Comments by "AFGuidesHD" (@AFGuidesHD) on "Did Poland bring on her own Destruction in 1939 because of her Aggressive Foreign Policy?" video.

"Why didn't Poland just ally with the commies" has the same answer as to "Why didn't Poland ally with Germany against the commies".
1700
37:02 "We should attack Germany" - Neville Chamberlain, Prime Minister "The choice was between doing nothing and entering into a devastating war, if I were to chose, I would choose war" - Lord Halifax, Foreign Secretary "We must have a war, we cannot lose it" - Henry Pownall, Chief of Staff "War and war now with a near Eastern Front" - Noel Mason-Macfarlane, Military attache to Berlin embassy and we all know where Churchill, Eden, Vansittart stood on the matter
14
Difference is Angry mustache man 1 wanted to ally with Poland against Angry mustache man 2 who didn't even want a small polish state to exist
12
"There is no doubt that Danzig is suffering heavy losses by diminution of traffic and continued idleness of margarine factory. Every additional day of these conditions will strengthen the German argument that Danzig should be less exposed to Polish pressure and should enjoy Reich protection and assistance." - Gerald Shepherd, British consul general to Danzig
9
@svenlittlecross > germans wanted to erase poland of the map the germans had no pre-determined plan as any decent historian would recognize, had Poland allied with Germany, no doubt Poland would be declared an Aryan nation like all the other Slav allies of Germany. The many attempts by Germany to gain an alliance with Poland contradict the narrative that Hitler hated Poles from the beginning, even in Mein Kampf Poland is only mentioned about 4 times and only in a geopolitical context. Source: Martin Winstone, The Dark Heart of Hitler's Europe:
6
@georgedrake1501 >from the outset define "from the outset". I don't think anyone claims britain wanted war before march 1939 but its clear they were working for one afterwards
6
@jasonjason6525 because apparently morality and law goes out the window "for strategic reasons" which is fucking laughable because starting the war in the first place was a bad strategic decision
6
@beatonthedonis47 >but later allowed the Polish state to exist. Only when the communists occupied the whole country. When Hitler talked about setting up a smaller Polish state in October 1939, Stalin vetoed the idea.
5
What if Danzig wasn't given to Poland by Versailles? What if Poland gave Danzig back? What if Poland made any attempt to avoid war?
5
@daboyz6106 ideology had nothing to do with it, Poland feared losing independence to either of the two powers if they allied with either one.
4
Germany: How about we be friends but you give me back Danzig? Poland: No. Germany: How about you just give back Danzig ? Poland: Fight me Germany: Ok Everyone else: WTF Poland? Post 1945 Western Historiography: Poland was the totally innocent victim of a long planned war for world domination by Hitler
4
@georgedrake1501 >Do you suggest the British just stand by as the Germans break more treaties and conquer more independent nations? Perhaps not, but in choosing to go to war with Germany, along with the evidence of planning such a thing, you can't then say "Britain tried to avoid war" when it played a large part in starting the war with its encirclement and power politics in eastern Europe. >respected a single treaty he signed this meme.
3
@splifstar85 >Russian Education
3
@marekmazurek8459 except they did, read "POLAND AND HITLER'S OFFERS OF ALLIANCE" and pretty much any decent book about foreign relations before WW2
2
@georgedrake1501 yet another one of my long ass fkn comments vanishes for some reason >they didn't choose to go to war except they did. read this - https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1939v01/d82 >what right does Hitler have to invade these sovereign nations? to get back Danzig which everyone who lived in Danzig wanted to do so, the allies in ww1 didn't even hold a referendum because they knew what the outcome would be >examples of treaties he honoured he honored them like any other country does. Look at violations of international treaties committed by Britain or america yet they come up with dumb excuses, its no different
2
yes a simplistic solution is exactly what eastern europe needs cough versailles, trianon, Saint-Germain-en-Laye cough
2
@Saeronor >As evidenced by a monumentally different geopolitical scene
2
@Bingo_Bango_ There is also the cabinet paper where Chamberlain literally says he doesn't give a shit what the casus belli for war with Germany is, the idea that Britain was planning on a war with Germany certainly wasn't a figment of Hitler's imagination. >Poland's mistakes earned it an invasion The United States, that great good guy nation, has invaded countries for far less than what Germany endured between April and September 1939. Imagine if Mexico threatened to bomb Los Angeles whilst shooting at American planes, harassing Americans living in Mexico, blocking exports to America and having a hostile press write about Mexican guns pointed at LA all at the same time as military mobilization. What do you think America would do? Poland refused any peaceful revision in Danzig and throughout the months said they'd rather die than give back Danzig, so what else could Germany have done but invaded proper?
2
@Bingo_Bango_ "England is advising France that they should both go along regardless of Poland. " - Joseph Kennedy
2
@Saeronor there's plenty of his reports and Burckhardts from the previous months saying the same thing, as i've just mentioned above
1
@Saeronor And it would also depend if the USSR "honored its obligations" to Czechia, I think this would pre-occupy Poland from launching any attack on Germany in a WW2-1938 scenario. And even if Poland did attack i'm fairly sure the Polish army was so out of date that the few defensive divisions in Germany would have handled it like Hindenburg handled the Russians in 1914
1
@kacperpiatkowski7208 >german imperial borders were huge grudge which is why Hitler also drew criticize in his pro-Polish policy, unlike Weimar Germany which wanted revision of the borders, Hitler wanted accommodation with the Poles, even offering to guarantee the Corridor >Why the fuck do you think germans started rearment? because they didn't have an army and nor could they have a foreign policy without an army, look at 1931 German-Austrian customs union. A Germany without an army can't even get a customs union without being threatened by other countries that have armies.
1
@Bingo_Bango_ no it was the poles that Broke off negotiations, even after March Hitler made personal attempts to negotiate with Warsaw. With Beck reiterating to the British on August 1st "The best chance of maintaining peace is for us to remain calm and firm without any sign whatsoever of compromise or inclination, official or otherwise, to negotiate about Danzig."
1
@Bingo_Bango_ >anecdotes and quotes, by Germans, from Germans is it not a valid source? or do you only accept anecdotes about Germany by Britons >Both of those ideas were utter fabrications well shit, the nazis were geniuses then, they got everything right, right down to the polish press demanding the shelling of danzig. If Hitler wanted to frame Poland then he would have ordered Danzig to establish a customs union with Germany which would have "provoked" a Polish invasion, yet Danzig in July wanted to ease relations, why's that? There are plenty of documents from Danzig diplomats about the efforts they went through to reach a rapprochement with Poland and most of them say the same thing, that it was Poland obstructing any peaceful negotiations. There was no effort by them to resolve the dispute peacefully. Can you blame Hitler for resorting to war if that is the only option he is given? As Henderson points out.
1
@kacperpiatkowski7208 there was no gunpoint at any point between 1933 and may 1939. On the contrary it was Poland bragging about its planes over Danzig and artillery pointed at Danzig
1
@Bingo_Bango_ >You're the one who keeps promoting them Actually i've only been using British and Swiss sources in this thread >I'm not even sure what you're getting at. your point about Hitler always wanting war with Germany and trying to frame poland as the "aggressor", I gave an easy option of how he could have achieved that, he didn't. > no Poland did not invade Germany. don't think i've ever claimed such a thing, I did say that Poland threatened numerous times to invade Danzig (which they did). >No one had a gun to Hitler's head apart from Lord Halifax's power politics and the constant warmongering by western press. Sure Hitler could have just embarrassed himself and give the initiative to the west but we'll never know what would happen. >I repeat: are you delusional? not at all. >muddied attention probably the case, i'm not a redditor and don't partake in many long winded internet debates. But I have read many books, including primary sources i.e. DGFP, DBFP and DUSFP etc. There is a clear view of diplomats of the time that Poland was refusing peaceful solutions the Germans are portrayed by British and American diplomats as reasonable folk who want Poland to come to the negotiations but Poland never did. You can't deny that fact, had Poland in fact made efforts to preserve peace then people like von Hassel and Nevile Henderson wouldn't have gotten stressed about the intransigent Poles.
1
@Bingo_Bango_ > the foggiest hint what's going on in the conversation so far. because i presume your whole general argument is the usual "it was a long planned war by hitler" yet the facts just do not add up. Why then had Germany cancelled its planned attack on Poland and then went back to negotiations, as Martin Winstone writes "The clearest evidence that Hitler was not pursuing a predetermined plan towards Poland lay in what he actually did." ... "Precisley because Hitler's ambitions in the East were so much greater - Lebensraum at the expense of the USSR rather than the restoration of the pre 1914 borders - he was less fixated on Poland. This enabled him to pursue a more pragmatic course, despite resistance from his conservative allies." ... "The German government still went through the motions of negotiation even on the eve of war. Their motivation no doubt was to try and avoid war with France and Britain if Poland could be induced to follow the German line". >Poland did not invade Danzig again, I never claimed they did. >Not an invasion of Poland by Germany. No. Because Poland never even contemplated the most basic and universally accepted solution to the problem, championed by basically everyone with common sense i.e. the return of Danzig to Germany. Instead Poland said "fight me" and Germany responded with "alright then". Yet this is all Germany's fault of course. >Say, could I have everything you own? More like "Say can I have back this city which itself wants to come back to me and was mine until it was given to you by the allies"
1
@Bingo_Bango_ So you think Poland "did nothing wrong" then ? >You are not permitted to renege on treaties Unless you're country is called the United States or Britain of course. >May he be absolved of guilt in his eyes, I don't think anyone is absolving him of any guilt but equally you can't absolve Poland of all guilt.
1
@Bingo_Bango_ >the only thing Poland did "wrong" was not give in to pressure from the USSR to annex and go to war with Germany You're saying it was wrong for Poland to not give part of its country in order to fight against the other ?
1
@Bingo_Bango_ > per the Soviet-German 1939 agreement. nowhere in that agreement did it "carve up poland" contrary to british apologists like yourself. spheres of influences "in the event of" are not set in stone territory assignments. >German negotiations were fair and reasonable how were they not ? Henderson certainly said they were moderate, though of course, as we all know according to "the correct historians" he was a famous nazi. >As an aside, it's always fascinating how vehement revisionists like you guys always come out when it's to the benefit of violent extremists and Churchill wasn't a violent extremist? sure. >Germany did nothing wrong I've never implied such a thing. >Where's the revisionists swarming to conclusions that can only be used to justify peace and sensibility? I don't understand your point in this?
1
@Bingo_Bango_ >you have to be an absolute imbecile to believe Oh but Britain decided that Poland was suddenly an important strategic partner and in total ignorance decided to military guarantee it? sure. >hypothetically yes, hypothetically, had Poland returned to negotiations or better yet offered to unilaterally give back Danzig as a gesture of their good faith, war may have been avoided. >or if Poland "asked for it" In the eyes of outside diplomats, they did indeed ask for it, just read this. https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1939v01/d227 Looking forward to how you dismiss this one.
1
@Bingo_Bango_ The general idea that Poland's position was unreasonable. How can it be reasonable for the daily tensions with Danzig and refusing the right of self determination to those people? Whilst telling everyone that they will go to war with Germany over it. >Britain became interested in defending Poland Or making sure Poland didn't give way to Germany, as we have already seen in March 1939 with Lord Halifax's meetings and Chamberlain's comments in the Cabinet meetings. You may or may not have read Simon Newman's book about the British guarantee? >you quoted a Briton in a way that implied that Poland was somehow wrong to hold Danzig Yes, here's another lovley quote by the British "it is recognized in Great Britain that Danzig is a German city and that British public opinion would welcome a peaceful solution based on the recognition of this fact" - Ashton Gwaktin >You have not addressed the fact that Germany had a policy of sabotaging negotiations How could they sabotage negotiations that never took place because the Polish didn't want them? They never took place despite the best efforts of Henderson and others to get the Poles to negotiate.
1
@Bingo_Bango_ > it's not this one No because as I said Danzig wanted a detente with Poland but then the Polish ultimatum of August 4th "shattered any hope" in the words of Burckhardt, though again i'm sure he's another nazi sympathizing diplomat to you, interesting that the diplomats of the time were all nazis isn't it? > By refusing to even attempt to seek common ground with Polish negotiators Would you not apply this to the Poles as well? >German troops at the border Both sides had been bolstering their borders for months, would you say Polish movements in February or March ruined the chances for a peaceful settlement ? I don't think you would. >I will continue to trust the private and authenticated communications of Germans declaring what Germany must and should do, And I will continue to trust the private and authenticated communications of Britons declaring what Britain must and should do >the victimization of the Polish Why do you just ignore the victimization of the Germans ?
1
@Bingo_Bango_ >came months prior if not years prior, everyone knew that Danzig was to return to Germany sooner or later and it was Poland who refused to let this happen hence why people also say Versailles started WW2 because it should never have been given in the first place. >usual argument about it being a planned and cunning plan to start a war I find it amazing that the only time the nazis were true geniuses and showed true cunning was in starting the war. Again do you think Poland was right to go along with the "die for Danzig" policy as supported by warmongers like Churchill and the Eden group. >no one gives a fuck about what Britain must and should do in relations to this topic except the British had a large part in this conflict though. Many contemperaries blamed Polish intransigence on the military guarantee, such as the King of Italy, Prince Regent of Hungary etc. not to mention Britain literally went around Europe asking countries to fight with them in a preventative war "regardless of Poland" not sure if i've already linked you to that document. "Beck is more than happy to have England’s support given in the way that it was, i. e., that Poland is the one to determine when England is to come to her rescue." - Joseph Kennedy "The Polish view was that now that they had france and Great Britain behind them, they could not concede in full demands which they had refused in March last." "Provided we could ensure Germany having to face a war on two fronts, there was much less likelihood of war" - Cabinet meetings minutes But do tell me how Britain had nothing to do with the start of WW2
1
@Raphael4722 >Versailles wasn't harsh that's not the argument, the argument is that certain points of it i.e. territory was badly handled and caused future conflicts between nations. Germany also surrendered on the basis of the 14 points which were ignored at the paris peace conference
1
@UCKduIlq4rGLVB__8GxQFIpw > by taking Danzig by getting back Danzig according to the peaceful and democratic loving principle of self-determination. And we'd never know what would have happened if war was avoided, for it was not avoided.
1
@Rgr262 with its foreign and economic policy controlled by poland, so it was ironically anything but free
1
@janek8935 the reason Danzig was made into such a mess is because the allies knew that the people there wouldn't want to be under the jackboot of the Poles, so they didn't even bother holding a plebiscite as they knew what the result would be.
1
@janek8935 yeah haha germany should have been smashed into 800 different principalities again xD haha
1
@liquidrock8388 "During the winter months, the unrest in Czechoslovakia continued to grow. Slovakia in particular called for more independence which caused the government in Prague to send troops into the province and to install a new provincial government – a mistake, Henderson tells us. One day later, on 11 March 1938, Tiso, the deposed Slovakian prime minister, approached Berlin for help and made his province a German protectorate. Henderson then suggested to the Czech ambassador at Berlin that the Czech government get in touch with Hitler as well; Prague reacted positively and delegated not only the Foreign Minister, Chvalkovsky, but also the new president, Hacha – an indication that Prague was ready to conclude an agreement on the spot. On 15 March 1938, the negotiations resulted in the creation of another German protectorate, covering the lands of Bohemia and Moravia. Henderson believes that the seizure of this part of Czechoslovakia was not based on a strategic German plan and sets out a number of reasons to support his thesis; he also states that if Hacha had really felt that he had been forced to accept a solution with which he could not identify, he could have stepped down; instead, Hacha stayed at his post until the end of WW2. Henderson criticizes the creation of the Protectorate because Hitler reaped world-wide criticism; at the same time he speaks of a German annexation of the provinces involved, but this term is not really applicable in this case, because the Protectorate was never integrated into the Reich – it maintained its own administration, its own currency, even its own army. The inhabitants did not have to do military service for Germany, and Germans needed a visa to enter the area."
1
@TomislavPuklin-wz1bl USSR also annexed Poland. "granted it statehood" as a Russian puppet. 100% chance that you don't know Germans also offered to grant Poland statehood post war (the brits rejected this multiple times).
1
@@dropkickthedecepticon4009 That's like saying "Manifest destiny would never let Canada or Mexico exist". Germany was entirely focused on Russia, not Poland.
1
@Pullapitko I know
1
@thethirdman225 or what about the German-Soviet talks where Germany offered Axis membership to the Soviets ?
1
@thethirdman225 Yeah but then he disowned that book and acted more geopolitical, see the German-Soviet talks and even Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. Imagine telling Hitler in 1923 that he allies with the commies lol
1
@thethirdman225 you point out that it was geopolitics and not ideology. Same reason that Germany wanted to expand eastwards, was geopolitics and not ideology.
1
@georgedrake1501 >they didn't choose to go to war with Germany except they did. >there wouldn't have been a war if Germany didn't invade Poland, that's literally it. Except there could well have been. Read this for an earth shattering bit of info https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1939v01/d82 >good thing they did plan and didn't just trust Hitler and let him do what he wants like you suggest. yeah good thing they plunged europe into war, got millions killed and destroyed europe haha >Hitler have to invade these sovereign nations? In order to get back Danzig and defend their right to self determination - yes. Poland refused to give back Danzig and instead said "fight me" throughout 1939, and its Germany's fault for saying "ok" ? >treaties he honored treaties as much as any other nation did respect them when they wanted to and came up with dumb legal arguments for not following them. Just look at the blatant American violations of international treaties since WW2 but "oh they were just defending themselves under article 52 of the UN charter paragraph c" yeah, sure.
1
@thethirdman225 I agree but then we attribute everything the Germans did to "nazism" don't we ?
1
yes which is why Poland wanted for a mostly peaceful war against Germany at that time
1