Talk:History of Poland (1939-1945)

Talk:History of Poland (1939-1945)/Archive 1

Contents

1 Debate on German occupation of Poland 2 Redrawing borders 1 Current protection status 2 Border provocations 3 Polish Secret State 4 References and peer review 5 Numbers, numbers 6 Karol Świerczewski

Debate on German occupation of Poland

Adam, i didn't say that current version is final, but only that it is OK. Also Polish HQ considered that German will stop after taking Pommerania etc as one of very possible alternatives, therefore "may" isntead of would.

And what's wrong with "Generalplan ost" mentioning??!

It's no good just mentioning it. What is it? Why is it relevant?

As to quote, it's very well known, although sometimes (erroneusly) attributed as about fate of the Jews.

Full quote: http://www.armenian-genocide.org/statements/hitler.htm

http://www.diaspora-net.org/Turkey/Armenian_Genocide.html

http://www.ancsf.org/files/armenian%20genocide/Hitler%20and%20the%20Armenian%20Genocide.pdf

http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/cragsite/MikeJosephSpeech.htm

This is link about soemone who tried to validate this quote: http://www.zoryaninstitute.org/Books/book_hitler_and_armenian.htm

The world is full of bogus Hitler quotes. That one doesn't sound like something he would say to troops or in public. Anyway the war against Poland was not a "war of extermination", it was a war of conquest. Extermination came later. I don't think it adds anything to text.

I'm sorry, but you are wrong. Extermination started 1 IX 1939, and einsatzgruppen and shooting Poles in masss execution. Poles were also shooted by Wehrmacht (e.g. many examples when German solderis exectued villagers ebcause Polish army was giving stronger than usuall resistance nearby etc). I would also say it's not bogus. It was used in Nurenburg trial, saw the full quote? There are sources for German original too szopen

Adam 13:58, 4 Nov 2003 (UTC) szopen

A war of extermination is a war where a nation gets exterminated. Hitler did not exterminate the Poles, or even try to, although that may have been his longterm intention. If he had you wouldn't be here, would you? The Einsatzgruppen killed Jews, not Poles, and even them not until 1941. The killings of Poles you mention were incidental, not part of a planned extermination. I will look into the Hitler, but even if it is authentic, I don't think it adds to the narrative. Adam 14:06, 4 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Einsatzgruppen killed Poles (and Jewish Poles) in 1939, althought they later also killed Jews and communists. EINSATZGRUPPEN were in 1939 shooting Poles in mass executions. POles WERE to be enslaved, about 1/4 of them were to be exterminated and rest turned into slave east of Ural. Also his and his minions terms were to exterminate as much Poles as it is possible. Many quotes from Frank and other will confirm this. szopen

Adam, you are probably unaware, that every city or village in Poland has its own cemetary of Poles (not-Jewish Poles) executed in mass graves. Village I attended as primary school with 400 dwellers, had mass grave of 43 locals. AM

---

I don't deny that at all - the article says that 3 million non-Jewish Poles were killed in the occupation. But that is not the same thing as a "war of extermination." If the Nazis had waged a war of extermination in Poland there would be 30 million dead, not 3 million.

Here are Heydrich's intructions to the Einsatzgruppen: it's all about the Jews, no mention of Poles: http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/Holocaust/heydrich_instructions.html

I think Szopen that you, and the other Poles who contribute here, are the products of a Polish education system which promotes a particular Polish nationalist mythology which sees the Poles as unique victims of Naziism and plays down the Jewish aspect. We all understand the historical reasons for this. But younger Poles really need to do some thinking about this Polish nationalist mythology.

Adam 14:32, 4 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I am going to bed now so you have 12 hours to prepare a reply :) Adam 14:34, 4 Nov 2003 (UTC)

No, Adam. We don't see ourselves as single unique victims. We see ourselves as victims with suffering second only to Jews and gypsies. In fact in school I was almost vomiting with all those "martyrology of the nation" lessons, which always stressed Jewish suffering. How many books on the concentration I had to read? Nalkowska and making soap from Jews. Borowski. Gee, sometimes we were really fed up with all of this.

But i see that some person here are result of education system which put "extermination" words are exclusively Jewish, and tries to belittle other victims (Gypsies, Jehova witnesses, homosexuals AND also, in much less scale but still Poles and other SLavs). Also, you quoted orderes from Heydrich from site which basically is stressing Jewish suffering. Einsatzgruppen were first put in Czechoslovakia IIRC, in may 1939. Then they were disbanded and reactivated in 1939 and put to the action, acting on the rear of the army, killing intelligentsia, journalists, etc. Including also Jews. Here just the proof that einsatzgruppen were active in 1939 (first paragraph, the rest is not revelent): http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/e/eichmann-adolf/transcripts/Sessions/Session-031-01.html.

See my Operation Tannenberg for effects of first actions against Poles during WWII.

Generalplan Ost - you don't know what it is?!? Generalplan Ost was plan of future fate of eastern Europe. "Endlosung of Jewish quesiton" was part of it, although separatey discussed. It was that all Poles would be expelled from Poland except for 3-4 million who would be turned into slaves, Polish intelligentsia would be exterminated as well as everyone who would be considered dangerous, and the rest would be kept in conditions which would made rise of death rate. In it Germans presented vision that Poles would cease to exists as the nation.

Sometimes whole darn villages were wiped out. People were shooted on the street. War of conquest may be brutal, but not that brutal.

Also, for God sake, Adam, 1,8 -1,9 million civilians, non -Jewish, ehtnic Poles died as a result of what? Too much sunbathing?

See here for some details: http://www.ushmm.org/education/resource/poles/poles.pdf

---

Szopen:
On extermination:

• The word "extermination" does not just mean "killing a lot of people" or even "mass killing of selected groups of people" (as in Operation Tannenberg. It means killing everyone.
• Hitler set out to exterminate the Jews, and in Poland at any rate he came close to succeeding.
• He did not set out to exterminate the Poles, at least not in the immediate term. If he had wanted to exterminate the Poles, what sense did Operation Tannenberg make? Why target the national elite if you intend exterminating the entire nation?
• I don't dispute for a second the enormous suffering of the Polish nation in WW2. You cite a figure of 1.9 million - I actually said 3 million earlier, and the article says that too. But in a nation of 30 million that is not extermination.

You note that I obtained the Heydrich quote from a Jewish wesbite. Are you alleging that the quote has been faked by "the Jews"? If not, why does it matter where I got it from? This just reflects (IMHO) the Polish paranoia about the Jews. As I said earlier, I understand the historical reasons for this, but people who want to be historians need to make an effort to overcome these sentiments.

On General Plan Ost, I didn't say I didn't know what it was, I said the sentence you inserted into the article didn't explain what it was, and therefore it just served to confuse the reader. If you think it is important, write a paragraph on Hitler's plans for Poland and put it in.

As I said to AM recently, I am not anti-Polish - if i was why would I bother writing this article, as well as articles on Wladyslaw Sikorski, Tadeusz Bór-Komorowski, Zofia Kossak-Szczucka and Jan Karsky, all people I greatly admire? But it is the historian's job to separate facts from national mythology, and to try to present what happened with objectivity, even when (particularly when) the subject-matter is as painful as this.

Cheers, Adam 23:52, 4 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Adam, i dind't say that quote of Heydrich was fabricated. I say, that it came from the site concentrating on Jewish suffering, and therefore it's not surprising that it contains information related to Jewish victims. Documents from Polish site contain more info about Polish victims, but you wouldn't expect me to cite them as proof that orders to kill Jews were nonexisting, would you?! I do not doubt that quote is authentic. WHich DOES NOT mean that there were no other orders/documents ordering extermination of Polish intelligentsia.

About number of Poles killed: there is no exact number and never will be. Before war ESTIMATED number of population in Poland was about 34-35 million IIRC (1931 census gives number 32 million, 1921 some 27 million), from which some 69% was identifying themselves as Polish, which gives us about 24 million Poles. About 6 million Polish citizens died during war, 2-3 million Jews, 2-3 million Polish non-Jewish and others. The border between Polish and Jewish is blur. There were Jews, who died because they were Jewish, who nevertheless considered themselves Polish and sometimes only link to their Jewishness was forgotten heritage of grandparents. 1.8 million of ethnic Poles is lowest current estimation of Polish civilians (non-military deaths) excluding those who died because their were Jews and other nationalities. After the war in 1946 census gives us number of 23.4 million citizens. About 2.3 million of which were officially German (unoficial estimation is 3.5 million), Belorussian, Ukrainian about 0.7 million and 40-120 thousand Jews. Which gives us 19-20 million ethnic Poles. Right? And during period of war if birth rate of before war was kept, i think that some 3 million Poles should be born, right? Some Poles were left in soviet Russia, some stayed in the west. But still, 24 - 19 + 3 = 8 million missing (at most) or 23-20= 3 million missing (at lowest possible count of missing) of ethnic, mostly catholic, Poles. Of which 2 million most probably died as result of occupation and few hundred thousand were military deaths. The rest were displaced people, those who stayed in Soviet union, those who stayed in the west.

About "extermination" word. Your goal is exterminate whole elite of the nation (about 20-25% of nation), turn rest into slaves, disperse them etc. Your desired result is that as many as possible people will die and nation will cease to exist. I would call it definetely war of extermination. In war of conquest you want to conquer people and territory. But Hitler's goal was to conquer territory and kill as much as possible people. Exterminating elite makes much sense, because it removes people who will most likely to oppose, while rest can hope that it won't come for them.

Also, Nazi officials (e.g. Frank, when said something in sense that "extermination of Poles and achieving more productivity and support of German war effort is contradiction and compromise had to be made") used few times word "extermination" when talking about Poles.

Anyway, common sense in Poland during war and after war was that "we are next". szopen

For me the choise of word is a sort of a sanitation matter. Slavonics were treated extremely harshely by the Nazis, but the matter at stake is if they were treated as harshely as were the Jews or the Gypsies. On one hand, its important not to forget that there were other victims of the Nazis than the Jews. On the other hand, it's important not to belittle the fate of the Jewry by diffuse and wide definitions equating their suffereings with that of for instance homosexuals or Red Army political officers. Also these had hard times, and could as individuals do nothing to escape their terrible fate, similarly to the situation for the national elites in Slavonic lands, but still there is a difference to the extermination of the Jewry which, mind you!, was almost completed before the end of the war. There is a difference: It wasn't the elite of the Jewry they targeted for industrial massmurders, it was all of the Jewry.
--Ruhrjung 09:18, 5 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Eh, Ok. Yet, the quote of Hitler is to be find out in almost every article about POland under occupation.

Actually i am reding now Generalplan Ost usmmaries and noted one sentence missed earlier, that Poles and Russians can't be "exterminated" because that would arouse the world, so only their elite has to be destroyed, nation resetllted and dispersed. Curious that they were affraid that extermination of Poles would arouse the world, and nothing like that about extermination of Jews... szopen

Both User:Danny (who is a professional Holocaust historian) and User:Zero0000 doubt that the "Armenian" Hitler quote is genuine, despite the fact that it is frequently cited. They are checking sources. (There is a parallel with the Hitler "law and order" quote which is also frequently quoted but is definitely bogus). I will leave it in unless and until Danny or Zero advise that it is not genuine. Adam 10:22, 5 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Hi. Very nice work finding the quote! Danny 10:49, 5 Nov 2003 (UTC)

But do you think it is genuine? And what do you think of the above discussion generally? Adam 10:58, 5 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Can we have somebody not-Jewish to work on the quote problem as well? It is really very common quote, so if it was really bogus, I would have been really surprised. Then we should inform 40 000 000 of Poles as well, starting from professional historians. And then inform Armenians... Please triple check! AM

(Just when I was ready to agree that not all Poles are anti-Semites... ah well. Adam)

Adam, so are you saying that I am antisemite? If so, please show me when i wrote something which would confirm that. As for AM, I think his word isn't anti-semitic. Someone not-Jewish, not-Polish and not-Armenian would have to work on the quote, since I (Poles) or Armenians probably would want to do everything to find arguments for and maybe missed important arguments against. This is quite natural and had nothing to do with xenophobia. Neutral person on other hand, who has no earlier assumption, free of prejudices will came to conclusion earlier.

BTW, "I was ready to agree that not all Poles are anti-semites" means that you think that all Poles are anti-semites now. Which (paraphrasing some person) may be result fo certain education system or paranoia over Polish quesiton in some circle (/paraphrasing).

Since i started discussing in usenet i found plethora of such persons, including such authorities as Kimel who were able to say that "Polish large losses are myth" or others who were happily saying that Poles helped Nazis in concentration camps and similar. This may caused certain attitude in me not present earlier, which may cause some of my wordings feeling uneasy for you, Adam. If so, point me them, and I will try to correct. I you can't, i expect apologise. I do not consider myself anti-semite, anti-German, anti-Czukcza or anti-whatever (although i have certain pro-Polish skew in discussions, but i am aware of that and if not opposing Polono-eaters i try to control it) (i am not counting you in that category to avoid misunderstandings) szopen

AM, I don't quite understand your problem. Yes, I am Jewish. I do not believe either Adam or Zero is. I have now consented that, given the sources, the quote looks real. If you follow some of the few very minor additions I have made here (and these were only to the Talk pages), I have defended Poles. As for other persecutions, check out the history of the Porajmos article, which I started and of which I wrote the bulk, and the Bydgoszcz article to which I added an account of the massacre. I do not deny the massacre of Poles or even that Poles were gassed for a period in Auschwitz. I have a position on Jedwabne which I haven't clarified, but it is very similar to that of Tomasz Szarota (see Więź, April 2001). I do reject my position being questioned because of my ethnic background, all the more so before you know what my opinion is. Danny 11:19, 5 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Danny, please accept my appology, if you feel offended. I didn't know that you are "our" Jew. :) Seriously, I do not trust historians, the only what I trust are source materials. The Situation as it loooked when the controversy started, was that Jewish scientists didn't believe that the statements is true, or they alleged that Hitler meant Jews, while in Poland, every child knows that statement is related to Poles. Even if you found that the statements is bogus, this would not make any break through, simply both sides would stand on the same positions. Opposite is true, if serious Polish historian would doubt in the statement or if a Jewish scientist found that the statement is original, this makes the compromise possible, and therefore is the base for NPOV. I hope that my explanations are sufficient. Do not take personally mistrust of historians, since we in Poland learned much about how governments forged history. And opposite is true, if in your country people still trust official history, this only means how naive people can be. If you are an exception this is wonderful.AM

Danny, I have a lot of respect to people like you, who are able to take neutral position without earlier prejudices. I am, unfortunately, not one of such person (although i did changed my mind a lot of times during discussion even in wikipedia). I don't know why you put your answer under mine. Was that because i tried to explain AM position? If chinese write about polish case nobody would cause him about POVishness (this would be just silly). Not that _I_ care much. eh, need definetely vacation not just from Silesia, but from whole wikipedia. --szopen

I should know better than to make ironic remarks here... Adam 11:27, 5 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Adam, it doesn't matter whether you intended it as irony or not. I feel offended. Either poitn me what my sentences or behaviour you consider antisemitic (and i will apologise and try correct it), or apologise szopen

Szopen, my comments were directed to AM, not you. They just landed that way because of an edit conflict. I do have problems with what he wrote, specifically in singling out Jews. Was there anti-Semitism in Poland, before and after the war? Sure, but it never reached the proportions its reached under German rule--as Celan wrote about the Holocaust (and Gutman quotes, discussing Poland), Der Tod ist ein Meister aus Deutschland. I still like to think that Jews and Poles can work together to better understand this tragic period in both our histories. Danny 11:40, 5 Nov 2003 (UTC)

If you are offended, Szopen, I apologise. My remark was in any case directed at AM, who said "Can we have somebody not-Jewish to work on the quote problem as well?", which I think by any reasonable standard is an anti-Semitic remark (and I am not Jewish by the way). Adam 11:44, 5 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Adam, I hoped that at least you would compare me to Zofia Kossak ;) Seriously, you really offended me again. I will put another chapter on you in the trouble user section. First, you should explain to me, why you didn't know that statement, while in Poland everybody knows it? It is there is your POV and there is Polish POV. The difference is, that we know your POV, partly because we understand your language, partly because your POV is POV mainstream culture, while you don't understand our POV, because you do not speak our language and our POV is local one. And this is the reason, why I probably read more works of Jewish historians then you, and for sure more then you read books of Polish historians. Knowing those works, I am able to dystinguish between people that try to NPOV and those that belong to extreme, and I realize the latter are pretty numerous. If we want Poles and Jews to agree at least on facts, there must be common work, and this what I wanted to suggest. Maybe I phrased it little bit odd, nevertheless I didn't exclude the option that those statements were bogus, and we were fed with the propaganda, as in many different cases. I am awaiting an appology. AM

Adam, could you please explain why you removed reference to Armenian quote?! It seems totally strange, taking into account previous discussion over the issue... Almost like you were bored and decided starting another edit war? Szopen

I deleted it because coming back to this article reminded me about it. It doesn't really fit in the narrative and I have never been persuaded that the quote is authentic. I only gave up last time because I was sick of arguing with Polish nationalists. Adam 08:59, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Adam, don't "Polish nationalist" me. You have very strong POV and it seems it may be summarised in "if Pole said that, this is NPOV". I will agree with you as soon as you will remove armenian quote from different holocaust museums and armenian genocide page. I am putting it back, if the only objection is "i feel it doesn't suit article and in my opinion it's not authentic". This is not essey. Szopen

Redrawing borders

The redrawing of the Polish borders was made by the Allies (US, UK and Soviet Union and not only by Stalin. Pro-Western Polish govermnent in exile in London, Pro-Soviet Polish government in Lublin and the united Polish government in Warsaw demanded to move the Polish-German border to the west and received it. On the same time they cannot prevent losses in the east. Mestwin of Gdansk 03:39, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC)

The facts of this matter are as follows:

• Once Germany invaded the Soviet Union in 1941, it was obvious that if Germany was defeated the Soviets would advance into central Europe, including Poland
• The departure of General Anders and his army to Iran meant that there were no Polish forces on the eastern front, except for the Communist controlled Berling army.
• It was decided at Tehran that the western allies would invade France in 1944. This meant that there was no chance of a western advance through the Balkans, which in any case would not have reached as far north as Poland.
• Therefore the Soviets were always going to be in physical control of Poland once the Germans retreated. In these circumstances there was no possibility of the western allies stopping Stalin doing what he pleased in Poland.
• Ever since 1941, and probably in fact ever since 1922, the Soviets were determined to establish a Soviet-Polish frontier roughly corresponding to the Curzon Line, on the grounds that the population east of this line was majority non-Polish, despite the presence of Polish-majority cities such as Lwow.
• At Tehran Stalin presented his proposed new borders for Poland: the Oder-Neisse line in the west, the Curzon Line (roughly) in the east. Churchill and Roosevelt had no alternative but to accept this, since they had no way of influencing events on the ground in the east.
• These were Stalin's plans, not Churchill and Roosevelt's. Churchill opposed them, and tried to find a compromise with Stalin as late as November 1944. But he was much the weakest of the three allies and had no leverage without Roosevelt, who was not interested in arguing with Stalin.
• The Polish government in exile had irreparably damaged its relations with the Soviets by insisting on an independent investigation of the Katyn massacre. Mikolajczyk therefore had no bargaining power with Stalin. His last card was the Warsaw rising of 1944. Once this was defeated the Soviets were in complete control of the situation.
• Churchill took the view that the London Poles should not insist on the 1922 borders if this meant antagonising Stalin, when the real issue was who was going to hold power in Warsaw after the war. It is possible, though not very likely, that Poland might have avoided undiluted communist rule if the London Poles had been willing to compromise on the borders.
• In any case, a very good case can be made that Poland was much better off with the 1945 borders than with the 1922 borders. The new Poland was ethnically homogenous, with more defensible borders, and the western territories included the Silesian coalfields and the ports of Danzig and Stettin. This was seen by most including many Poles as a fair swap for the forests and swamps of the eastern territories.
• It is true that millions of Poles were expelled or fled from the eastern territories, and that this entailed a great deal of suffering on top of what Poland had already suffered. On the other hand, Poles of all political views were happy to grab the western territories, which had been German for centuries, and expel millions of Germans with even greater suffering.

Adam 05:26, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Your opinions are right with one exception:

• It was not Stalin's idea to move the Western border of Poland to the Odra-Nysa line. This border was requested by the Polish government in Exile as early as 1940. There was even a special working comitee pereparing document to convince the Allies and to prepare for the future peace conference.
• The difference was that he Polish government desired to extend Polish borders to the west, leaving the eastern borders without change. At the same time Stalin desired to move the Soviet-Polish border, and treated the western aquisition as a compesantion.

In September 1939 Poland was invided by the Nazi Germany (1st Sept) and the by Soviet Union (17th Sept) and later occupied and divided between the two countries. Luckily the 2 enemies started to fight in 1941, so this gave Poland a change to fight with only one enemy.

• The final result of the Polish-German war was the Poland's win and territorial gains in the west.
• The final result of the Polish-SOviet war was the Poland's defat and a territiorial lost inth east.

Mestwin of Gdansk 05:53, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC)

The key issue is not the western border - everyone was happy to take lands from the Germans. The key issue is the eastern border. The Soviet agenda was always to bring the whole of Belarus and Ukraine under Soviet rule, and to create a clear-cut ethnic border along the Curzon Line. In the context of WW2, this was Stalin's agenda, not that of the western allies, who had no strategic interests in the area. Their only choice was to acquiesce in Stalin's plan, or to antagonise Stalin by putting up a futike resistance to it. They chose the former, they were quite right to do so in the context of WW2 as a whole, and the London Poles should have known that they would. Why should the western allies have jeopardised their alliance with Stalin, who held all the keys to defeating Hitler and liberating Europe from his rule, for the sake of Poland's supposed right to control a piece of land in which Poles were a minority? Adam 06:06, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Its interesting that Mestwin says that the PGIE wanted the Oder-Neisse border as early as 1940 (no i am not going to call it "Odra-Nysa" as i detest the kind of bigotry that is inherent in such name pushing (just like a pole calling Germans teutonic scoundrels on the Poznan page history)) but on the Oder-Neisse line talk page, another Pole says that the government in exile would have been happy with the 1939 borders in both east _and_ west. PMA 07:33, Mar 20, 2004 (UTC)

Mestwin, or whoever he is, is worthless and not worth listening to. See him and Space Cadet joking around about me being a Nazi on Talk:Gdansk. I'm sick of these POV pushers who make practically any work on anything having to do with Poland impossible. john 07:52, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC)

It is also interesting that Mestwin, like other Polish editors here, sees what Poland wanted as the only relevant consideration. He says himself that Poland wanted both the western territories, which were inhabited mostly by Germans, and the eastern territories, which had a Ukrainian-Belarusian majority - a veritable Polish empire! And they expected Churchill and Roosevelt to help them achieve this. He ignores the fact that the whole of Europe was under Nazi rule, and that the western allies had other concerns than the territorial ambitions of Poland to consider. Stalin was the key to defeating Hitler, as well as to the whole postwar settlement of Europe, and the allies were quite right to tell the Poles that they should accept the borders they were being offered and not pick fights with Stalin that they had no hope of winning. Adam 07:56, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC)

My intention was to show you that the phrases like Stalin gave something to a country are simply not in neutral language, and usually not true. - Mestwin of Gdansk 22:31, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC)

But Stalin did "give" Poland things: new borders, a Communist government and the Palace of Culture in Warsaw, to name but three. I didn't say they were necessarily good things. Adam 07:55, 21 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Adam, first things first. - reference to your allegations on former "adam carr is anti-polish bigot" page.

1) It seems you don't know how to read. Yes, YOU CANT. POint me where i refused to use DANZIG in the name of the articles. POINT ME IN PAGE HISTORIES WHERE I REFUSED TO ADMIT THAT DANZIG was used in the past. TO remind you, i always proposed using Gdansk (Danzig) convention consequently through all history of the city, including modern times. 2) You are ignoring things not easy to you. You ocntinue to repeat that there was Belarussian/Ukrainian majority in the east. This is partial truth. Poles were majority in Middle Lithuania, minority in Ukrainian lands (but there were territories where they were majorities too) and in Belarus - but Belarussians were not calling themselves Belarussians (they called themselves "natives" "tutejsi"). My family was expelled from territories which were exclusively Polish and had not a single non-Polish inhabitant. (In fact, to this day there is larg ePolish minority there). 3) POint me where i contributed to nationalist version of history. I am men able to change his mind - just f* see my discussion of Brmoberg massacre. Your answer is just calling other people names (like calling me Polish nationalist). Show me something which could prove that i am Polish nationalist. Use my user contributions history. Point to the sentences (but not taken out of the context) which prove that i am Polish nationalist. If you can't, stop call me nationalist just because you don't like me or my opinions. 4) In fact the only people accusing me of nationalism is YOU and Helga Jonat (who is banned now from wikipedia - Nico was accusing me ocne but i think he changed his mind). Go and insert my name into conflict users page. Go and see how many people will back you. You don't know me. You don't care to know me, which is fine, but don't accuse me just because you don't care to or can't read.

When i started writing it, i was really enraged.. i hope i edited out all the f* remarks. If i omitted some, apologise. Szopen

Current protection status

I am requesting to start discussion to resolve dispute over the current, protected version of wikipedia. There are currently 2 issues:

1. Adam Carr's doubts about Armenian quote. If he has some substantial proves, he should discuss it, instead of making empty doubts.
2. I object referring to the Eastren Poland as having Ukrainian/Bellorussian majority. This sentence is Stalin's opinion, originally saying that Soviet nationalities have majority in Eastern Poland. As we already established, this is not true.

there is no Ukrainian/Bellorussian nation

there were areas, where Ukrainians or Bellorussians had majority. There were areas where Poles had majority. There were areas where Jews had majority. However, statement that all areas East of Curzon line had Ukrainian or Bellorussian majority and all areas West of Curzon line had Polish majority is simple lie.

most of all, most of Ukrainians and Bellorussians didn't want to be Soviet citizens.

1. There were many people that believed, Poland was betrayed by Western allies. I don't think you can ignore that opinions. Make NPOV yes, but removing all references is falsification of history.

Instead shutting somebody's mouth over factual falsification, please discuss issues Cautious 16:41, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I don't see how saying that the eastern areas had a majority of Ukrainians and Belorussians over all implies that there weren't regions there that had a Polish majority. But it's a basic fact that the areas which had been Polish on August 31, 1939, which were a part of the Soviet Union from 1945 did have a non-Polish majority, even if isolated regions within there had had a Polish majority. john 18:49, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)

From Curzon line article:

Poles 4,794,000 39.9%

Ukrainians and Ruthenians      4,139,000  34.4%
Jews                           1,045,000  08.4% 
Byelorussians                    993,000  08.5%
Russians                         120,000  01.0%
Lithuanians                       76,000  00.6%
Others and not given             845,000  06.4% 

(the others were mainly Poleszuks from Polesie)

Yes, if you artificially combine Ukrainians and Bellorussians you can calculate such a majority, but what it prooves? Even Adam Carr, somebody you cannot call fan of Poles, said clearly that Curzon line was not a line dividing ethnic Poland from non-Polish East. The page was protected, because somebody believe such a factual errors should be protected. Cautious

Border provocations

I understand from another source that the border provocations mentioned in the first paragraph were in fact, at least partly, staged by Germans disguised as Polish operatives. I would like to see this confirmed somewhere and would also be interested to know whether any Polish were involved in real "provocations". --Cfailde 13:57, 2004 Jul 10 (UTC)

So far as I know the "provovations" were a complete German invention, although there was at least one staged fake provocation of the kind you mention, an "attack" on a German army post in Silesia. The pre-war Polish regime was pretty stupid, but not stupid enough to provoke the Germans in such a way. Adam 16:09, 10 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Yup. Halibutt 16:55, Jul 10, 2004 (UTC)

Polish Secret State

To all whom it may concern (regardless of nationality, race, skin colour or religion) - at Wikipedia:WikiProject History of Poland I'm starting a Polish Secret State Project. Its purpose is to describe all the political, military and social organizations in occupied Poland during WWII as well as the Polish Government in Exile agenda, underground media and such. Take a look at Talk:Polish Secret State for more details and a broader explanation of my idea. I'd appreciate any help, especially in describing the political parties during WWII and their military organizations. The (very early and far from being ready) list of red links is here. I'd appreciate any help. [[User:Halibutt|Halibutt]] 03:26, Sep 7, 2004 (UTC)

References and peer review

Well, seems like we have quite a good article here. This needs references though. Any other ideas for improvement before I submit this to Wikipedia:Peer review and eventually Wikipedia:Featured article candidates? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 23:07, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Numbers, numbers

Why do strengh estimates differ from those in the Polish September Campaign articles? References please! --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 19:17, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

Specifically, this article gives Germans: 1.6 million troops, 250,000 trucks and other such motor vehicles, 67,000 artillery pieces, 4000 tanks, one cavalry division, 2000 plains, while PSC article - which has ilinked online references - gives 1,8 million soldiers, 10,000 guns, 2,800 tanks and 3,000 aircraft. Polish: 800,000 troops, including eleven cavalry brigades, two motorized brigades, 30,000 artillery pieces, and 120 tanks of the advanced 7-TP type. The Polish airforce consisted of 400 aircraft. 160 of them were PZL P.11c fighter aircraft, 31 PZL P.7a and 20 P.11a fighters, 120 PZL P.23 reconnaissance-bombers, and 45 PZL P.37 medium bombers. Meanwhile, PSW article sais: 1 million soldiers, 4,300 guns, 880 tanks, 435 aircraft. Few minor notes from the PSW article: only 600,000 Polish troops were mobilised by Sep 1. The 880 tanks are explained in the text as 132 7-TP and 300 tankettes. Polish fighers number: 169. This is rather confusing. See table at Talk:Polish September Campaign#Numbers, numbers in which I summed up the numbers and where I will post futher comments. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 19:32, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

Karol Świerczewski

Can anyone here please translate article about Karol Świerczewski for English Wikipedia ?

Thank you in advance (Fisenko 04:37, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC))

I will begun translating into Karol Swierczewski. OOC, what brought your interest in him? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 09:32, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I was reading about UPA, Stepan Bandera, Soviet partisans and related subjects. Afterwards I expanded, translated from Russian and wrote few articles for Wikipedia. I remembered from my Polish history class about Swierczewski and I wanted to write an article about him as well, however, most of information about him online is in Polish and since I don't understand it I realized I need help. (Fisenko 18:24, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC))