Should France And Britain Have Attacked Germany In 1939

  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

unmerged(6881)

Lt. General
Dec 17, 2001
1.590
0
Visit site
Originally posted by sokolowski
@vilkouak

Interesting info. Actualy, I think Turkey proposed something like this even before Napoleon. After the Russo-Turkish war at the time of the Confederation of Bar, Turkey in full respect to Poland, announced that it was willing to cede certain parts of its land to Russia/Austria (?) as long as Poland was not partitioned. It's somewhere. I can't find the book where it says this but as soon as I do, I'll post in more detail.
I'll hit Czartoryski's biography a bit more tomorrow as currently I'm about to fall asleep... it's almost 1am here.

Regards

Yes, Turkey before peace with Russia in 1774 desperately tried to ally Poland seeing her the only state that would have a reason to fight against Russia. In fact Turkey was the only state in Europe who never recognized Partitions of Poland. But as you can see both Poland and Turkey had interest to be friends when the power of Russia become so dominant in second half of 18th cen.
Napoleon had only little interest in proposed exchange especially that he wanted to cede territories that were to become part of France for territories that were located somewhere in Central Europe and has nothing in common with France.
 

unmerged(6881)

Lt. General
Dec 17, 2001
1.590
0
Visit site
Hi Hardu, If you give me your e-mail, I'll send you the newest version of "The Great History of XX cen. by Poles" to let you know about latest fakes we produced and original documents we were able to destroy in 12.03.02-11.02.03.

Oldest updates are aviable as usual on our The Most Secretive and Truest Historical Page Ever Made.

Don't forget the password! "Reality is a lie".;) :).

Greetings,

Vilkouak, The Great Keeper of the Vault.
 

Halibutt

Marshal of Poland
5 Badges
Sep 8, 2001
3.396
0
www.halibutt.pl
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Semper Fi
  • 500k Club
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
Originally posted by Hardu
(...)But, as of 1977, the major source for the informaiton on the military talks between Poland and France on May 15 to 21 1939 seems to have been Gamelin's memoirs. That is at least the only one quoted by Anthony Adamthwaite in "France and the coming of the second World War, 1936-1939 (London : Cass, 1977).
Oh my, oh my. Another member of the "Ordre Clandesitne des Gamelinistes". Where do they all take their love towards Gamelin from?
Cheers
 

unmerged(5120)

Quartermaster General
Jul 30, 2001
1.218
0
Visit site
Originally posted by Hardu
:confused:

Hmm, In response to Shrike00's hypercriticism about sources I'm accursed of being a Gamelin-lover by the Poles.

:confused:

Ah well, that's life.

:D :D :D

It's always a bad idea to take the middle ground. You tend to catch flak from both sides.
 

unmerged(2695)

General
Apr 5, 2001
1.848
0
Visit site
I finally got Gamelin's memoirs out of the magazines.

He definitely says that he had promised the Poles to contain the maximum numbers of Germans on the Western Front - attacking between the Moselle and the Rhine with the 33-35 divisions available ASAP after a German attack on Poland. The overall plan for the attack was in fact drawn up in the autumn of 1938. It should be noted that an attack in this sector was an attack into a strategic cul de sac. The French would still have had to cross the Rhine or the Moselle to do major harm to the Germans. Neither would have been easy operations against an intact German Army.

Understandably he was not happy about the prospect of a frontal attack there. So unhappy that he had no regrets about going on the defensive and waiting for a German attack on the Low Countries or in the Balkans (Yugoslavia and/or Romania - preferably both.) Allied offesive actions in the West were not planned until British first line ground forces strength in France reached parity with the French, i.e. about 30 divisions. This would not happen until the spring of 1941.

Which is why Allied 1939-/40 military planning became increasingly concerned with the peripheral theaters of war: Scandinavian and the Balkans.

Another interesting point is that the major contingency discussed before Sep.1 1939 was how to react to a German coup de main against Danzig. A German war of conquest against Poland was only one of any number of eventualities considered before Sep.1.
 

Halibutt

Marshal of Poland
5 Badges
Sep 8, 2001
3.396
0
www.halibutt.pl
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Semper Fi
  • 500k Club
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
Originally posted by Hardu
Hmm, In response to Shrike00's hypercriticism about sources I'm accursed of being a Gamelin-lover by the Poles. (...)
I hope you know that it was ment to be a joke. I didn't mean to offend you in any way as I was writing about Anthony Adamthwaite.
Cheers
 

unmerged(13535)

Second Lieutenant
Jan 6, 2003
143
0
Visit site
I haven't forgotten you ....

Even though I am attempting to straighten out our wobegone friend webbrave I have not forgotten this debate. Don't think for an instant that you are right. Please be assured you are still wrong.:)

Seriously, I decided I needed more ammo. Therefore I have begun even more serious investigation. Time will tell if I am right or not.


BTW, I caught all your sly cracks about my delusions. Just so you know, its not me, its my "post-revolutionary messianic mission" to indoctrinate all of you into believeing that America is the most forthright country on earth and that it is our heritage to rule the universe and make lots of Levi's.

:) :)
 

Halibutt

Marshal of Poland
5 Badges
Sep 8, 2001
3.396
0
www.halibutt.pl
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Semper Fi
  • 500k Club
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
Shrike, I came across another piece of information that might help you in your neverending quest for finding the truth. One of my handbooks mentions British ambassador to Paris sending a memo to London on September the 16'th. I'm retranslating it from polish, so it might look a little bit different in the original. Anyway, it goes like this:
"The french governement is considering the question what to do, if Russia seizes some part of polish territory. They propose not to help Poland in her war against Russia, as a matter of fact they propose to do the other way around. Interesting. How are those plans related to the military pacts France has signed with Poland?". This is not a proof itself, but there might be some piece of information in the british diplomatic documents.

And remember, thee who seeksth the truth: it's out there.
Cheers
 

unmerged(13570)

Panzer Gangster
Jan 7, 2003
386
0
Visit site
Re: I haven't forgotten you ....

Originally posted by shrike00

Seriously, I decided I needed more ammo. Therefore I have begun even more serious investigation. Time will tell if I am right or not.


Ammo is never enough without weapon.
shrike00, finally you lost,
play the man to admit it :D
 

unmerged(10416)

Winter depri
Jul 28, 2002
3.333
3
The discussion whether or not the western allies "betrayed" Poland is pointless. They had signed the alliance (not only with Poland but also with the CSR) in a time when they were still believing the world worked the way it did in 1914. The never realized that this was no longer the case until it was too late... probably until Hitler occupied Prague in March 1939.

In the west, people believed for a long time that wars like the Great War would simply not happen again. They thought, hey, we've suffered so much for so little, surely the Germans think the same. They didn't realize what Hitler's intentions were. Hitler was extremely good at hiding his true thoughts when it was opportune... remember how he always talked about "bringing all Germans home into the Reich"? That's what he said until after Munich, and everyone wanted to believe it. They didn't want to believe that he would want to conquer Poland, or that he would deliberately attack France and England. It's the common (flawed) logic - "It must not be, so it can not be."

Hitler reoccupied the Rhineland - hey, he broke the Versailles treaty, but at the time many people in France were already believing the treaty was unjust in the first place.

He annexed Austria - and newsreels and newspapers all showed how the overwhelming majority of the Austrians cheered the invaders, how they stood at the roadsides and waved swastika flags. It's like the TV pictures today of cheering Iraqi kids - you see those pictures and you think "But it's all good!" and you forget that international law was broken, that you were actually against it. The Nazi propagandists really knew what they were doing.

Hitler then asked for the last thing he would demand - the last thing, then he would be satisfied. He wanted the German-populated border regions incorporated into the Reich, and then there would be no more quarrels between the CSR and Germany. Only this item was still standing between the two nations, only this was still preventing "peace in our time". And the people in the west, they saw that they were selling their own ally, that they were serving the CSR on a silver tablet to Hitler, but they wanted to believe that peace was possible. They wanted to believe that this was all Hitler wanted. Surely Hitler would not want war! Why, he always spoke of how seriously he was committed to peace, that he wanted merely a just peace betwen equals. And at that point, France and Britain were no longer able to negotiate from a position of strength. They had been deluding themselves for too long... it was too late to turn the tables, to stand up to Hitler and say "no!"... or so they thought. The world had seen that this Germany was a disciplined country, that Hitler had set things to right. When people thought of Germany those days, they thought of a country that had mysteriously been transformed within only a few years, from a down-trodden, demoralized country suffering from the great depression into a powerhouse - led by a man who had no doubts about what he wanted, a man driven by an iron determination and fueled by a desire for peace. Or so everyone thought. To stand up to this man would not only be asking to be kicked in the ass, it would also be wrong. Hitler was on the Times cover as "Man of the Year 1938". He was the class champion, and people looked at him the same way they would look at the football quarterback in their class who aced all his exams and also played on the soccer varsity team and had the best-looking girlfreind in the entire school. One of those people who had "SUCCESS" stamped on their forehead.

And Hitler played along with their game. (He had actually wanted all of Chekhoslovakia, not just the Sudetenland.) People wept as Chamberlain proclaimed that there would be peace in our time. The west was psychologically just not able to stand up to Hitler - until March 1939, that's when people were finally able to see the what Hitler and the Nazis were really up to.

In a brilliant display of brutal power politics, Hitler forced the Chekh president Hasha to agree to the German occupation and the independence of Slovakia. This is when everyone who was still under Hitler's spell realized that the Munich treaty was not worth the paper it was printed on. But it was also too late... Britain and France forged an alliance with Poland, Romania and Greece, but it was a makeshift agreement, and personally I doubt the statesmen who signed the treaty believed that this would intimidate Hitler.

The great dilemma on September 1st was that France and Great Britain, the allies of Poland, had not concerned themselves to the question "How can Hitler be stopped" until it was too late, but that they had nonetheless bound themselves to Poland. They had bound themselves although they had no idea how to fulfill their promise. They declared war on Germany, alright, but Hitler was determined to go to war with them anyways, so that did not matter. Had they remained neutral, he would have come for them right after he would be done with Poland.

They had armies, alright, but they had never thought about using them until it was too late. Armies are trained to fight the previous war, not the upcoming one... The French had not contemplated that they would declare war and the enemy would not come. They called the month until May 1940 the "Phoney War" with a reason. It was a war that they had imagined to be totally different...

Macchiavelli would say that they should never have signed the treaty in the first place. Never promise to do something you have no idea how to do. He also had a few very clear things to say about military readiness... *sigh*
 

unmerged(16470)

Captain
Apr 24, 2003
345
0
Visit site
Originally posted by Sigi
1.
2. You should be aware, that in 1939 the main enemies of Hitler were France and England, not Poland. Poland just become Hitler's enemy after it entered in treaties with France and England. It was the reason that Hitler cancelled the peace treaty with Poland. Surely Germany had some claims on Poland (Gdansk), but it was not the main problem, which caused WW2. Moreover it might had been much easier for Poland to enter in alliance with Germany, than to put Polish nation of great sufferings of WW2 in which they (we) lost more than 6 mln citizens. .

Not sure if anyone brought this up in the rest of this thread but my eyes got tired and blurry by the time I got to page 3 :D . I am almost embarrased to say the following because Sigi is single-handedly taking on everyone else :D but here goes....

Hitler never viewed Britain as it mortal enemy even up to Battle of Britain. He admired the "British ways" and eventually sent the poor Hess on a mission for partition the world as "peace of our time" :D As for France, he looked down on "French ways" and yeah maybe he regarded them as mortal enemy. But up to the DOW on Poland, he had hoped for peace with the Western Allies. So why Poland? Read his Mein Kampf to understand his mindset. His main target is Lebensraum (did I spelt that right?) - ukraine, white russia etc (and Poland too). Guess who is physically in his way to the land mass in SU? Danzig/Gdansk or no Danzig/Gdansk, he will conjur other crisis to either DOW Poland or make it its ally or puppet.

At cerebral level, if Poland could be physically transported (beam me up, Scottie :D ) to another location, we might not have WWII, only Germany slugging it out with SU....
 

unmerged(16470)

Captain
Apr 24, 2003
345
0
Visit site
oh one more thang before I scoot to avoid the counter-batteries :D is that I remember from way back then reading books on france between the WWs that discussed the country as a whole and not just militarily. French economists in 20s projected that Germany's military-age menfolk would outnumber France's within the next couple of decades. This was one of the reason for the defensive-behind-the-Maginot mindset of the French Army between WWs. At a time when defensive weapons (ie machineguns, artillery) were proven to be more effective than offensive, how better to counter a numerically superior enemy than to make him charge your forts :D . Unfortunately, once this philosophy took hold in the French Army, it was not dispelled/shaken/replaced when offensive weapons (tanks, airpower, not the half-hearted stuff attempted in WWI) got the upper hand.

.....jumping into my foxhole.....
 

Halibutt

Marshal of Poland
5 Badges
Sep 8, 2001
3.396
0
www.halibutt.pl
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Semper Fi
  • 500k Club
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
Shrike00,

Another trace which might lead us to truth and eternal glory:

Count Edward Raczynski, polish ambassador in London (1934 - 1945) wrote a short booklet 'The British-Polish Alliance; its origin and meaning' (Publication of the General Sikorski Historical Institute in London, 1948). Both the author and the Earl of Halifax (who wrote a preface) concentrate mainly on the talks between the diplomats, not military missions, but on page 20 he writes

General Waclaw Stachiewicz, at the time GHQ. C.O. has written in the weekly Wiadomosci (XI-46, 23rd Nov.) an article which throws important and interesting light on this matter. According to Gen. Stachiewicz, mutual agreement was already well advanced by May, 1939, chiefly through Staff talks led on the British side by Gen Clayton. Further talks were conducted in July with Gen. Ironside. They were mainly concerned with support from the air for Poland. In case of a German attack on Poland "British Bomber Command stationed on British and French soil were to constitute an attacking force ready for immediate action", writes Gen. Stachiewicz. The R.A.F. were to raid German military targets. In case of German raids upon civilian targets in Poland, the R.A.F. was to answer in kind in Germany. This latter step, however, was conditional upon consultations with "Britain's allies", i.e. France. In addition, it was planned that an aircraft base should be established in Poland from which "bombers which were part of the Home R.A.F. might temporarily undertake operations in case of war".

Later in the text he makes a remark that

I myself heard after the event, that the French Government had refused to agree to the reprisal bombing of Germany, fearing that the all-powerful Luftwaffe might retaliate by bombing French cities. The matter requires further clarification.

The text is short and in english, so it's quite easy to check. If you'd like to obtain it, you should refer to The General Sikorski Historical Institute, 20 Princes Gate, London S.W.7 (the code might have changed, I don't know), or any other good polish library in UK or US.

And it proves that not everything is in the diplomatic archives as even the polish ambassador to G.B. did not participate in those talks.
Cheers
 

Halibutt

Marshal of Poland
5 Badges
Sep 8, 2001
3.396
0
www.halibutt.pl
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Semper Fi
  • 500k Club
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
As a sidenote, Edward Bernard hrabia Raczyñski seems to be rather credible source of information. From 1943 on he was a polish Minister of Foreign Affairs. 1979 - 1986 he was a President of Polish Government on exile.
Cheers