The Poles can do what they choose without the threat of the Americans sending in tanks etc if the Poles do something the Americans do not like.
You bet we are mate 
Chevan, could you provide something more about those bold ones?
Pozdrawiam,
Kovalski
What did bad for the poles the soviet tanks ?
The Soviet military contingent was placed on a case of new War. The simular american contingents were in the Western Germany.
As far as i know the soviet tanks were out of the actions in Poland- all the repressions like the shoting the demonstrant in Gdansk in 1970 were sanctioned by the Local Polish authrities with using the polish military forces.
Mate there is a lot of links about this discuss in European mass media ., You could search it in English if you want.
In your next post you’ll surely write that the polish commie puppet government was the only legal one in polish history and this one only had the real support of Poles
The rest of governments were full of CIA or MI6 agents and the polish kings were in fact Prussian, German, Austrian, Swedish or Turkish spies who were playing their role in all-world anti-Rrussian conspiracy 
And BTW, Soviet tanks in Poland had some work to do, for example in Czechoslovakia, were the New War, as you call it, had begun. And I just can’t recall who was the attacker? U.S., West Germany, British or French? Oh no! I remember now, that terrifying civilians who became such a thrilling enemy for brave soviet soldiers that they needed to use their tanks against them!
Besides that soviet soldiers in Poland built hundreds of schools, hospitals etc., didn’t rape any girl, didn’t murdered anyone and didn’t steal a single watch!
So many reasons to be proud Chevan.
Pozdrawiam,
Kovalski
Well i don’t know who was a legal gov - hovever we both know for sure that the 3++ millions of Polish member of communist party voited and supported the policy of Gomulko and Garek.
And do not forget about pupet polish MVD, puppet policy and puppet polish elite that so like to kiss comride Breznev and singed the sweet songs for him in 1960-70
I did not even guess how supposed soviets tanks could change the polish maind without any shot.
And BTW, Soviet tanks in Poland had some work to do, for example in Czechoslovakia, were the New War, as you call it, had begun.
No man . The New thermonuclear War could be possible if not the soviets troops in the Eastern Europe.
BTW the in patisipation in Chehoslovakia TOOK ACTIVE PART the Polish troops too.And Gomulka was glad to suppress the Czech “nationalists”.
I hope you did not forget about this sad fact;)
And I just can’t recall who was the attacker? U.S., West Germany, British or French?
USA, oh mate sure no.
The USA as you remember was TOO busy in slaughtering the Vietnam villiages by napalm and chemical wearpon- than they even They send to the Breznev though diplomatic channels the massage- the CHEHOSLOVAKIA IS A INNER ISSUE OF SOVIET BLOCK.
Therefore no “independent” West GErmany, France and Britain did not dream to attack the Soviet block.
Oh no! I remember now, that terrifying civilians who became such a thrilling enemy for brave soviet soldiers that they needed to use their tanks against them!
Oh mate now you are remembering , that a great;)
So i think you remember lik the “terriifying civiliance” burned on the soviet tanks and enjoy the show like the soviet tankers try to put out the flame.
Coz the y CLEARLY know - the SOviets had STRICT ORDER - DO NOT OPEN FIRE to the “civiliance”.
Besides that soviet soldiers in Poland built hundreds of schools, hospitals etc., didn’t rape any girl, didn’t murdered anyone and didn’t steal a single watch!
Building the schools?
No mate the soviets were busy - they raped the polish girls by a bunches per day.They increased the population of Poland since 33 mil in 1945 untill the 60 mln in the 1991.You know the Dastard Stalin presented much German territories for Poland ( whole Eastern Prussia) that was unpopulate.
So the Soviet soldiers had a secret mission- to increase the polish polulation- so they had a personal responsibility for a such great quantity of Poles today.
Meanwhile the poles build a great heavy industry ( not only hospitals , scholls) using the CHEAP soviet oil and materials.
So many reasons to be proud Chevan.
Definitelly i have no so much reason for pride like you have;)
But that’s true…
It’s great you agree at last that polish commies were just a bunch of puppets;)
As Man of Stoat said here: http://www.ww2incolor.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5563
"I love this post-modernist approach to history, in that when discussing really really bad things done by another nation/group you are abjectly criticised if you don’t have a full “mea culpa” included about all the slightly bad things that your nation/group has done, and even if you do give such a mea culpa you are criticised for being critical at all because your own country’s history is not whiter than a vestal virgin’s silken underthings.
It’s the academic equivalent of “how dare you criticise Mohammed Atta for murdering thousands of people on 9/11, you stole and broke Emily Parkinson’s pencil in fifth grade, so you are hardly blameless”
Oh how could these bloodthirsty czech and slovakian civilians burn peace-loving soviet soldiers in their tanks?
These guys were just on a holiday trip, when they were attacked
At least!
Chevan admitted what soviets did in Poland after the war!
I always believed in you! Finally, you opened your eyes
But you had to mixed something, maybe the soviet soldiers were on a secret mission somewhere else, because Poland had never had 60 millions of citizens mate
So where were they achieve this? Got some info in the famous Chevan’s database?
And remember that you would be able to produce anything if you didn’t steal all advanced technology from the west
Not mentioning the polish coal, which you demanded to be sold to USSR by a price 10 times lower than price in world market.
I think the big difference here is the difference between coercion and force.
The US often coerces other countries into either doing its bidding or joining in. This takes many forms, trade deals for example and so the country doing the US’s bidding always gains something from it [or will do in the future].
The Soviets simply used puppets and force to make other countries do their bidding with absolutely no chance to say no or no exonomic or other benefits.
Any country can always say no to the US [Germany and France in GW-1 is a good example] which clearly wasnt true for those in the Soviet Block.
Buch of puppets is at least a THIRD part of Polish ACTIVE population.
It was Puppet Poland - not gov.
It’s the academic equivalent of “how dare you criticise Mohammed Atta for murdering thousands of people on 9/11, you stole and broke Emily Parkinson’s pencil in fifth grade, so you are hardly blameless”
Itts not so simple mate- indeed you have to undertsna this so - how dare you blamed the Taliban , captiring the the Iraq when it was a Saudi camicadze that fly the airpains in 9/11.
Oh how could these bloodthirsty czech and slovakian civilians burn peace-loving soviet soldiers in their tanks?
These guys were just on a holiday trip, when they were attacked
Oh mate those piacefull soldiers at least did not try to shote to them utill the most end and drop to them the Molotove Coctail.
They have no ot it.But Czhech had it - coz they always walk in parade with Molotov’s.
And you are rather biased to presend the usial soldiers from the People Army of USSR and Poland like the bastards.
At least!
Chevan admitted what soviets did in Poland after the war!
I always believed in you! Finally, you opened your eyes
My eyes was wide open every time when you begin the rosophobian threas.
But you had to mixed something, maybe the soviet soldiers were on a secret mission somewhere else, because Poland had never had 60 millions of citizens mate
So now you see - they raped not as much as you dream:)
They just could reach the 37 mln in 1991;)
What a bastards.They did not realized the plan;)
So where were they achieve this? Got some info in the famous Chevan’s database?
Famouse?
And remember that you would be able to produce anything if you didn’t steal all advanced technology from the west
I thought you would say from Advanced polish tehnologies:)
Not mentioning the polish coal, which you demanded to be sold to USSR by a price 10 times lower than price in world market.
Coal - who need the polish coals in USSR mate?
The Ukrainian Donbass and Russian Kuzbass prodused a more then enought after the reconstructions in late 1949.
But yess the stopid commi bued the Polish coal in two-thee time higher then the Ukrainians one.
They need to support it ally- Poland, and supplied the oil that POLAND had no at all on the soviet lowest prices.
BTW do you ever know the so called Polish coal is indeed the German coal of Silesia that was presented to Poles form by the “evil Soviet regime”.
The dastard Stalin again…
- said Chevan, the greatest expert in polish history ever!
It is simple mate. Every time I point out some nasty things done by the Soviets, you say that polish weren’t clean. It is your way of discussion.
It is not about who threw the first coctail or fired a first shot.
It is about what were the Soviets doing in Czechoslovakia? What they went there?
This thread my friend wasn’t about Russians at all. Please check the title.
“The Poles on the fronts”.
It is not about Russians.
And it is you who started this discussion, in this embarrassing way of argue.
Nobody said a word about Russians before you posted here.
This sense of humour is much below my standards.
I ain’t gonna answer that.
You’re trying to convince me that that production prevented Soviets from stealing more coal?
But who asked him to do so?
I suppose I know the answer coming from your database.
Here’s a pertinent thread:
http://www.ww2incolor.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3695
Comrade Molotov Speaks:
"Germany, which has lately united 80 million Germans, has submitted certain neighboring countries to her supremacy and gained military strength in many aspects, and thus has become, as clearly can be seen, a dangerous rival to principal imperialistic powers in Europe - England and France. That is why they declared war on Germany on a pretext of fulfilling the obligations given to Poland. It is now clearer than ever, how remote the real aims of the cabinets in these countries were from the interests of defending the now disintegrated Poland or Czechoslovakia. This is shown if only by the fact, that the British and French governments declared that their aim in this war is to smash and dismember Germany, although this target is concealed from the masses of the people under the cover of slogans of defending the “democratic” countries and the “rights” of small nations.
When the Soviet Union did not want to be an accomplice with England and France in carrying out this imperialistic policy against Germany, the hostility in their attitudes regarding the Soviet Union became still more pronounced, giving a vivid evidence, how profound the class roots of the imperialists’ hostile politics against the socialist state are. The Anglo-French imperialists were ready to escalate the war started in Finland to a war against the USSR and not only utilizing Finland to this purpose - but also Scandinavian countries, Sweden and Norway."
Yes , said Chevan who has a manis polish friends;)
It is simple mate. Every time I point out some nasty things done by the Soviets, you say that polish weren’t clean. It is your way of discussion.
Well mate i just COULD not creat EVERY year the simular thread about polish nasti things;)
Coz i know this could be unpleasant for you;)There are a lot of such things , you know it.in polish history.
But if you persist - i might to do it instead to argue with you in your.
It is not about who threw the first coctail or fired a first shot.
It is about what were the Soviets doing in Czechoslovakia? What they went there?
And what they did there mate?
Did they massacre the czhechs kinda Yanks in Vietnam in the 1968?
This thread my friend wasn’t about Russians at all. Please check the title.
“The Poles on the fronts”.
It is not about Russians.
And it is you who started this discussion, in this embarrassing way of argue.
Nobody said a word about Russians before you posted here.
Right mate - nobody said a world except you source that you linked
http://www.ww2.pl/
That tells a insulting things about my state IMO.
So do not confuse please us- who has begin first.
This sense of humour is much below my standards.
I ain’t gonna answer that.
No problems.
I will no continie such humore.
You’re trying to convince me that that production prevented Soviets from stealing more coal?
Stealing coal?
Nobody staled poilish coal mate.
Except the poles who have stealed the German Upper Silesia in 1945;)
After the evil Stialn has persisted in the 1945 conference of allies - to join the silesia ito the Poland.
Bastard he…right.
But who asked him to do so?
I suppose I know the answer coming from your database.
Good question mate?
Who ask him to do so.
May be the feeling of guilt befor poles?Or international slav solodarity?
Anyway he was a bas…on yur mind.
Howeve this is a good question for me- if nobody of poles today do not even try to remeber about what stalin did good for poland?
The Coal of silesia was a basis for Polish post war industrial rise.
Here’s a couple of threads from another forum that show why, despite the illusion of numbers on paper, why it would have been ridiculous to expect for the French to mount a major offensive against Germany, they simply did not have the doctrine nor the trained army for it as the bulk of their “strength” on paper was comprised of reserves that needed retraining:
http://www.armchairgeneral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=40442
http://www.armchairgeneral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=42558
http://www.armchairgeneral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=35753
Nick i do understand nothing now;)
If the France had no “trained army and doctrine” why they has have deceived the Poles that they could beat the EGrmans?
i.e. you want to say thet France&Britain simply lie for the poles that they could attack the EGrmany and protect the Poland?
Or that poles were so stopid to believe UK/France?What is you point?
And why do you think that Germans Army was “good trained” in the 1939.
Untill the september 1939 they have no wide combatans and military experience ( like and the frenches and britains) so why the Germans WERE trained but Frances&Britains WERE not?
True in the 1941 after the victory inthe Europe the GErmans army was the best trained in entire world, but NOT in the 1939 when they just has began the war.
And as wrote the some of GErmans generals the Polish comany was not “pleasant walk” for them- the poles fight enought hard . And the GErmans was forced to use the ALL AVIATION AND Tanks in the Poland.
SO in fact the september of 1939 was the BEST moment of whole war to Attack the GErmans in the West.
But they did NOTHING, why?
Coz they “were not trained” - what a bulshit…
May be the Frenches were “better training” during the battle for france in 1940? Did it help them a much;)?
No. I don’t think you do, nor do I think you bothered to read the provided links. This is fine as I know they are very long and hard to translate unlike my crap posts. So I’ll break-it-down for you…
While I do not totally agree with the gentleman whose posts on the pre-war French military thinking reveal an indepth knowledge of the situation, I do think he contributes enormously to dispelling simplistic notions regarding the perceived strength and disposition of the French military circa 1939-1940…
If the France had no “trained army and doctrine” why they has have deceived the Poles that they could beat the EGrmans?
Whom deceived whom? The French deceived both themselves and the Poles that they could defeat the German Army…
Also, I believe the French also were thinking that the million+ man Polish military, while hardly the most modern in the world, would hold out quite a bit longer than they did…
i.e. you want to say thet France&Britain simply lie for the poles that they could attack the EGrmany and protect the Poland?
In a sense, they didn’t “lie.” They in fact did attack Germany through the Saar. I agree it was a bit pitiful and far more could have been done. But the French doctrine of “Methodical Battle” did not effectively allow for a truly offensive mode until the Germans had already suffered heavy casualties…
Or that poles were so stopid to believe UK/France?What is you point?
What did the Poles actually believe? What was actually stated in the treaty? All I can find on the internet about this is rather unreliable, even unsourced making concrete or definitive statements on this pretty dubious.
The only definitive statement on record is French Commanding General Gamelin telling the Poles he would launch an attack on the Germans within three weeks (which he did, if it was half-hearted). History largely paints Gamelin a fool, while some paint him a victim of circumstance. I think the truth is somewhere in between, while some of Gamelin’s statements and actions pre-and-during the war are inexcusable, the fact is he faced some very disadvantageous political realities regarding French manpower and the conscription laws that were written which effectively reduced the French army to one third its peacetime strength in the period from 1927 to the mid-1930s. Also, the Belgians changed their policies to neutrality in 1935, making French cooperation with them almost impossible and France newly vulnerable as the Maginot Line now had an open flank.
And the Polish Army was already collapsing at this point, very early on. Then of course, there was the second invasion by the USSR and its belligerent statements against the French and British, and their rather pro-Hitler attitudes as well, probably only contributed to the attitudes of waiting for a German attack during the “Phony War”…
And why do you think that Germans Army was “good trained” in the 1939.
Because they had a completely new approach to combined arms warfare that was vastly ahead of everyone else’s, including the French “Methodical Battle” doctrine, which moved at a far slower pace than modern technology allowed. Even as panzers drove deeply towards the Channel coast, French commanders will still projecting German advances using infantry foot speed and were shocked to find how far they had driven with their panzers in a day…
Untill the september 1939 they have no wide combatans and military experience ( like and the frenches and britains) so why the Germans WERE trained but Frances&Britains WERE not?
They didn’t? You mean the Germans hadn’t fought in the Spanish Civil War? The Freicorp engagements? Or that the “Reichswehr” hadn’t fought significant post war civil insurrections? And it’s not about “experience,” it’s also about innovative thinking that the Germans adopted and the French, British, and the Americans largely ignored because their militaries could afford to not take risks and look to 1918 on how to win a battle.
Do I have to explain the German postwar history or the Versailles Treaty constraints to you? And how these actually forced the German military to adapt its thinking towards highly mobile warfare?
True in the 1941 after the victory inthe Europe the GErmans army was the best trained in entire world, but NOT in the 1939 when they just has began the war.
Why would the German wartime army be better trained in 1941 than it was in 1939? Because that’s when they defeated large Soviet formations? I have no idea where this comes from since they were some of the worlds best trained soldiers and airmen in both time periods. In fact, the same concepts that made the Wehrmacht/SS/Luftwaffe almost unstoppable juggernauts in 1941 were all there in the late 1930s. You simply cannot separate the German military into two year distinct periods. They are in fact interrelated…
And as wrote the some of GErmans generals the Polish comany was not “pleasant walk” for them- the poles fight enought hard .
True enough. But it was still “lightening war” by the contemporary standard of victories set by even the successful Allied advances at the end of WWI. The Polish military was simply not prepared for the shock ans speed of the German advance and their adeptness at combined arms warfare, much like the French would soon be. It was the same shock the the Red Army would feel in 1941, though they French would have to endure it without the benefit of time and space to reverse their errors…
And the GErmans was forced to use the ALL AVIATION AND Tanks in the Poland.
SO in fact the september of 1939 was the BEST moment of whole war to Attack the GErmans in the West.
Not “all” aviation was in Poland. The Luftwaffe still had significant assets in the West to guard against the RAF and French Air Force. And neither could touch the Luftwaffe in the use of tactical aviation to support ground forces…
But they did NOTHING, why?
But they didn’t “do nothing.” They quickly mobilised the French Army which was only about 206,000 men in late summer of 1939, to several million men - most of whom lacked training. Who was going to do it?
Coz they “were not trained” - what a bulshit…
Trained in what? They were reservists that hadn’t done anything for years, often poorly led and without organization or equipment as of yet.
May be the Frenches were “better training” during the battle for france in 1940? Did it help them a much;)?
Actually, they had better training, but the wrong kind. The French Army was reorganizing and had never adequately answered what to do if the Germans didn’t attack the Maginot Line, which was actually the French command’s wet-dream, even if they knew it unlikely that the Germans were stupid enough to try a head on assault. This may well have slowed and contained a German panzer assault for long enough for the French to figure out that the generals favoring more mobile warfare, like Charles De Gaulle, than Methodical Battle allowed for were correct.
The seeds of the French Army’s collapse was laid rather quickly, within the first 48 hours of the “Battle for France” when under trained and equipped reservists were caught holding the main point of German attack, unexpectedly, through the Ardennes Forest and the main French front line forces were caught in Belgium about to be cut off. But you see, the French thinking was entirely defensive in nature which was a direct result of their low birth rate and the existential dilemma of whether they could ever beat Germany in a long war without inflicting very heavy casualties on the Germans without suffering themselves in the initial phase of the war, which had to be defensive for this very reason. The fact that the French did have an opportunity not withstanding, they may not have been able to defeat the Germans even then. It is however an open question which will haunt them forever. But for all there failures of the French high command and political leaders of the 1920s and 30s, of which there are many, they cannot be blamed for the Invasion of Poland, whether they did enough or not. But they simply were not ABLE to do much for a whole host of reasons…
Of course, we can turn things on their head and ask why the great hero of the Soviet Union, the great man of steel: Marshall Stalin, didn’t invade Germany or their occupied lands while the panzers were in France in 1940?
Yeah, that Pact really was in the Soviets best interests, wasn’t it? :lol:
Moving this thread to “General,” since it now has little to do with the thread topic…
Thank for the care Nicki;)
OK lets discuss the things.
Whom deceived whom? The French deceived both themselves and the Poles that they could defeat the German Army…
So shortly speaking you want to say that France was not able to realise its military ability correct in the 1939?
But why they "suddenly’ have realised that they could not defeat the GErmany Army right after the 1 september?
Why he suddenly decided not to attack the GErmans on your mind?
Also, I believe the French also were thinking that the million+ man Polish military, while hardly the most modern in the world, would hold out quite a bit longer than they did…
But they HOLD the GErmans whole 17 days.
So this was enough time at least to began the any combatan actions in the West.
In a sense, they didn’t “lie.” They in fact did attack Germany through the Saar. I agree it was a bit pitiful and far more could have been done. But the French doctrine of “Methodical Battle” did not effectively allow for a truly offensive mode until the Germans had already suffered heavy casualties…
Well but the attack through Saar look like the kiddish play in comparition with the Battles in the Poland.
And why did they forget to notice the poles before the 1 sep that “their doctrine of the Methodical battle” do not let them to execute the French-Polish treaty?
What did the Poles actually believe? What was actually stated in the treaty?
The beginning of the union UK/France military action was stated in the treaty.
All I can find on the internet about this is rather unreliable, even unsourced making concrete or definitive statements on this pretty dubious.
Well actually the some of secret additions to the agreements are hard to find today.
But i think this is naive to think that the Poles was not promised nothing concrete.
And the Polish Army was already collapsing at this point, very early on. Then of course, there was the second invasion by the USSR and its belligerent statements against the French and British, and their rather pro-Hitler attitudes as well, probably only contributed to the attitudes of waiting for a German attack during the “Phony War”…
Oh this is something new;)
what a pro-Hitler attitied of Frnace and britain do you mean during the Phony war?
That were in Anti-German treaty with Poland, right?
Do you meant they simply sold the Poland for Hitler as well as Chehoslovakia year before?
Because they had a completely new approach to combined arms warfare that was vastly ahead of everyone else’s, including the French “Methodical Battle” doctrine, which moved at a far slower pace than modern technology allowed. Even as panzers drove deeply towards the Channel coast, French commanders will still projecting German advances using infantry foot speed and were shocked to find how far they had driven with their panzers in a day…
Yes the GErman Blitzkrieg tactic was superioir for its time.
However thay have to send to the poland ALL OF their tanks and Aviation. SO in the MAgino line they could not trat for the Frences by the contr-offensive, right.
They didn’t? You mean the Germans hadn’t fought in the Spanish Civil War? The Freicorp engagements? Or that the “Reichswehr” hadn’t fought significant post war civil insurrections? And it’s not about “experience,” it’s also about innovative thinking that the Germans adopted and the French, British, and the Americans largely ignored because their militaries could afford to not take risks and look to 1918 on how to win a battle.
Well Nick i/m seriously doubt that the participation in Spanish Civil war the German Legion Condor was the seriose support for preparation Entire GErman Army( the total participation of GErman troops in Span was no more 19 000 of mans for all 3 years)
I doubt this could train the GErman army.
Besides do not forget tht in Respublican side there were a lot of voli\untaries form France, Poland and other states.
So i think the OVERAL Germn combat experience was no more the UK/Frence befor 1 sept of 1939.
Do I have to explain the German postwar history or the Versailles Treaty constraints to you? And how these actually forced the German military to adapt its thinking towards highly mobile warfare?
The thinking is a just thinking.
Can yo believe if i say yothat the soviet commander of Army Tuhachevskij planned in 1937-38 to crach the GErmans army for the short time and the small blood in the territory of GErmany using the newest speedy soviet tanks and aviation armades.
And his thinking was really highly outstanding for his time.
Did it help the Army in the 1940 in Finland?
Why would the German wartime army be better trained in 1941 than it was in 1939? Because that’s when they defeated large Soviet formations? I have no idea where this comes from since they were some of the worlds best trained soldiers and airmen in both time periods. In fact, the same concepts that made the Wehrmacht/SS/Luftwaffe almost unstoppable juggernauts in 1941 were all there in the late 1930s. You simply cannot separate the German military into two year distinct periods. They are in fact interrelated…
In the 1941 the GErman army had a great succesfull full scale experience inthe Europe after the 2 year continious compain.
During the two years thy developed and buffed its Blitzkrige tactic that was still no so perfect in Poland in 1939.
Therefore in the summer the GErman army was the best that world ever seen befor.
Not “all” aviation was in Poland. The Luftwaffe still had significant assets in the West to guard against the RAF and French Air Force. And neither could touch the Luftwaffe in the use of tactical aviation to support ground forces…
What do you mean the significan asset?
The few GErmans aircraft in the West could support a much?
Or may be the Luftwaffe from Poland could attack the Frenches?
Anyway Nick you simply ignore that fact that France had a absolute superiority in aircraft in the West at that time.
Besides do not forget about British aviation that could support the France in actions agains GErmany…If they really took the place;)
But they didn’t “do nothing.” They quickly mobilised the French Army which was only about 206,000 men in late summer of 1939, to several million men - most of whom lacked training. Who was going to do it?
So in this way the right question is “What for” they do it?
Had they mobilazed its army in aim to attack the GErmany - or for the sake of appearance?
Trained in what? They were reservists that hadn’t done anything for years, often poorly led and without organization or equipment as of yet.
Oh Nick, you really a bit of naive.
Was the 1.5 million of GErmans army that invided the Poland the whole bunch of super-Rembo that could hit the Polish aircraft by the single shoot of bow?
Were they most of them not the simular reservists , former workers and peasants, who had no any poor training and was poorly armed?
well almost forget ( the GErmans captured the Whole arsenal of Chehoslovakia- so they have very enough wearpon in the 1939;)
Of course, we can turn things on their head and ask why the great hero of the Soviet Union, the great man of steel: Marshall Stalin, didn’t invade Germany or their occupied lands while the panzers were in France in 1940?
Good question.
But why Marshal Stalin should save the Europe - if nobody asked him about ?
Or maybe somebody wished to sign the treaty with USSR befor the war?
Ah ,Nicki?
Or may be the Britain signed the treaty with Stalin in the 1939?No?
Nobody want have deels with “dirty Stalin” - so why he should save the Europe?
Beside they now were so lucky now under Nazy “new Order” that immediatelly has began the jewish pogroms and killing of communists;)
Whom was he needed to save?The pro-nazy regimes who dreamed to destroy the “evil Communism” together with Further?
Yeah, that Pact really was in the Soviets best interests, wasn’t it? :lol:
That thought is even deeper that your irony
Guys,
Regarding the France/England and Poland in 1939.
Look what I found. Please read this post on the Armchair General forum and also see the following posts.
It is quite interesting if it is true that Poland knew in advance from MAy 1939 that in case of German attack it will be sacrifised by the Fr/UK. I find it difficualt to beleive though (that Polaish gov. knew that).
Again, read the links! The Poles knew there was nothing the Allies were going to do because it was too impracticable. And the French were not going to attack in 1939, nor 1940. The Allies were waiting until they had strategic advantage to start any offensive operations in 1941. The French doctrine didn’t allow for anything else, and as it is, the French went to war knowingly with a vastly weaker air force than the German’s Luftwaffe.