| HN Mirror

"co-starting the 2WW, together with Germany"

It's so convenient to ignore the Munich agreement and the dismemberment of Czechoslovakia by Germany, Poland and Hungary with the approval of the West and despite the USSR's objections.

That's something both Polish and international historians condemn, and there's no serious justification of this act, not in maintream Polish history books, nor on Wikipedia (described as "annexation" in .pl wiki). PS: Poland was not a signatory to the Munich agreements.

But Molotov-Rippentrop pact is a direct consequence of the Munich agreement that clearly signalled that the West doesn't intend to fight Nazis and the USSR would be alone.

The same signal was reinforced by the failure of the USSR to form an anti-Hitler alliance with France and the GB.

The events that followed prove the lack of will to fight Hitler on part of the West - the Great Britain declared war on the Germany after it invaded Poland, but this war is called the Phony War for a reason - the GB didn't actually do anything.

So when you reduce the history to "the USSR signed the pact with Hitler and they together started WW2" it is at the very least uninformed.

At the time, it didn't prevent Poles to take their bite from Czechoslovakia too.

I've already condemened it.

PS: I like sharp counterarguments, but I guess it cannot go as "P1: We did wrong! P2: What about that time you did wrong?"

onetimemanytime 2572 days ago

No honor among thieves. Poland was marked to be taken off the history books because her neighbors were powerful. Poland would have the same back then, if it was in their position. History of the world. The last few decades are very unique as we have peace, minus a few things here and there.

mcguire 2571 days ago

There's a short story (by Alan Dean Foster?) about the Polish empire surviving into the 20th century and leading to a glorious utopian age.

0: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism

rblatz 2572 days ago

Yeah! what about that![0]

Please don't mindlessly repeat this Cold War propaganda bit.

There is a direct cause and effect relationship between the Munich agreement and the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact. Talking about the latter starting the WW2 without mentioning the former is at the very least misleading.

qbaqbaqba 2572 days ago

Please, don't mindlessly repeat this Russian propaganda. Rapallo happened in 1922. And there is a direct cause and effect relationship between it and German militarization.

You will need to elaborate on that.

Edit: Please don't substantially edit your comments after they have a reply.

And you still need to elaborate.

Synaesthesia 2572 days ago

The war nearly started in 1938 over Czechoslovakia. Hitler was already determined upon war at that point, so he is right that it’s a split toe more complex than that. You have to look at the preceding years, appeasement and Munich.

ekianjo 2572 days ago

Worth noting that the Allies who justified the protection of Poland to declare war on Germany, avoided declaring war on Soviet Russia which invaded Poland on the Eastern side (about 2 weeks after).

From another POV: those two week later Poland as a state didn't exist, the former Polish government was in exile, and USSR took back territories that Poland took from USSR in the 1919-1921 Polish-Soviet war.

Polish government went exile after the Soviets invaded.

PS: In 1919, it was USSR who fought the war on Polish ground, and lost. I don't think you'll find too much material to play moral high ground here.

2nd Polish republic was established after WW1, so there was no Polish ground. The border was supposed to be Curzon line (exactly that line, that USSR took back in 1939), but the Poles were gunning for more, hence the 1919-1921 war.

If you consider Polish ground whatever was high mark of Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth, then good luck with that. It was empire building in the making, they overstretched and didn't make it. It is no Polish ground exactly in the same sense, that Balkan is not Turkish either.

> 2nd Polish republic was established after WW1, so there was no Polish ground

Versailes declaration (FR, UK, IT), with support of Polish statehood - June 1918 / End of WW1 - November, 1918 / 2nd Polish Republic established - November, 1918 / Start of Polish-Sovet war - February, 1919

Polish statehood is not the same as the polish territory at a convenient point of time.

After Versailles, the Poland was established on the territory of Germany, Austro-Hungarian empire and Russian empire. However, the Russian empire part was supposed to be up to the Curzon line.

Instead, the Poles went opportunistic far behind it. What they gained in the war (because Soviets were weak at the time), they lost in the war 20 years later (table has turned, they were weak at the time).

Not that they didn't similar things elsewhere; they had to annex parts of Czechoslovakia too (1919-1920).

Sorry, I don't have sympathy when a conqueror loses whatever they conquered.

liberal_098 2572 days ago

> USSR took back territories that Poland took from USSR in the 1919-1921 Polish-Soviet war

Essentially, Poland was occupying these territories between 1921 and 1939. Also, Poland had a dictatorship (quite typical in Europe at that time) and they were highly aggressive with respect to their neighbors: Polish-Ukrainian War (1918–19), Polish-Lithuanian War (1920, culminating in Żeligowski's Mutiny), Polish-Czechoslovak border conflicts (beginning in 1918).

It had authoritarianism (with many democratic elements in place) since 1926 (way way more liberal than that of Soviet Union, or Nazi Germany). Before that it was fully democratic (though, chaotic).

As for the conflicts you'd decribed, some of them were conflicts without clear aggressor (e.g. Polish-Czechoslovak conflicts of 1918) typical of those times, some were misdeeds of Polish state (annexation of Vilnus and Czechoslovakian Zaolzie in 1938).

ekianjo 2571 days ago

This is an absolutely non valid POV. The Polish government still existed back on the 17th of September when the USSR invaded, and Russia and Poland has signed a treaty of non-aggression that was renewed for 10 years in 1934 and was still claimed to be valid by both parties back in 1938.

There's no way you can deny that the USSR invaded a state of Poland that still existed and was still fighting against aggressors right when Russia troops passed the frontier.

One source, out of many: https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k4437527/f1.item.zoom

Note that your comment is actually pure propaganda from Staline's himself (this is exactly what the USSR claimed when they invaded Poland, and they presented themselves as liberators and protectors instead of invaders). Of course, you should know better than to trust the communist propaganda.

vkou 2572 days ago

The invasion by the USSR is what caused the collapse of Poland. It couldn't fight a two-front war.

Koshkin 2572 days ago

As if it hadn't been losing to the Germans already.

jagger11 2571 days ago

So, helping Nazi Germany in the beggining of the WW2 seems justified in light of this, I agree.

Koshkin 2571 days ago

The Germans did not need help, and they would have been happy to take all of Poland.

qbaqbaqba 2572 days ago

USSR didn't exist in 1920 either, it was established in 1922.

True, but when you use the optics "it is no man's land, let's take it while we can", why only in the case of 1919-1921, but not in the 1939 case?

When Soviets crossed Polish borders in 1939, the Polish statehood was exactly in the same defunct state as the Soviet in 1919-21.

Polish borders as of 1918 are here - https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historia_Polski_(1918%E2%80%93...

Soviet Union decided to attack, it lost the war, it had to ceede territory.

qbaqbaqba 2572 days ago

Poles didn't cross the Soviet border in 1919.

NeedMoreTea 2572 days ago

British and French had treaties with Poland, the US didn't enter the war until 41.

Roosevelt and Churchill seemed to believe Stalin's promises about Poland at Yalta. Only later did they seem to realise Stalin's words were empty. Churchill was hugely criticised in parliament right after for the poor treatment of Poland, including by his own party. There was even a vote of confidence in the government.

Of course post-war Europe ended up looking very suspiciously like the Molotov-Ribbentrop lines...

petre 2572 days ago

Roosevelt and Churchill practically gave away the whole of Eastern and Central Europe to Stalin. That's why the whole Yalta affair is quite unpopular amongst Eastern and Central Europeans. Hopefully history won't repeat itself now that we're all part of Nato.

oblio 2572 days ago

Trump is tearing down NATO right now and the US doesn't even need it anymore since it's focusing on China. I'm glad that Romania is on the Western side this time, maybe we get to be spared from foreign imposed governments for once.

If we get lucky maybe we can sneak in a reunion with Moldova within the next few decades while Russia goes through its usual cycle: https://www.economist.com/sites/default/files/images/print-e...

petre 2571 days ago

If you ignore the bullying, Trump is rather pragmatic. He's not tearing down NATO but pushing other NATO countries to take responsibility, fund their militaries and maybe buy US weapons in the process. Poland and Romania are quite receptive, Germany not so much because they aren't directly threatened.

The focus on China and Iran is also pragmatic. China has gotten more aggressive lately and Iran is likely getting punished.

https://www.britannica.com/event/Munich-Agreement

readhn 2572 days ago

"USSR attacked Poland on 17-th of September 1939 (co-starting the 2WW, together with Germany)."

German army was to complete the occupation of the Sudetenland (part of Czechoslovakia) by October 10 (1938), and an international commission would decide the future of other disputed areas. Czechoslovakia was informed by Britain and France that it could either resist Germany alone or submit to the prescribed annexations. The Czechoslovak government chose to submit.

The Soviet Union also had a treaty with Czechoslovakia, and it indicated willingness to cooperate with France and Great Britain if they decided to come to Czechoslovakia’s defense, but the Soviet Union and its potential services were ignored throughout the crisis.

petre 2572 days ago

They ended up with the USSR coming to their "defense" anyhow, just like they also did later, in 1965.

konart 2572 days ago

Why lie?

>Польский поход Красной армии (17—29 сентября 1939 года), в советской историографии освободительный поход РККА, в современной историографии также советское вторжение в Польшу

Polish march of the Red Army, liberating march of The Workers' and Peasants' Red Army in soviet historiography, also Soviet invasion of Poland in modern historiography.

mcguire 2571 days ago

Listen, after decades of listening to the American Civil War being refought, this discussion is fascinating and entertaining. But can we keep it somewhat civil?

Please retract the accussation of lie, it's quite unpleasant to me personally: I said that the title says "march", and you seem to confirm.

konart 2564 days ago

Your comment states this as if russian version has nothing to do with 'invasion", if not a lie, than clearly an attempt to make people think that russian version is somehow different in this regard, which is a lie. As the 'march' part is only applicable to soviet historiography as stated on the wiki page and obviously should not be changed as this is a historical fact.

samstave 2572 days ago

Is this when there were mass killings of poles in the forests? Or was that by the Nazis?

philwelch 2572 days ago

Katyn was perpetrated by the Soviets.