Why did the UK declare war on Germany after the partition

>>3287028
Because the USSR hadn't broken a whole lot of treaties lately, including bilateral ones with the UK itself, and there was hope that they could be restrained through normal diplomatic processes.

As it was, it was a pretty near thing that they weren't attacked anyway. Go look up Operation Pike.

Because it would have actually made a Russo-German alliance, which would have been unstoppable.

>>3287040
>Russo-German Alliance

Bullshit,at best they would have fought in separate wars.

File: Churchill's handnote.png (177KB, 300x473px) Image search: [Google]

177KB, 300x473px

>>3287028
it never really was about Poland, was it?
Also, by the end of the war, Poland was fully occupied by the Soviet Union and nobody gave a shit.

>>3287043
Britain, alone, couldn't defeat Germany or the Soviet Union, let alone both at the same time.

Moreover, it was clear to the British that the Soviets were merely piggy-backing.

>>3287028
Because only Germany was a danger to France and UK. If they didn't help Poland then they why would they make extra effort?

>captcha: IRVING
oh fuck off

>>3287046
Percentage deal never mattered did it? Britain was by far the least important member of the great three.

The same reason why the anti-communist Hitler let the Soviets have half of Poland, a larger sphere of influence, a non-aggression pact, and numerous trade deals. People like to see WWII as an ideological war but it was pragmatic and cold as any other.

>>3287028
Because they were not utterly retarded?

Even numerous (100s of 1000s) Pollacks themselves joined red army to defeat Nazis.

>>3287074
Those were Polish soldiers who were sentenced to death but not executed before the Sikorski-Majski deal in 1943 and those who didn't make it to join general Anders. They had no choice as Poland was already doomed when USSR joined the allies and was free to conquer the entire country.

>>3287028
Britain and France already had enough on their plate with the war against Germany, while the USSR partitioning Poland did piss them off, the Western Allies took a "one enemy at a time" approach, and drew up plans to bomb the Soviet Union should they sign an alliance and join the war on the side of Germany. As long as it still a non-aggression pact, the Soviets could wait until Germany was dealt with.

That approach ended up paying off massive dividends though with the start of Operation Barbarossa, with the British no longer standing alone against Germany and giving them a chance in hell of actually winning the war with the Red Army fighting on the Continent.

>>3287028

Cause Brits are smart enough to fight their enemies one by one

>>3287067
Those who consider WWII to be a good war are not worth listening. At first it was a war of conquest of allied Germany and USSR. Then it was a war between the two.

The involvement of USA and UK seems almost like a sideshow. Also they can't claim that they joined "lesser evil" as there was nothing lesser about the Soviets.

>>3287055
no, that was just churchill trying one of his tricks. of course in the end whoever controlled the troops controlled the land.

>>3287088
You give them way too much credit.

>>3287028
Because Britain and France obliged themselves to protect Poland from Germans, not Soviets.

>>3287080
>Those were Polish soldiers who were sentenced to death
Not really. Once Nazis attacked Russia, Stalin cancelled M-R pact and amnestied most of the Pollacks, who then joined him or the western allies.

>They had no choice as Poland was already doomed when USSR joined the allies and was free to conquer the entire country
Simmiliar number of them fought in AK. Virtually nobody fought for Germans and if they did they did so to sneak out and join Brits.

Lechs overwhelmingly took Soviets as the lesser evil, there's no other way how to put it.

Because the invasion was a violation of agreements made between the Allies and Germany, no such agreement existed with the USSR

>>3287093
They must have been doing something right. For more than 800 years, no European power ever became strong enough to actually build a navy that could be used to successfully invade and occupy Britain. I don't think that's just a matter of luck.

>>3287028
Stalin was unprepared for a major war and was playing for time by allying with Germany.

Soviet foreign policy, from 1940 until Barbarossa was all about making the Comintern act like peaceniks toward Germany just to stall while the USSR built up it forces.

>>3287028
Under the Polish-British Common Defense Pact, the UK promised assistance if Poland was attacked by a European nation. But a secret provision of the pact, understood by Poland, was that the European nation it was directed at was Germany. France had perhaps a stronger agreement with Poland, but decided to ignore it based on the swift defeat of Poland.

Also, Germany invaded Poland on September 1st, England and France declared war on Germany September 3rd, but the Soviet Union didn't invade until September 17th. By then it was obvious Poland would fall before England or France could do anything about it so why declare war on the Soviet Union when it was also obvious at some point Germany would turn on Russia?

The UK and France took the long view that they couldn't do anything to save Poland, but they would need the Soviet Union as an ally against Germany in the future.

>>3287116
Sikorski-Mayski was the amnesty.

>Simmiliar number of them fought in AK

Home's Army were simply Polish soldiers who stayed in either German or Soviet occupied Poland. Even after Soviets were forced to change sides bith treated them exactly the same. As a potential danger to their regime.

Just like general Anders said as it written in Patton's autobiography : "He told me, laughing, that if his corps got in between a German and Russian army, they would have difficulty in deciding which they wanted to fight the most."
And I understand them completely.

>>3287153
>before England or France could do anything about it

They decided that they will not honor their alliance with Poland on September 12th in Abbeville. Ironically Abbeville will be liberated by Polish troops in 1944.

because germany could take over the world if it was allowed to conquer europe.

This is the dumbest fucking question on this board and it shows up every day. How are they going to fight both at the same time genius? This isn't HOI4 where you can just console command your way to success with 100 British divisions in 1938

because a unified german state was a threat to anglo and french dominance of europe.

>>3287177
They weren't even fighting one enemy.
According to Jodl if France and Britain attacked in 1939, despite their limitations at the time they would be strong enough to defeat Germany. I don't know if it's true. Even Germany kind of overestimated their chances and needed a break before they attacked France so they weren't as tough in 1939 yet.

>>3287166
Anyway the important point is that the UK had a treaty with Poland with a secret provision that only obligated them to declare war on Germany should she attack. This wasn't revealed until like 1993 as the UK didn't want to draw attention to the fact that they had many treaties with similar secret clauses all over the world.

>>3287155
>He told me, laughing, that if his corps got in between a German and Russian army, they would have difficulty in deciding which they wanted to fight the most.
Laughing is the keyword here. They hated them both, but when jokes went aside they were ready to collaborate with Soviets.

>Home's Army were simply Polish soldiers who stayed in either German or Soviet occupied Poland.
And fought there against Germans. Once Germans were crushed AK was "disbanded", but some soldiers turned against Soviets and fought to the bitter end

>were forced to change sides bith treated them exactly the same
That's not exactely true. During this time Poles collaborated with Russians, but Russians kept betraying them. Case in point: Warsaw uprising.

Just to make it clear, my point isn't that Poles and Russians were bffs, but that Poles clearly saw who's the bigger evil.

On a slightly related note I remember an article in which the author stated that most Poles consider British to be their heroes and only a few are upset about the phony war (nothing about Teheran/Yalta, Monty and the fate of Polish soldiers etc).

Do Brits really believe that? Because I think it's easier to find someone who has a positive opinion on Russians and that's saying something. And I usually defend the British because some people are way too harsh (for example the theory that they stole Polish gold) and it's true that Churchill was far more decent than Roosevelt. Not to mention Alec Douglas-Home was even better as he called Churchill out on his behavior when he was basically appeasing Stalin.
And I think it's cool that they didn't throw out Polish government in-exile. It's a small thing but it's fine.

But to claim that Polish people think that they owe something to the British or that they should be grateful is wishful thinking.

>>3287240
>but when jokes went aside they were ready to collaborate with Soviets.

Anders was wounded in the leg and spine by the Soviets who later sentenced him to death just like many other soldiers. Many others suffered exactly the same under both occupations. Why would they treat one invading army better than the other? A common saying was that the Soviets was "ally of our allies." For Poles everywhere they war just as bad if not worse than Germans but they had to somehow cooperate with them on account of the western allies.

Soviet whitewashing is honestly one of the worst WWII legacies.

File: 1501274170257.jpg (18KB, 300x402px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 300x402px

>>3287142
>

>>3287142
The Dutch.

>>3287036
[citation needed]

>>3287258
>whitewashing
I'm not even a tankie, but Soviet demonization is much more common than whitewashing.

>>3287258
>Why would they treat one invading army better than the other?
Maybe because one of them considered them to be lesser species that ought to be enslaved or exterminated? It's not some fucking quantum mechanics.

>Soviet whitewashing
Oh boy, you sure got me there. What gave me away? The part where I said "Russians kept betraying them"?

>>3287292
I never found anything that would indicate that Poles liked Soviets better than Germans. It was the Soviets who started anti-Polish ethnic cleansing programs that basically eradicated Poles in the Soviet Union.
Between 1939 and 1941 both occupation zones were just as dangerous, both were killing members of the elite, undesirables and even random people who were at the wrong place at the wrong time.

Bagration and later Warsaw Uprising accelerated German programs. And this is used by some people as evidence that Poles should be grateful to Soviets. "They'd kill you all and we would only kill some of you". This coming from the same regime that was ready to exterminate Polish population for no reason in the late 30s. The entire thing is brought down to statistics and proportions. Million this way million that way. And it's not like they changed after Poland became their "ally". Even after the war they were building new labor camps in Poland.

On personal level no primary sources say that Soviet soldiers were any better. Some could be better than others like with all other armies but they were no heroes to anyone who was living under German occupation. They were probably happy that the fighting was over and hopeful that Soviet soldiers would only come to steal their crops or belongings and nothing more.

>>3287142
The Spanish

>>3287374
People there always equate Nazis and Commies. Generally it's always people from the West who are claiming that Stalin was the lesser of two evil probably because of guilt. Of course they'd have to eat their words had Stalin got his hands on the hydrogen bomb but nevermind that. Aside from communist era brainwashing it's always been pretty much a normal thing to assume that they were just as bad and you're claiming that it was a general belief held by politicians, military and/or civilians which isn't true. Or is the fact that Poland had communist collaborators and no Nazi ones is supposed to be the proof? Well since communism was supposed to be international it doesn't mean much. By the time Soviets conquered the other half of the country the Polish underground state was decimated, government in exile marginalised and Stalin way more powerful than his other two allies.

>>3287463

I tried to calcuate the percentage of civilian casualties in both occupation zones. It's difficult to find data specifically for 1939-1941. Then I realized how pointless it was. There were five times as many Poles living on the German side than Soviet side. My first results showed just one percentage of difference but I didn't take minorities from the western side or the massacres commited by UPA into account. But even if the gap was wider I don't care. It's absolutely disgusting to pick favorites considering both were just as willing to kill anyone opposing them. Most people don't need to make calculations to know that. The difference wasn't wide enough. Especially since Germans were in a different position once they were backed into the corner. It's different than comparing for example crimes commited by American soldiers on German citizens in small towns which were just incidents and not official state policies. Before Germans started exterminating Poles they wanted them to be their allies. Before Soviets decided to simply subjugate Poles (while still executing their soldiers) they murdered almost the entire Polish population in their country. No side offered any guarantees.

>I'm not aware of any Soviet programs comparable to GP ost.

National programs of the motherfucking NKVD in the 1930s.

>>3287028
Non-meme answer: Poland was already finished by then and the areas Stalin annexed weren't even polish, but occupied Belarusian/Ukrainian land.

Also the main goal of the war was preventing the rise of a German superpower, not protecting Poland or safeguarding some Slavs; no more than the goal of world war 1 was to protect Serbia.

The allies even let Stalin keep his 1939 annexations after the war, and even left Poland to be a soviet communist puppet state.

All of this cause Churchill had a hate boner for Germany.

>>3287043
In order to establish a new world order, they could have tried to defeat the lesser enemies through a temporary alliance.

Hitler would receive his Lebensraum in Europe and Stalin would establish Soviet control over huge swathes of land with little risk.

>>3287606
>Stalin annexed weren't even polish, but occupied Belarusian/Ukrainian land.

Jesus Christ why don't you say that Poland was asking for it? Many countries couldn't secure their independence following post-WWI chaos. Doesn't mean that those who survived had to be invaded for it.
Also Stalin attacked Poland after he secured peace with Japan not because Poland was already defeated because it wasn't. He still had to fight for it, Hitler didn't give him shit.

>>3287620
Maybe Poland shouldn't have occupied Ukrainian and Belarusian land? Maybe Poland shouldn't have invaded Slovakia in 1938?

Poland wasn't exactly some innocent poor kid. They tried to throw their weight around and got trounced by the bigger kids.

>>3287463
>People there always equate Nazis and Commies
It's common way to insult Commies. It's simmiliar to Americans calling Trump literally Hitler. I also don't trust you saying that people who do that reside on the better side of iron curtain.

>been pretty much a normal thing to assume that they were just as bad
That pretty much goes against historical consensus, political proclamations and what I hear from the elderly people. What are you basing the claim on? Please don't say "It's true cuz I say so". Before you say my claims are hollow too, let me just cite the publication I provided to you: "Jak pisze prof. Wojciech Materski, zasadnicza różnica między okupacją niemiecką i sowiecką polegała na tym, że Niemcy w sposób masowy i systematyczny mordowali całe narody (Żydów i Cyganów wręcz na skalę przemysłową), Sowieci zaś nie podejmowali się planowej eksterminacji całych narodowości (wyjątek zrobiono dla polskich elit), a skala ofiar była spowodowana bardziej warunkami życia będącymi konsekwencją represji."

>Before Germans started exterminating Poles they wanted them to be their allies
I hope you didn't mean Hitler's Germans. That would be very silly thing to say and would indicate you to fancy certain alt-history book.

>It's absolutely disgusting to pick favorites considering both were just as willing to kill anyone opposing them
It was pretty disgusting for Poles, but they did pick favorites.

>National programs of the motherfucking NKVD in the 1930s
You mean Kresy? Or the bullshit claim about "murdering entire Polish population" in 30s?

>I tried to calcuate the percentage of civilian casualties in both occupation zones. It's difficult to find data specifically for 1939-1941. Then I realized how pointless it was.
Who cares, you are not a historian qualified for such research and you would just pick random numbers from wiki. I alredy gave you publication that covers this subject, read it.

>>3287584
The only correct answer so far

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yh1T7J6ynFU

Worth watching

>>3287638
What is this weird theory now? Ukraine and Belarus lost their independence because of Bolshevik invasion. Poland had some lands with sizeable Belarusian/Ukrainian population. For all of their sake thank God they didn't leave them alone or they would also be taken by the Soviets.

Slovakia didn't exist in 1938. You're talking about Zaolzie. In 1919 a lot of innocent people died in sensless land grab but by 1938 Polish-Czech relations improved a bit. When the country was about to lose its independence it was better to take that speck of land (and you make it sound like total invasion) to protect the Polish population. Everybody understood that and it didn't sour the Polish-Czech relations in exile.
You sound like you're about to post "evidence" about the Bromberg Bloody Sunday.

>>3287683
>P-Polish occupation was peaceful
>belarusians, Ukrainians, and Slovaks wanted to be invaded and occupied by Poland!!

You're embarrassing

>>3287639
>Or the bullshit claim about "murdering entire Polish population" in 30s?
Are you the same kind of guy who calls Soviet invasion in 1939 "controversy", claims that the evidence about the Soviet involvement in Katyn massacre was faked or that anti-communist insurgents were pro-nazi bandits?
I'm talking about the Polish Operation of NKVD of course. There's your lesser evil. Communists killing people based on their nationality.
Despite the best efforts from Russian government nothing will convince people who remember Soviet occupation that they were in any way heroes or at least that they were lesser evil. I'm generalizing I'm sure there are some Polish families with pro-Soviet sentiments. Some who were lucky enough that they didn't lose anyone to them. And they were pretty lucky because Soviets were even eliminating people who were local communists. Doesn't change that Anders's sentiment is still true. For Polish government or soldiers USSR was no natural ally even compared to Nazi Germany.

>>3287374
>Warsaw uprising
Was as much against the Soviets (politically) as it was against the Germans (militarily).

>S-M agreament
The Brits forced the Poles to sign it.

>Poles in the Red army
The bulk of whom were POWs made to fight.

>What are you refering to?
You might have heard of
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katyn_massacre

>>3287040
>unstoppable
I assure you they could not have defeated the UK, the US, and Brazil

File: classic-980.jpg (346KB, 980x980px) Image search: [Google]

346KB, 980x980px

>>3287714
If by "occupation" you mean not giving up land to the Soviets which you keep ignoring along the rest of the post then it was really the best thing considering it was impossible for Belarus or Ukraine to exist as independent nations and a sizeable population of Poles was in no hurry to die.

And what fucking Slovaks? Slovakia is that country to the right of Czech Republic you retard. And they invaded Poland when they were created as a puppet state.

>>3287753
Katyn wasn't the first anti-Polish program, wasn't the last and wasn't the largest. The point is USSR was always ready to start purges against anyone. They don't call it a prison of nations for nothing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_Operation_of_the_NKVD

>>3287090
>muh soviets did everything
And they totally brought the Rising Sun to her knees by the mere act of declaring war

>>3287781
Don't care about this. Whoever claims that people should be grateful to the Soviets for the victory misses the point of the war. It was never good vs. evil and only one of the two main European aggressors was defeated.

>>3287767
The fact that the remainder of Belarus and Ukraine were Soviet Republics doesn't change the fact that Poland was still occupying Belarusian and Ukrainian land. "Better for them" my ass. Ukrainians absolutely loathed poles.

And Poland DID invade and annex parts of Slovakia in 1938, how are you missing that? Why is it justified when Poland partitions and invades a country?

Face it, what happened to Poland in 1939 was exactly what Poland was found to other countries

>>3287142
The spanish were completely capable with better leadership. The dutch literally did it.

File: 21499EA000000578-0-image-a-22_1453077727133.jpg (50KB, 634x423px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 634x423px

>>3287028
IT IS THE ENGLISHMAN'S RIGHTFUL DUTY TO MAINTAIN A BALANCE OF POWER ON THE CONTINENT BY WHATEVER MEANS NECESSARY IN ORDER THAT HE MAY FURTHER THE SUCCESS OF HIS NATION IN THE NEVER-ENDING STRUGGLE FOR GLOBAL HEGEMONY

>>3287853
>Poland is justified in invading and conquering! TOUGH SHIT!
>waaaah!! Why is germany and Russia invading and conquering me!???

Fuck off retard, you got a taste of your own medicine.

File: thonk.png (12KB, 179x155px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 179x155px

>>3287841
yet you nerds handed czechoslovakia over to germany on a silver platter

hell you if didn't do this then the generals of germany would've overthrow the nazi government and you would've avoided world war 2 completely

>>3287638
Holy shit, I remember you from the other thread. How hard is to learn where Slovakia is?

>>3289010
Not that guy but he's right, Poland annexed Spis and Orava from Slovakia in 1938 (Slovakia conquered it back a year later though).

They feared the slavic warrior

File: 1447296231388.png (155KB, 1278x2407px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 1278x2407px

Reminder that Poland deserved everything it got.

>>3289033
I'm not a very big fan of Poland but this picture always get me laughing by implying refugees are a good thing

>>3287028
They would have, see operation Pike(which would have been a gigantic failure if it came to pass) but then they were too busy getting invaded

File: subtle EU propaganda.png (12KB, 422x295px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 422x295px

>>3289033
Schultz fuck off this board.

>>3287028
Because Churchill wanted war with Germany and not with the soviets. simple.
Germany got too strong economically and by sheer force and power of the nation.
The two big players france and england didnt want that to happen in the slightest so they had to think of a way to off germany.

>>3289062

>Churchill

>>3289062
Even if that was true it wouldn't take off any blame from Germany and USSR from starting the war in the first place. No one forced to do it.

Of course first we'd have to find out what the First Lord of the Admiralty could do to decide the fate of Germany in 1939.

File: 1501045045432.jpg (112KB, 634x818px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 634x818px

Given that Britain and France had already committed themselves to war with a European superpower and Poland was all but overrun, it would have made little sense to declare war on the largest nation on the planet on top of that as well. A bit like committing to challenging a 6 foot bully to a fist-fight but realizing there's an 8 foot bully nearby beating someone else up as well. In the end, when that bully got attacked by this bully, he was considered a friend until the first bully was brought down. Then a cold war ensued with the surviving bully.

The only legitimate question then, is how Britain and France would have acted, had the opposite been the case: the Soviet Union invading Poland first, and Nazi Germany two weeks later. Would their defense treaty have included guaranteeing Poland's safety from a Soviet attack? The answer is no: there was a legal loop-hole that meant the treaty was mostly tailored to respond to German aggression. The idea of the Soviet Union invading Poland, and nothing happening as a result, and then Hitler invading to take back Danzig, and having Britain and France declare war on him wouldn't have sat well with post-war morality. Good thing for the victors then, that Hitler turned out to be an ideological warmonger after all, and Stalin the cold opportunist, rather than the other way round.

>>3287028
>What is Operation Pike

>>3287761
>and Brazil
how could I forget our biggest liberator Brazil!

>>3287049
Churchill wanted to attack the Soviet union and liberate Eastern Europe but it couldn't be done. It would have brought more bloodshed for little reward.

>>3289084
This it the Anglo-Polish treaty from April of 1939, whcih convinced Hitler to attack Poland.

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/wwii/blbk19.asp

>ARTICLE 1.
>Should one of the Contracting Parties become engaged in hostilities with a European Power in consequence of aggression by the latter against that Contracting Party, the other Contracting Party will at once give the Contracting Party engaged in hostilities all the support and assistance in its power.

>ARTICLE 4.
>The methods of applying the undertakings of mutual assistance provided for by the present Agreement are established between the competent naval, military and air authorities of the Contracting Parties.

No words about this agreement being specifically about Germany so according to this article Britain should've not only help Poland (and by help I mean military assistance not bullshitting war by dropping leaflets) against Germany but against the Soviet Union as well.

>>3289096
Well the reward would've been significant for the other part of Europe which would've been liberated.
Churchill at least wanted to honor his alliance. He had some remnants of honor.

>>3289062
Churchill wasn't even the prime minister.

>>3289178
/pol/ likes to make up quotes about Churchill and obscure Polish politicians wanting war and about Hitler wanting peace and security for German minority.
Literally nobody forced him or Stalin to start the war.

File: Piast Tower-Cieszyn.jpg (149KB, 375x500px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 375x500px

>>3287638
> Maybe Poland shouldn't have occupied Ukrainian and Belarusian land?

So a multi-ethnic Soviet state = good but a multi-ethnic Polish state = bad?

> Maybe Poland shouldn't have invaded Slovakia in 1938?

Maybe Czechoslovakia shouldn’t have seized a territory full of Poles, while Poland was fighting the Bolsheviks?

File: 1919-1920-polish_soviet-war.jpg (74KB, 800x533px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 800x533px

>>3287810
> Poland was still occupying Belarusian and Ukrainian land.

At best, all you can claim is that the lands were populated by multiple ethnicities and after WWI, were up for grabs by whoever could hold on to them (and that would NOT have been Belorussia and Ukraine).

>>3289240
Though Petlura from Ukraine was Polish ally. I guess Ukrainian independence was off the table during the negotiations. Not that Ukraine would be able to stay independent for six months when left alone next to the Soviets.

File: Mapka_miedzymorza.png (8KB, 250x170px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 250x170px

>>3289256
> Though Petlura from Ukraine was Polish ally. I guess Ukrainian independence was off the table during the negotiations.

Poland’s plan (or at least, Piłsudski’s) was to surround the U.S.S.R. with independent nations all allied together for their own protection; Prometheism or the Międzymorze (Intermarium) Plan.

This would have obviously and critically included an independent Ukraine but the West didn’t give a shit after WWI and the Poles could barely hold on to their independence, so Ukraine and Belorussia (as well as the Caucasus and other regions) fell to the Soviets.

>>3287028
British hypocrisy.

This: >>3287039 is sad bullshit.

File: Curzon_line.svg.png (69KB, 563x513px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 563x513px

>>3287028
Soviets acted according to British plan.

>>3287738
>Are you the same kind of guy who calls Soviet invasion in 1939 "controversy", claims that the evidence about the Soviet involvement in Katyn massacre was faked or that anti-communist insurgents were pro-nazi bandits?
Fuck off, I don't suffer brain damage.

>I'm talking about the Polish Operation of NKVD of course
OK, but that didn't killed "entire Polish population in the USSR". Shit was pretty disgusting on itself, there's no need to exagerate it.

>Despite the best efforts from Russian government nothing will convince people who remember Soviet occupation that they they were lesser evil
Again that's just hollow rhetorics. In reality Russians did not aimed for extermination of Polish nation (if they did there would be no Poland now), so the choice was obvious.

>For Polish government or soldiers USSR was no natural ally even compared to Nazi Germany
Yet they massivelly collaborated with them against Nazis. If Russians would win, Poles were fucked, if Germans would win both Poles and Russians would be no more.

>>3287753
>Was as much against the Soviets (politically) as it was against the Germans (militarily).
As much? The uprising relied on Soviet help, when Soviets betrayed them it was drown in blood. Resulting destruction of city too, was nothing like Russians managed to pull of.

>The Brits forced the Poles to sign it
Did Brits forced AK not to attack Russians?

>The bulk of whom were POWs made to fight
But they fought well. POWs forced to fight with 0 motivation would desert en masse (like did Poles forced to fight under Germans), In our case 200k Poles fought in Berlin, instead of joining AK.

>You might have heard of Katyn
Katyn massacre is not comparable to GP ost.

>>3289890
If you're the same apologist from the last thread then you were surprised to learn that the Soviets established a number of labor camps in Poland after WWII.

>OK, but that didn't killed "entire Polish population in the USSR". Shit was pretty disgusting on itself, there's no need to exagerate it.
What do you think was the goal of the operation? It didn't actually kill every single Pole living in the USSR but it doesn't change that every single one was a potential victim of the purge. It wasn't action against rich Poles or those who had military background or anything. This alone proves just how full of shit tankies are. The policy of both regimes towards Poles could change at moment's notice. When Germany was losing the war and were facing uprising in the occupied territory they accelerated the genocide programs. 5 years earlier Hitler seriously considered alliance with Poland. For Stalin Poles were a potential fifth column and obstacle on the way of global revolution which is why AK members were a target during and after the war.

>Yet they massivelly collaborated with them against Nazis.

Who? Who goddammit? Them?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trial_of_the_Sixteen

Who aside from people involved with the communists like Berling, Wasilewska or Gomułka was collaborating witht he Soviets? USSR attacked Poland allied with Nazi Germany in order to spread the revolution westwards. From September 17th onwards they were the enemy. They were the aggressors. Again Anders's words speak the truth about the Polish sentiments towards them.

And the forced alliance between the Soviets and USA/UK made the situation even more delicate because people involved with the legal government like Sikorski, Mikołajczyk, Sosnkowski had to make the best of the situation in which they were surrounded by more powerful players including one that was still occupying half of their country's territory.

File: 1500505965753.jpg (1MB, 1668x917px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1668x917px

>>3290116
>In our case 200k Poles fought in Berlin, instead of joining AK.
The leader of AK was arrested and murdered. Members of anti-German/anti-Soviet groups were arrested and murdered even those like general Nil who retired and just wanted to live in peace.

>>3287028
The official german position: declare war on Poland and conquer it.
The official soviet position: Poland as a state no longer exists, we are just going to annex this empty land before the germans can do so.

One is easier to swallow, I guess, and they couldn't go to war with both, thus cementing the alliance between them. They needed (and achieved) divide and conquer to deal with that.
A good way to divide two allies is to declare war on one and keep trading with the other. The British also did it during Napoleon's years, between France and Russia.

File: 54644.png (84KB, 314x614px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 314x614px

>>3290127
Well they could claim so in their propaganda. Doesn't change the fact that the invasion on Poland continued and so did the battles.
It's really fascinating. One of the only times the three factions (for the lack of better term) of WWII met on the field of battle. Soviet Union was on the sides of both Axis and Allies but really they had their own plans.

>>3287818
>and occupy

>>3290127
>The official soviet position: Poland as a state no longer exists, we are just going to annex this empty land before the germans can do so.
They made a nice excuse for economic cooperation, political promise of frienship and litertal agreement to divide eastern Europe together with Nazi Germany

File: muhmunich.png (87KB, 1502x864px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 1502x864px

>>3287638

>>3289092

>implying Brazil didn't single-handedly win both world wars

>>3289351
This makes me sad.
It even has a intact Fjellkonan.

>>3287028
British conflict with Germany was inevitable, they only used Poland as an excuse and Soviet Union as a meat fodder hopping that they would kill each other.

>>3290116
>What do you think was the goal of the operation?
Soviets were pretty clear on that, crushing the Poles and preventing any resistance when the invasion of Poland comes.

>If you're the same apologist from the last thread then you were surprised to learn that the Soviets established a number of labor camps in Poland after WWII.
Again, fuck off, I ain't some commie apologist I stand by the mainstream stance.

>For Stalin Poles were a potential fifth column and obstacle on the way of global revolution which is why AK members were a target during and after the war.
Soviets acted like shit against Polish resistance, but that doesn't change the fact Nazis were still primary target for the AK.

>5 years earlier Hitler seriously considered alliance with Poland
Situation in Europe changed drastically once Germans rearmed and were actually capable of exercising power.

>Who?
AK (despite being constantly betrayed), AL and Poles serving under the Red army. Pretty much all of Poles capable of holding a gun accepted the ceasefire and plenty of them even worked together.

>And the forced alliance between the Soviets and USA/UK made the situation even more delicate because people involved with the legal government like Sikorski, Mikołajczyk, Sosnkowski had to make the best of the situation in which they were surrounded by more powerful players including one that was still occupying half of their country's territory.
Why didn't they even tried to cooperate with Nazis though?

Soviets were cunts, that's for sure, but you fail to understand what would German victory mean. Extermination of 80% and enslavement of the rest. What we saw during Polish People's Republic is preferable.

>>3290354
kek

File: Nuremberg2.jpg (47KB, 537x638px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 537x638px

>>3287028
OP. This is literally the official answer:

>turns out there was this secret clause nobody knew about i the polish alliance that said we only had to declare war on Germany

Thats *literally* what they say.

>>3289127
Anon, thats because the german part was actually secret dude. (they literally say this is true)

>>3290354
lmao

>>3287028
They strongly considered it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mj7biOwRks

>>3287028
>Why didn't the UK start a completely unwinnable war?

Gee, I fucking wonder

>>3294042
this

>>3287028
maybe because uk could not do shit against russia. they only have a navy which is useless against russia, they would have never won a war on their own aswell, only chance was to cowardly wait for amerifags

>>3289890
>The uprising relied on Soviet help, when Soviets betrayed them
Hey guys let's start a nationalist uprising before Red army is here. No need to consult reds either. We will take our capital and form a domestic government while germans are busy fighting soviets! Stalin BTFO. Perfect plan! Whoops, there're more german troops than we expected. Where is Red army and why are they not helping us? We were betrayed!

>>3287761
They wouldn't have had too.

They could have secured the continent and Africa, and eventually the US and UK would have to seek peace.

>>3287055
> Britain was by far the least important member of the great three.
Yes but that still means they were the third most powerful nation in the world at the time.

>The UK declared war on Germany to stand up for what's right, to fight tyranny, no one invades Poland on OUR watch and gets away with it.
>Except the Soviets

Because they would've lost

>yeah let's go to war with Germany and the Soviet Union at the same time

>>3294260
>Suvorov
Suvorov lived in 18th century.

>versus global communism with one "nation" of lobotomized drones
Lad, we got to see what was communism under cold war Soviets like. It was neither "one nation" or "lobotomized drones" (at least compared to Nazis).

>same kind of occupational terror
Lolno, only in Balticum did Soviets managed to do worse than Nazis.

>>3295125
Stalin personally ordered Red Army to stall and wait until Warsaw burned.

>>3287761
UK and the US maybe, but Brazil is unstoppable

>HUEHUEHUEHUEHUE

>>3295336
>Stalin personally ordered Red Army to stall and wait until Warsaw burned.
And why would he care if polish nationalists lived? Was he under some sort of obligation to help them? Bulgarians, romanians, czechs were smart enough to plan their uprisings beforehand and got the soviet assistance they needed. Their armies joined reds. They understood how world worked.
Poles had literally put themselves in a crazy gambling situation and then blamed soviets for the outcome. Plan to fuck up soviets and fuck up yourself equals betrayal apparently.

File: image.jpg (208KB, 960x797px) Image search: [Google]

208KB, 960x797px

>>3287028
>mfw Danzig ist Polnisch

>>3295774
>Was he under some sort of obligation to help them?
Yes, common fucking sense and decency. Attack during the uprising would result in lesser casulties on both Polish and Soviet side and would give Russians some liberator points.

>Bulgarians, romanians, czechs were smart enough to plan their uprisings beforehand and got the soviet assistance they needed
You forgot Slovaks, they didn't got any assistance and were drowned in blood too. However due to Soviet incompetence, not betrayal.

>>3287028

Why didn't the UK bomb Dresden sooner?

Why did they let a single smelly kraut live after the war?

Really jogs my nog.

>>3296197
It's spelled Gdansk, sweetie.

>>3287142
except that time the Dutch sailed into London and burnt it

>>3287243
>Churchill was far more decent than Roosevelt
>theory that they stole Polish gold
>theory
>they didn't throw out Polish government in-exile
Not that they not want to.

>>3296478
>Why didn't the UK bomb Dresden at all?
FTFY

File: Warsaw_Uprising_by_Tomaszewski_-_Mazowiecka_1.jpg (274KB, 2000x1551px) Image search: [Google]

274KB, 2000x1551px

>>3295125
>>The uprising relied on Soviet help, when Soviets betrayed them
>Hey guys let's start a nationalist uprising before Red army is here. No need to consult reds either.

The fuck? Stalin was literally extorting the Poles to rise up and throw out the German invaders, then he sat back and let the Germans kill more Poles in the Warsaw Uprising then the U.S. lost in the entire war.

>>3287028
It was debated in Parliament but considered militarily inadvisable (read; we'd fucking lose so why bother)

>>3300036
The fuck? whole Warsaw uprising of Armiya Krayowa was staged by Britain and polish government in exile in London.
There was separate communist polish resistance, Armiya Ludowa. Maybe you should learn anything about Poland before speaking about it

>>3302145
Armiya Ludowa just sat on their asses the whole war and claimed all the credits for resistance after.

>>3302403
Well they certainly did not claim the credit for Warsaw uprising. You know when it was started without them and later poles surrendered to the nazis under condition that Krayowa soldiers were to be treated as pows and Ludowa not. Poles sure love to backstab each other in critical times, fail and then declare it's someone else's fault.

>>3287055
Sure, but without Britain sticking in the fight it's likely that fascism would've eventually won, it's rather lucky that the world got a nazi germany led by a jackass, or else we might be under a very differnt, much harsher yoke.

>>3287791
Stalin partitioned poland, then briefly fought japan, then germany declared war on them, the USSR was a disgusting tyranny, but to say the soviets crimes were as large as nazi germany is fucking absurd.

>>3287028
The British were being pragmatic.