[jagger11]

> 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

[vetinari]

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.

[jagger11]

- In 1918, borders of Poland were established on the future Curzon line (more or less, less in fact) - https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historia_Polski_(1918%E2%80%93...

- The territorial gains of Poland in 1919-1920 materialized, because it won a war started by the Soviet Union

- Curzon line was proposed/described only in 1920

- Those lands (that you described as conquered and re-conquered) weren't Russian etnically, more like Belarusian, Ukrainian, Lithuanian, and Ruthenian

- (edit) The secret pact (Germany-USSR) didn't say Soviet union will recover the territorial gains from 1920-1921, but that it will occupy Eastern Poland (east of Vistula River), making it effectively partition of Poland, so no Curzon line here too.

PS: Please reply if you'd like, and EOT for me. This whole centithread started because I wanted to display that the current Russian historiography is heavily biased (way more than other "western" countries) towards minimizing its own misdeeds, and portraying them as innocent, normal or justified.

[sergeykish]

I'm sorry, but this reads like "Russians fought for Belarusian, Ukrainian, Lithuanian, and Ruthenian lands".

Looks quite strange at least about Ukrainians (which were half as many as Russians). Do you think they stayed home? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_All-Union_Census_of_the_...

Meanwhile Poland occupied ethnic Ukrainian territories https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish–Ukrainian_War (east of future Curzon line).

This helped Bolshevik to overthrow https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_People%27s_Republic

Of course Bolshevik never intended to stop until all Europe is in fire.

That's Poland who started the war https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiev_Offensive_(1920)

> Piłsudski also said: Closed within the boundaries of the 16th century, cut off from the Black Sea and Baltic Sea, deprived of land and mineral wealth of the South and South-east, Russia could easily move into the status of second-grade power. Poland as the largest and strongest of new states, could easily establish a sphere of influence stretching from Finland to the Caucasus. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish–Soviet_War

I can't see Poland in good light here - same imperial attitude, same old flows in ethnic politics. Same as Russia.

As for the pact

> The terms of the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact of August 1939 provided for the partition of Poland along the line of the San, Vistula and Narew rivers which did not go along Curzon Line but reached far beyond it and awarded the Soviet Union with territories of Lublin and near Warsaw.

Yet

> Soviet Union annexed all territories east of the Curzon Line plus Białystok and Eastern Galicia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curzon_Line

PS: I've replied only because I wanted to display that the comment is heavily biased (way more than other "western" countries) towards minimizing its own misdeeds, and portraying them as innocent, normal or justified.

[jagger11]

I don't think I've ever made a point that PL (and earlier PL-LI commonwealth) had a stellar record of treatment of minority nationalities in its borders. Could you clarify with which point I'd made you argue?

[sergeykish]

> Those lands (that you described as conquered and re-conquered) weren't Russian etnically, more like Belarusian, Ukrainian, Lithuanian, and Ruthenian

Those lands were not Poland ethnically.

[masonic]

  hey were weak at the time

Didn't "Weak" Poland survive longer fighting a two-front war than France did in its single-front war? And for the remainder of the war, escaped Poles fought for Britain and other allies.