Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
But you can bet your bottom dollar, if Russia ever lifted a finger to harm Poland, they would pay for it dearly with their blood, as they have always done throughout their history of military incompetence.
You think the USA would sit back and let Poland be invaded? Would we sit back and let them capture "Fort Trump", when it is completed?
I doubt you know much about the real Russia, and it's history. The winters were the most effective tool for combating their enemies, but their armies were generally useless and almost always led by losers. The only thing their soldiers were ever good at doing was dying, which they usually did at a 2 to 1 ratio compared to the enemy, on a good day. They've won the hard way a few times now and again, but that's a mighty tall mountain to climb, even when fighting equally incompetent, or far weaker armies.
Being proud of dying is fine and dandy, but you don't win wars by dying.
Guess what? It was the Soviet Union that defeated the Nazis. They lost well over 20 million of their citizens in the process, but they defeated them. Our efforts-and those of the UK, were at best a sideshow. Great Britain provided a handy air field to launch bomber attacks that took out Germany's production capability, lessening the pressure on the Soviets and shortening the war-but in the end that was only a contributing factor. The same German war machine that rolled over Eastern Poland in 3 weeks. The Poles fought incredibly bravely-but fighting tanks with cavalry on horseback was a fools game. The Soviets managed that in spite of Stalin slaughtering their military leadership prior to WWII.
Crimea has a large ethnic Russian population who identify as Russians. Crimea historically was part of Russia. Russia did a good job of proving that Europe has not changed. Europe had no interest in standing up to the aggressors, so it was very easy for Putin to scoop up and collect that region. I believe there is a warm water naval base or port there that the Russians were more or less renting. And now it's theirs outright.
It was definitely worth it for him. I believe some sanctions were applied, the Russians continuing slurping Putin's vodka without a care in the world, and Putin has added a strategically important region to their federation.
Syria and Russia are allies. If the Syrian government wants them there, why should we care, and what right do we have to say they can't be there?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toyman at Jewel Lake
Guess what? It was the Soviet Union that defeated the Nazis. They lost well over 20 million of their citizens in the process, but they defeated them. Our efforts-and those of the UK, were at best a sideshow. Great Britain provided a handy air field to launch bomber attacks that took out Germany's production capability, lessening the pressure on the Soviets and shortening the war-but in the end that was only a contributing factor. The same German war machine that rolled over Eastern Poland in 3 weeks.
Yes, the Russian winter did a number on the nazis, just like Napoleon's army before them. All the Russians had to do was keep retreating, while allowing the Nazis to throw more and more limited resources, manpower, vehicles, etc into the void. Eventually, the Nazi war machine ran out of bodies, fuel, resources and such to commit to the Eastern front. The USSR is much bigger than Poland, and the climate is much more harsh. All they had to do was keep losing until the Germans could no longer physically move forward. Once they were depleted, the momentum moved in the other direction, and the walls began to close in on Germany from all directions. The USSR was able to outproduce them at this point, since they continued to move their factories back while retreating. As long as the tanks were being built in mass, they could make up for the incompetence on the battlefield.
The USSR didn't win all by themselves though. There was war on the other side of Europe and in Africa, and the Americans with the help of allies were busy fighting the Japanese. It was allies vs axis powers, not nazis vs USSR. There were many fronts and theaters of war. The USSR sacrificed more than any other nation for victory, I think that is almost undeniable. But would they have won if the Nazis attacked Russia first, and nobody bothered to help? Looking at how much the USSR lost, and how poorly they fought prior to turning the nazis back... Well, I think it's best to focus on how it happened, not how it could have happened.
Of course, there is the fact that the Germans were being led by a meth fueled madman who wanted war on all fronts, and he got it. And he lost because of his insatiable appetite for war, destruction, ethnic clenching, and all the other evil stuff committed by the third reich. The guy was literally insane, and Europe stood by and watched as he picked nation after nation off, but eventually, he bit off more than he could chew.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toyman at Jewel Lake
The Poles fought incredibly bravely-but fighting tanks with cavalry on horseback was a fools game. The Soviets managed that in spite of Stalin slaughtering their military leadership prior to WWII.
The Poles never engaged in a coordinated cavalry charge against tanks. That's a myth used to belittle the Poles and make them out to be stupid.
Quote:
Originally Posted by silverkris
Lots of Poles work in the UK and Ireland because their own country can't provide enough employment opportunities. When I asked a friend of mine who's Polish why many of her compatriots work overseas, she said, "We're like the Mexicans of Europe. We export our labor."
So why should they remain in the EU? Doesn't seem they are getting everything they were hoping for by joining, but they have seen the ugly side of the EU when Merkel attempted to bully them into submission.
The Poles fought incredibly bravely-but fighting tanks with cavalry on horseback was a fools game. The Soviets managed that in spite of Stalin slaughtering their military leadership prior to WWII.
Uh, how about a bit of nuance????
1. Poland was on "both sides". MANY POLES were loyal to Germany or were actual Germans. Even among the Polish, many people liked the idea of German civilization. Poles were very glad to help the Nazis kill and round up Jews, with many of the spoils going to the Poles.
2. Stalin, before the war, had taken Ukraine by "force of starvation" and killed 3 Million plus there...wiped out their language and culture (this continues today.....and Trump is on the wrong side!). Ukraine became the killing Ground for the Nazis and the Ukrainians paid dearly...and, again, many of them would have preferred to side with Poland/Germany but they couldn't. In fact, that's part of the reason Stalin killed so many of them...to destroy any possible attempt of them to organize.
Without the stuff we and other westerners sent to Russia they would have been taken over. Now...I don't know if that is a bad thing or not, since the Russians have never gotten it together and maybe today they'd be part of a Greater (but beaten) Germany and act civilized instead of still being 100's of years behind the rest of the world in terms of rights.
Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic, are nations which know what it's like to live under left wing communist tyranny. Proud nations. I wish we had huge nationalist rallies like that in America.
Left-wing hipster commie USSR was very nationalist too, you do realize that right?
Left-wing hipster commie USSR was very nationalist too, you do realize that right?
Nationalism appears to create a lot of problems over time...
But, please keep in mind that the population of the USSR was hardly a single bloc and I think it can even be said that most were not "into it".
So I would argue that's not Nationalism. It was actually ruling By the Sword.
I think we have to separate Nationalism from Militarism. Germany was Nationalistic and a good part of that was OK...the part that was proud of their education and arts and general advancements. It's only when it changes to "you WILL advance the German way at the point of a gun" that it changes big time.
Japan was nationalistic and militaristic.
I think most readers of history can agree that Russia is and always has been broken. They never got it together. I once read this expressed as "every country has software and hardware" - the hardware being resources and stuff like that and the software being the programming of the people.
Russia has the hardware...big land mass, incredible resources, etc, but their software has always been screwed up. It's been action/reaction and never balanced.
But my reading is that most Russians really never bought big time into the commie thing. It was more of a movement that came out of Moscow by force...as a reaction to the Monarchy, wars, etc.
I wonder why all the White Nationalists who are here on C-D don't head over to Poland and Russia? These days they can even get a Big Mac there.
They can set up a perfect society there and school the world on how it is done.
And unhappy blacks move to Zimbabwe and Jews to Israel?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
