloody fugly fashion, period.
 
Last edited:
In 1939 Britain and France signed a series of military agreements with Poland that contained very specific promises. The leaders of Poland understood very clearly that they had no chance against Germany alone.

British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain stated in the House of Commons on March 31, 1939.

"As the House is aware, certain consultations are now proceeding with other Governments. In order to make perfectly clear the position of His Majesty's Government in the meantime before those consultations are concluded, I now have to inform the House that during that period, in the event of any action which clearly threatened Polish independence, and which the Polish Government accordingly considered it vital to resist with their national forces, His Majesty's Government would feel themselves bound at once to lend the Polish Government all support in their power. They have given the Polish Government an assurance to this effect. I may add that the French Government have authorized me to make it plain that they stand in the same position in this matter as do His Majesty's Government."

Having secured a guarantee, the Poles now took steps toward coordinating their defensive preparations with the British. On April 4, 1939, Poland's Minister of Foreign Affairs, Józef Beck, visited London for talks with Prime Minister Chamberlain and Lord Halifax, the Foreign Secretary. The content of these talks was described in an official communiqué sent from London to Warsaw on April 6th:

"The conversations with M. Beck have covered a wide field and shown that the two Governments are in complete agreement upon certain general principles. It was agreed that the two countries were prepared to enter into an agreement of a permanent and reciprocal character to replace the present temporary and unilateral assurance given by His Majesty's Government to the Polish Government. Pending the completion of the permanent agreement, M. Beck gave His Majesty's Government an assurance that the Polish Government would consider themselves under an obligation to render assistance to His Majesty's Government under the same conditions as those contained in the temporary assurance already given by His Majesty's Government to Poland."
Shortly thereafter a formal agreement between Poland and Britain was signed which clearly stated "If Germany attacks Poland His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom will at once come to the help of Poland."

Whereas British support of Poland was a relatively recent diplomatic development, Poland's alliance with the French had a long history. The first French efforts to buttress Poland against Germany went back to 1921. In that year, Raymond Poincaré, soon to become president of the FrenchRepublic, had stated "Everything orders us to support Poland: The [Versailles] Treaty, the plebiscite, loyalty, the present and the future interest of France, and the permanence of peace."
To this end France had sealed a mutual assistance pact with Poland on February 21, 1921. According to Article One of this pact France and Poland agreed to "consult each other on all questions of foreign policy which concern both states." Furthermore, Article Three made it clear that "If, notwithstanding the sincerely peaceful views and intentions of the two contracting states, either or both of them should be attacked without giving provocation,the two governments shall take concerted measures for the defense of their territory and the protection of their legitimate interests."

This agreement for mutual defense was then augmented on September 15, 1922 by a formal military alliance signed by Marshal Foch and General Sokoski. This agreement stated explicitly "In case of German aggression against either Poland or France, or both, the two nations would aid each other to the fullest extent."

Seventeen years later, Poland and France, facing growing tension with Germany, found it necessary to reaffirm the defensive alliance they had formed in the wake of World War I. In mid-May of 1939, Poland's Minister of War, General Tadeusz Kasprzycki, visited Paris for a series of talks. At issue for Kasprzycki was clarifying the terms under which France would assist Poland militarily. These talks resulted in the Franco-Polish Military Convention which, according to historian Richard Watt, stated that "on the outbreak of war between Germany and Poland, the French would immediately undertake air action against Germany. It was also agreed that on the third day of French mobilization its army would launch a diversionary offensive into German territory, which would be followed by a major military offensive of the full French army to take place no later than fifteen days after mobilization."

Unfortunately, when Germany attacked, Poland was almost totally and completely betrayed by its democratic "friends". While Britain and France did declare war, French troops made a brief advance toward the Siegfried Line on Germany's western frontier and immediately stopped upon meeting German resistance

This is very significant since Hitler had concentrated almost all German military forces in the east, and France had one of the strongest armies in the world. Had France attacked Germany in a serious way as promised, the results could have been very serious, if not disastrous for the Germans.

Instead, Hitler was able to win a complete victory over Poland and then mobilize his forces for a devastating offensive in the west in the next year.

The British and French betrayal of Poland in 1939 was not only dishonest, it was a military stupidity of truly monumental dimensions. Unfortunately, more betrayals would follow. Contrary to their assurances to the Poles Britain and France would agree to allow Russia to keep the parts of Poland seized as part of their deal with Hitler in 1939.

A crowning humiliation of the Poles was the refusal of their British "friends" to allow the free Polish army to march in the victory parade at the end of the war for fear of offending a Soviet puppet government in Lublin.
 
No, they declared war and did absolutely nothing beyond declaring war, thats outright focking treason.

That sir is a lie, normally in case of a moron like lldjaw i'd say its a mistake but you're smart enough to say you're lying.

Lets be done with blanket statements, Germany had roughly 2900 tanks, 1100 armored and recon cars and about 2.4 milion men worth of active troops.

Germany attacked Poland with 1.8 milion men, 2700 tanks and 1000 armored cars as well as 10.000 artillery pieces.

In the West Germany had roughly 350.000-370.000 men with about 300 artillery pieces, 30-50 pz Is and an unknown number of armored cars (not exceeding 100).

We can run the sources and do the add/subbstract game and the end effect will still be the same, virtually 100% of effective german forces were in Poland, the 350.000 men in the west had between them a brigade worth of heavy equipment and there were no reserves.

Since 2 fast divisions had armored cars instead of tanks and allies outnumbered Germans in trucks and artillery, regular soldiers were equipped the same as their Polish or French counterparts.

In 1939 everything that could drive, run or walk and shoot was in Poland, there were no "millions" of men, there were just about 2 milion men and the name of the game was shortage, Germany didnt have enough tanks, trucks, guns which is why all of the active hardware was in Poland and none if it in the West let alone in reserve.

Please tell me you're f*cking with me? Those couple of thousands of Germans in the Condor Legion are supposed to count for what?

Without a shot.

Land your army in France, roll over the pathetic militias defending the Western border of Germany, do not betray Poland in Abbeville and put pressure on the French to move with you, yeah there were ways but they required actually fighting instead of declaring war and meeting with France over tea and crumpets deciding arbitraly that Poland has fallen.

Nope, you declared war and did nothing, going to war involves actuall fighting and beyond a few token actions absolutely meaningless for the war effort neither UK nor France did anything.

You were not in the position to do that, Churchill was smart enough to know that despite Hitlers sympathetic outlook towards UK once Europe gets bent over there's no way Germany would allow independent power like UK at its doorstep.

The difference between Germany of 1939 and Germany of 1944 is gigantic, Germany of 1943 or 44 is Germany thats economically many times larger then it was in 1939, 39 was the only time when Germans did not have effective reserves on a strategic level or any chance to shift troops.

This is another reason why Polish war effort is skimmed over, betraying Poland the West (UK and France) rewrote their history completely ignoring the fact that Poles completely tied the Wehrmacht, this made the franco-british treason at Abbeville seem logical.

Of course you could, instead of issuing blanket statements tell us why did Germans have only 200 guns to oppose the French at Ruhr, why werent there any armored or mechanized reserves in Germany? Where were the units Germans could shift to face the Anglo-French invasion if it happened?

Germany 1939, no reserves, 100% forces tied in combat for 3 weeks, 20% of their motorised forces destroyed or inoperational by the second week and militias defending their western border, those are the facts that no amount of your blanket statements can shift or change, the only thing that was lacking was guts and honour by French and British.

Also Lee could you explain to us the phenomenon of Abbeville? On 12th of September Brits and French meet in Abbeville and decide not to help Poland on the grounds that it has lost the war already.

At the same time French inform the Poles that they are attacking and Germans are withdrawing their forces to meet the french threat.

So thats treason of Poland by both UK and France right there.

At the same time Poland which supposedly already lost the war launches the offensive that will become the battle of Bzura, from 9 to 22 September 250.000 Poles tie 500.000 Germans along with entire German armored, mechanized and airforce elements.

Polish army is succesfull throught the initial 7 days of the battle, from 9 to 16th Sept.

So not only did UK and France betray Poland and decided Poland has lost while polish troops were massacring 5 german infantry divisions, not only did they lie to Poles so Poles pushed their offensive well past their offensive capacity, the French and Brits fully aware of the opportunity Poles created still decided to sit it out.

Stop issuing blanket statements Lee and argue with facts, Britian and France betrayed Poland in a bloody fugly fashion, period.
This moron will not say publicky what he's thinking of you,because he will remain polite.
But to refresh your"memory",this moron will state the following
1)Britain and France never expected to be obliged to fight:they were thinking that words would be enough to deter Hitler,but Der Fuhrer was not impressed.
2)Militarily Britain could not prevent Hitler to attack Poland and could not help Poland .
3)France could not help Poland because after a few days Poland had,strategically, already lost the war,although the Poles continued the fight valiantly and because France was not ready :that the French had a lot of tanks and artillery,spreaded over the whole of the country,does not mean that they could be ready in a few days .
4)If the Polish colonels were neglecting military realities,then ,they were very stupid .
These moron does not great you
 
In 1939 Britain and France signed a series of military agreements with Poland that contained very specific promises. The leaders of Poland understood very clearly that they had no chance against Germany alone.

British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain stated in the House of Commons on March 31, 1939.

"As the House is aware, certain consultations are now proceeding with other Governments. In order to make perfectly clear the position of His Majesty's Government in the meantime before those consultations are concluded, I now have to inform the House that during that period, in the event of any action which clearly threatened Polish independence, and which the Polish Government accordingly considered it vital to resist with their national forces, His Majesty's Government would feel themselves bound at once to lend the Polish Government all support in their power. They have given the Polish Government an assurance to this effect. I may add that the French Government have authorized me to make it plain that they stand in the same position in this matter as do His Majesty's Government."

Having secured a guarantee, the Poles now took steps toward coordinating their defensive preparations with the British. On April 4, 1939, Poland's Minister of Foreign Affairs, Józef Beck, visited London for talks with Prime Minister Chamberlain and Lord Halifax, the Foreign Secretary. The content of these talks was described in an official communiqué sent from London to Warsaw on April 6th:

"The conversations with M. Beck have covered a wide field and shown that the two Governments are in complete agreement upon certain general principles. It was agreed that the two countries were prepared to enter into an agreement of a permanent and reciprocal character to replace the present temporary and unilateral assurance given by His Majesty's Government to the Polish Government. Pending the completion of the permanent agreement, M. Beck gave His Majesty's Government an assurance that the Polish Government would consider themselves under an obligation to render assistance to His Majesty's Government under the same conditions as those contained in the temporary assurance already given by His Majesty's Government to Poland."
Shortly thereafter a formal agreement between Poland and Britain was signed which clearly stated "If Germany attacks Poland His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom will at once come to the help of Poland."

Whereas British support of Poland was a relatively recent diplomatic development, Poland's alliance with the French had a long history. The first French efforts to buttress Poland against Germany went back to 1921. In that year, Raymond Poincaré, soon to become president of the FrenchRepublic, had stated "Everything orders us to support Poland: The [Versailles] Treaty, the plebiscite, loyalty, the present and the future interest of France, and the permanence of peace."
To this end France had sealed a mutual assistance pact with Poland on February 21, 1921. According to Article One of this pact France and Poland agreed to "consult each other on all questions of foreign policy which concern both states." Furthermore, Article Three made it clear that "If, notwithstanding the sincerely peaceful views and intentions of the two contracting states, either or both of them should be attacked without giving provocation,the two governments shall take concerted measures for the defense of their territory and the protection of their legitimate interests."

This agreement for mutual defense was then augmented on September 15, 1922 by a formal military alliance signed by Marshal Foch and General Sokoski. This agreement stated explicitly "In case of German aggression against either Poland or France, or both, the two nations would aid each other to the fullest extent."

Seventeen years later, Poland and France, facing growing tension with Germany, found it necessary to reaffirm the defensive alliance they had formed in the wake of World War I. In mid-May of 1939, Poland's Minister of War, General Tadeusz Kasprzycki, visited Paris for a series of talks. At issue for Kasprzycki was clarifying the terms under which France would assist Poland militarily. These talks resulted in the Franco-Polish Military Convention which, according to historian Richard Watt, stated that "on the outbreak of war between Germany and Poland, the French would immediately undertake air action against Germany. It was also agreed that on the third day of French mobilization its army would launch a diversionary offensive into German territory, which would be followed by a major military offensive of the full French army to take place no later than fifteen days after mobilization."

Unfortunately, when Germany attacked, Poland was almost totally and completely betrayed by its democratic "friends". While Britain and France did declare war, French troops made a brief advance toward the Siegfried Line on Germany's western frontier and immediately stopped upon meeting German resistance

This is very significant since Hitler had concentrated almost all German military forces in the east, and France had one of the strongest armies in the world. Had France attacked Germany in a serious way as promised, the results could have been very serious, if not disastrous for the Germans.

Instead, Hitler was able to win a complete victory over Poland and then mobilize his forces for a devastating offensive in the west in the next year.

The British and French betrayal of Poland in 1939 was not only dishonest, it was a military stupidity of truly monumental dimensions. Unfortunately, more betrayals would follow. Contrary to their assurances to the Poles Britain and France would agree to allow Russia to keep the parts of Poland seized as part of their deal with Hitler in 1939.

A crowning humiliation of the Poles was the refusal of their British "friends" to allow the free Polish army to march in the victory parade at the end of the war for fear of offending a Soviet puppet government in Lublin.
1) to lend all support in their power:they did lend all support in their power,it was neglectable,because the support available was neglectable.
2)the official communiqué from april 6th:eek:nly meaningless blah blah
3) there wer no assurances to the Poles about Russia.
4)If the Poles were thinking that,in 1945,Britain and the USA,better the USA,Britain was unable to do anything,would start a new war to roll-back the SU,then,they were not naive,but stupid .Roosevelt,nor Truman cared about Poland,only about the votes of the ethnic Poles in the USA.Poland was not the navel of the world and the world had no obligations to Poland .
 
This moron will not say publicky what he's thinking of you,because he will remain polite.
By all means go for it, freedom of speech is for all of us, mind you i'm not out to sh*t on your lawn because its fun, in your case the fact that you're such a total ignoramus is depressing.
But to refresh your"memory",this moron will state the following
1)Britain and France never expected to be obliged to fight:they were thinking that words would be enough to deter Hitler,but Der Fuhrer was not impressed.
Really? Why did they promise to help Poland will all their army then? You basically confirmed that UKand France lied to Poland and thus betrayed it, thanks for conceeding the point.
2)Militarily Britain could not prevent Hitler to a Poland and could not help Poland .
Step one - ship 50.000 soldiers with tanks and the works to France.
Step two - roll into defencless Germany.
Step three - watch the german defence collapse both in Poland and in the West due to complete lack of reserves.

How is that impossible?
3)France could not help Poland because after a few days Poland had,strategically, already lost the war,although the Poles continued the fight valiantly and because France was not ready :that the French had a lot of tanks and artillery,spreaded over the whole of the country,does not mean that they could be ready in a few days .
Jesus man... thats exactly why i called you out as an ignorant moron.

You've just been given the facts, two weeks into the war Poland is succesfully leading an offensive larger than Normandy, three weeks into the war Poland still had more then 700.000 men.

Basically Poland did not lose either strategically or otherwise all the way into 17th, its army was intact, the main facilities were intact, the frontline was concentrated and Germany was stuck on Warsaw and Lwów completely unable to take both cities.

Unless you can provide proof that polish army was broken, routed or encircled (which it was not) or unable to further resist effectively, Poland did not lose untill the 17th when Russia invaded and focked up the rear.
4)If the Polish colonels were neglecting military realities,then ,they were very stupid .
The fock? Poland was the only country in Europe fully aware of the "military realities" 90% of british intel came from Poland, Poland wanted to mobilise weeks in advance but was stopped by France and UK fearing to aggravate Hitler!

Your claims are not only ignorant bollocks they're insulting given that it was Poland who was blowing the horn months in advance completely ignored untill the last day and then betrayed.

Poles gave Brits and French weeks of time by alarming them to Gerrman troop concentration, your points are insulting, ignorant and moronic, based on your own idiotic assumptions and opinions born out of arrogance and lack of any knowledge whatosever, its like discussing physics with an ape.

Next thing you'll say its Polands fault that French didnt attack and Brits didnt ship to France earlier.
 
1) to lend all support in their power:they did lend all support in their power,it was neglectable,because the support available was neglectable.
Please please just stop writing.

Are you telling me that the French army of 500.000 men with over 1000 tanks, over 3000 guns and over 300 armored cars could not take on 160.000 men with 200 WWI era cannons and rifles?

4)If the Poles were thinking that,in 1945,Britain and the USA,better the USA,Britain was unable to do anything,would start a new war to roll-back the SU,then,they were not naive,but stupid .Roosevelt,nor Truman cared about Poland,only about the votes of the ethnic Poles in the USA.Poland was not the navel of the world and the world had no obligations to Poland .
Are you some neo-nazi sh*thead? You sound like people from stormfront and axis forums.

Poland made cracking the Enigma possible, Poland lent support during BoB that was so significant it probably saved UK, Poland was responsible for handing over V-2 technology to the West, Poland gave UK and France a year more to prepare for 1941 by inflicting such losses on Wechrmacht in 1939.

The West sure as f*ck had lots of obligations to Poland, which in the end didnt change anything, just like it was betrayed in 1939 Poland got sold in 1945.

Also i like how you ignore where Brits didnt allow Polish troops on the victory parade after polish pilots saved Britain and polish mathematicians allowed Enigma to be cracked and Blechley park to work by providing the punch plates technology.
 
By all means go for it, freedom of speech is for all of us, mind you i'm not out to sh*t on your lawn because its fun, in your case the fact that you're such a total ignoramus is depressing.

Really? Why did they promise to help Poland will all their army then? You basically confirmed that UKand France lied to Poland and thus betrayed it, thanks for conceeding the point.

Step one - ship 50.000 soldiers with tanks and the works to France.
Step two - roll into defencless Germany.
Step three - watch the german defence collapse both in Poland and in the West due to complete lack of reserves.

How is that impossible?

Jesus man... thats exactly why i called you out as an ignorant moron.

You've just been given the facts, two weeks into the war Poland is succesfully leading an offensive larger than Normandy, three weeks into the war Poland still had more then 700.000 men.

Basically Poland did not lose either strategically or otherwise all the way into 17th, its army was intact, the main facilities were intact, the frontline was concentrated and Germany was stuck on Warsaw and Lwów completely unable to take both cities.

Unless you can provide proof that polish army was broken, routed or encircled (which it was not) or unable to further resist effectively, Poland did not lose untill the 17th when Russia invaded and focked up the rear.

The fock? Poland was the only country in Europe fully aware of the "military realities" 90% of british intel came from Poland, Poland wanted to mobilise weeks in advance but was stopped by France and UK fearing to aggravate Hitler!

Your claims are not only ignorant bollocks they're insulting given that it was Poland who was blowing the horn months in advance completely ignored untill the last day and then betrayed.

Poles gave Brits and French weeks of time by alarming them to Gerrman troop concentration, your points are insulting, ignorant and moronic, based on your own idiotic assumptions and opinions born out of arrogance and lack of any knowledge whatosever, its like discussing physics with an ape.

Next thing you'll say its Polands fault that French didnt attack and Brits didnt ship to France earlier.
1)I will not say what I am thinking of you,because I will not lower myself to your level.
2) Britain had no 50000 men with tanks available and it would take weeks to transfer them to the front .
3)Poland was not leading an offensive larger than Normandy:your chauvinism is ridiculous.
4)About Poland having 700000 men:Hermany had still millions in 1945
5)On 15 th september,Germany was already transferring troops to the West.
6)military realities means that France was more than 1000 km remote from Poland.
7)you have not any knowledge of WWII .
8)you have only a big knowledge of terms of abuse,a substitute for your ignorance .
 
Please please just stop writing.

Are you telling me that the French army of 500.000 men with over 1000 tanks, over 3000 guns and over 300 armored cars could not take on 160.000 men with 200 WWI era cannons and rifles?


Are you some neo-nazi sh*thead? You sound like people from stormfront and axis forums.

Poland made cracking the Enigma possible, Poland lent support during BoB that was so significant it probably saved UK, Poland was responsible for handing over V-2 technology to the West, Poland gave UK and France a year more to prepare for 1941 by inflicting such losses on Wechrmacht in 1939.

The West sure as f*ck had lots of obligations to Poland, which in the end didnt change anything, just like it was betrayed in 1939 Poland got sold in 1945.

Also i like how you ignore where Brits didnt allow Polish troops on the victory parade after polish pilots saved Britain and polish mathematicians allowed Enigma to be cracked and Blechley park to work by providing the punch plates technology.
1) because you are an ignoramus ,not willing to understand the difference berween 500000 men spreaded over France and the possible available offensive strenght
2) that Poland saved Britain in the BOB :you are even more stupid than I thought.
3)inflicting such losses on the Wehrmachr? :50000 men .
4)the V2 was totally neglectable and only a waste of money .
5) why should Polish troops be allowed on the Victory parade ? Were the French allowed.It should only give troubles with the (puppet) government in Poland :the Polish troops were troops without country and without government .
 
1) because you are an ignoramus ,not willing to understand the difference berween 500000 men spreaded over France and the possible available offensive strenght
2) that Poland saved Britain in the BOB :you are even more stupid than I thought.
3)inflicting such losses on the Wehrmachr? :50000 men .
4)the V2 was totally neglectable and only a waste of money .
5) why should Polish troops be allowed on the Victory parade ? Were the French allowed.It should only give troubles with the (puppet) government in Poland :the Polish troops were troops without country and without government .

It is generally agreed that the single most important factor that could have lead to British defeat was the shortage of pilots. As the result, the British were forced to rely on their allies to fill this gap, and Polish pilots, with their excellent pre-war training and experience from two campaigns performed beautifully in that role. In terms of numbers, in the crucial days of September 1940, every one in eight pilots of the Fighter Command was a Pole, and 303 Squadron's contribution was nothing short of amazing. Hence the opinion of Sir Hugh Dowding

”Had it not been for the magnificent material contributed by the Polish squadrons and their unsurpassed gallantry, I hesitate to say that the outcome of battle would have been the same”

Only two nations were not part of the victory parade: Poland and Yugoslavia.
 
1
2) Britain had no 50000 men with tanks available and it would take weeks to transfer them to the front .
To be specific, UK had 62.000 professional soldiers grouped in six infantry divisions along with four motorised brigades and separate tank battalions, the immidiate number of tanks available in UK as of Sept was 410 in addition it had 24 fighter squadrons, 1900 guns available and could call upon another 100.000 men from homeland security.

Thats over 150.000 men 10 times more tanks, 9 times more guns and 23 times more machineguns then the entire german force arrayed in the West, why werent these men in France months before september?
3)Poland was not leading an offensive larger than Normandy:your chauvinism is ridiculous.
Actually Poland was leading an offensive that was the third largest offensive in the entire WW2.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Bzura

Educate yourself.

This offensive led to a massive battle that lasted two weeks, one german infantry division was almost completely destroyed, four others suffered catastrophic losses, 100% of german airforce and fast units had to be used in counterattack and it took a 2:1 numerical superiority by the Germans to finally halt the offensive.

Said offensive was in its most succesfull stage at the time when the French and Brits decided that Poland has lost the war (sic!)

For 2 weeks Germany was unable to draw a single soldier from Poland since it had to use them to contain the two Polish armies.

Now that you've been educated i'm waiting for you to kiss my arse and apologise, mind you the Wiki is innacurate in that it doesnt count Polish reserve forces which raise the number of belligerents by tens of thousands, also it significantly lowers the german forces by not counting the Landwehr divisions, at least 60.000 men.
4)About Poland having 700000 men:Hermany had still millions in 1945
In 1939 it had only 2.4 milion troops, from this only about 2 milion were combat troops and from these 1.5 were in Poland.
5)On 15 th september,Germany was already transferring troops to the West.
What tank divisions?:)
6)military realities means that France was more than 1000 km remote from Poland.
But it was bordering Germanys defencless border no?:)
 
Last edited:
1) because you are an ignoramus ,not willing to understand the difference berween 500000 men spreaded over France and the possible available offensive strenght
Funny you say that because these half a milion french troops were not spread throught France, they were concentrated in the Saar region.

Made it in bold letters for you, as for their offensive strength? They had over 1500 armored vehicles and over 70.000 motorised troops as well as over 300.000 first line infantry against an enemy who had 200 WWI guns, several hundreds old machineguns and mortars and some minefields.

France army in sept 1939 had a massive offensive potential against an enemy who had no defensive capabilities whatsoever.
2) that Poland saved Britain in the BOB :you are even more stupid than I thought.
1/8th fighter pilots were Poles, 13% of all Germans shot down over UK in BoB were shot down by Poles, Poles had experience and training at a period when such pilots were at a premium, yeah Poles saved UK even Brits admitted it repeatedly.
3)inflicting such losses on the Wehrmachr? :50000 men .
480 tanks and 230 armored cars destroyed or severely damaged, thats about 25% of the grand total german mechanized elements for example, the losses in hardware were such that Germans had to delay their invasion of France.
4)the V2 was totally neglectable and only a waste of money .
Ah your educated guess again captain neo-nazi, V-2 was the gateway to all later rocket technologies and the west only got it because polish Home Army stormed a launching facility and retrieved a complete V-2 to retro-engineer by the allies.
5) why should Polish troops be allowed on the Victory parade ? Were the French allowed.
Yes the French were allowed, French who collaborated with Germany, betrayed Poland and murdered their jewish population were allowed whereas Poland who's pilots saved Britain, who's scientists cracked enigma, who's soldiers stormed Monte Cassino and liberated Holland was not allowed to participate.

You seriously dont see anything wrong with this? I'm starting to suspect you came here from Axis forums or another neonazi site.
It should only give troubles with the (puppet) government in Poland :the Polish troops were troops without country and without government .
They had a country that was sold out by their allies and a goverment that was betrayed by the same allies, at last they were refused an honor they earned more than anyone except maybe the Russians and you dont see anything wrong with it after all that Poland did contribute towards the final victory of the West and survival of UK?

You sir are either a closet neo-nazi or just a bloody stupid twat.
 
That is a pretty wide-open question, LeEnfield, but I would imagine that it had something to do with U-boats cutting supply lines between GB and Europe and vice versa. And the British hatred of Germany built with the blitz in 1940 as well. But most of all, I can't see a very stubborn Churchill siting idly by while the rest of Europe came under Nazi control. It is simply something he would not stand for, even if it came down to one last British soldier with a club fighting the last German armed with a pocket knife. As Pink Floyd said on "Dark Side Of the Moon," "...hanging on in quiet desperation is the English way."


Right On. Eye-witness account here:-


Saturday September 7, 1940, 4.14 pm.


Black with death, black with bombers
Heinkels, Dorniers and Junkers, three hundred and forty-eight
Messerschmitt fighters, six hundred and seventeen
.Black with a canopy twenty miles wide
A black block of death, eight hundred square miles of sky
.Bombs on London, twelve hours

Bombs on London, seventy-six nights -
Nights in a row
Killing over forty-three thousand civilians
Unremitting slaughter,
Incessant attack on lives

High explosive compression,
Pulling and pushing.
Sucking out eye-balls,
Ripping off clothes,
Tearing out breath.
Black with death

To crush the spirit of London.


I lost 2 homes in those 76 days - rubble and dust.

As for saving Poland - Britain just didn't have a magic wand available at the time. We just did what we could without question - we stood our ground.

-
 
Last edited:
Please chill out a bit Panzer. Most guys just simply buy nazi/communist propaganda, about Poland being backward, worthless nation of barbarians. They dont give a damn. Every country did some wrong back then. Same goes for Poland I suppose. But in the west allies are seen as heroes, riding on white horse to kill nazi dragon. It reminds me of communist propaganda, before 1989. Same thing happens everywhere, just in different ways. I find it kinda sad.
 
Please chill out a bit Panzer. Most guys just simply buy nazi/communist propaganda, about Poland being backward, worthless nation of barbarians. They dont give a damn. Every country did some wrong back then. Same goes for Poland I suppose. But in the west allies are seen as heroes, riding on white horse to kill nazi dragon. It reminds me of communist propaganda, before 1989. Same thing happens everywhere, just in different ways. I find it kinda sad.

The most important features of the Polish contribution to the defeat of Germany are determination and perseverance. Despite the severe defeat in 1939, the Poles formed five more armies, including four in exile: in France in 1939, in the United Kingdom in the summer of 1940 (after the defeat and capitulation of France), and twice in the USSR in 1941. These were the army of Gen. Anders that fought later in the South of Europe, and the one that emerged in 1943 and later fought at the Red Army’s side. The fifth Polish army, created at the end of September of 1939 was the conspiratorial armed force in the occupied territory. For the entire period of the war there also existed the very important “silent front” – the intelligence. Probably up to 2 millions Poles served since September 1st, 1939 to May 8th, 1945 in all the Polish military formations – regular armies, partisan troops and underground forces. In the final stage of war the Polish troops on all the European fronts amounted to some 600 000 soldiers (infantry, armored troops, air force and navy). In the summer of 1944, while commencing regular military struggle against the retreating Germans, the armed underground numbered more than 300 thousands sworn soldiers. It can be concluded that Poland put in the field the fourth greatest Allied army.

"The soul of Poland is indestructible, and she will rise again like rock which may for a spell be submerged by a tidal wave, but which remains a rock."
(WINSTON CHURCHILL, 1.10.1939)
 
Back
Top