Why did Poland die?

59
80 years ago, the Polish Red Army operation began. The Polish campaign began in the conditions of the death of the Polish state under the blows of the Third Reich. The Soviet Union returned to the power the West Russian lands captured by Poland during the Soviet-Polish war 1919 — 1921. and pushed the frontier to the west. It is possible that it was these kilometers that saved Moscow from falling in the 1941 year.

Why did Poland die?

Tanks BT-7 of the Soviet 24th light tank brigade are included in the city of Lviv. September 18, 1939




How the Polish elite sentenced the Second Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth


In the prewar period, Warsaw looked upon Hitler Germany as an ally in a future war with the USSR (Polish predator) Poland participated in the Czechoslovak section. In the 1938 year, the Poles captured the Teszyn region, an economically developed region that seriously increased the production capacity of Poland’s heavy industry. In March 1939, when Germany finished Czechoslovakia, Slovakia became “independent” (vassal of the Third Reich), and Bohemia and Moravia (Czech Republic) became part of the German Empire. Warsaw did not protest against the seizure of the Czech Republic, but was offended by the fact that it was allocated a too small share.

Even before the capture of Czechoslovakia, Berlin began to exert pressure on Warsaw, preparing to resolve the Polish question. In January 1939, Hitler met with Polish Foreign Minister Beck. The Führer suggested that he abandon the old patterns and seek solutions on new paths. In particular, Danzig can be politically reunited with the German Empire, but Polish interests, especially economic ones (Danzig could not exist economically without Poland) should be ensured. According to Hitler’s formula, Danzig became politically Germanic, while economically he remained with Poland. The Führer also touched on the issue of the Polish corridor - after the Versailles Peace of 1919, the Polish territory divided East Prussia from the rest of Germany. Hitler noted that Poland needed a connection with the Baltic Sea, but Germany also needed a land connection with East Prussia. And it is necessary to find a solution that will meet the interests of both parties.

Thus, Adolf Hitler clearly articulated the interests of the Reich - to return Danzig to Germany and revise the status of the Polish corridor that separates Germany from East Prussia. Beck in response did not say anything sensible - neither for nor against.

In April 1939, England and Poland entered into a mutual assistance agreement. In the same period, Moscow invited London to conclude an agreement between Britain, France and the USSR on mutual assistance in the event of aggression in Europe against any of the contracting powers. Also, the three powers were to render any, including military, assistance to the Eastern European states located between the Baltic Sea and the Black Sea and bordering the USSR, in case of aggression against them. That is, with such an agreement, the Third Reich had no chance of winning against Poland or France. The West could have prevented a major war in Europe, but London and Paris needed a war - the “crusade” of Germany against Russia.

Such an agreement could change the course. stories, stop the further expansion of the Third Reich and World War II. However, most of the British and French elites preferred to continue the policy of bleeding Germany and Russia. Therefore, the summer negotiations of the USSR with the Western powers were in fact sabotaged by Paris and London. The British and French dragged on time, sent minor representatives who did not have broad powers to conclude a military alliance. Moscow, however, was ready for such an alliance; it proposed to place 120 divisions against the aggressor.

Poland generally refused to let the Red Army through its territory. Firstly, in Warsaw they were afraid of uprisings in the Western Russian regions, which, at the sight of the Red Army, would oppose the Poles. Secondly, the Polish elite has traditionally been overly self-confident. In Warsaw they were not afraid of a war with the Germans, they promised that "the Polish cavalry will take Berlin in a week!" If Germany dares to attack. In addition, the Poles believed that “the West will help them” if Hitler decided to attack Poland. Thus, the Polish elite refused the help of the USSR in a possible war with the Third Reich. Thus, Warsaw signed the death sentence to the Polish state.

Moreover, Warsaw itself provoked Berlin to attack. In the summer of 1939, a new phase of Polish pressure on Danzig began. 29 July Danzig protested against the rude behavior of Polish customs officers. On August 4, Warsaw presented an ultimatum to the free city, in which it promised to impose a blockade on food imports, if the Danzig government does not promise that in the future it will never interfere in the affairs of Polish customs. Also, Polish customs officers should have received weapon. In fact, Warsaw threatened to starve Danzig, as the free city depended on external food supplies. At the request of Hitler, the free city capitulated. Berlin feared that Warsaw wanted to provoke a conflict with Germany, but she had not yet completed military preparations and wanted to maintain peace.

Poland at that time was experiencing a military psychosis associated with the demand to return Danzig-Gdansk. In mid-August 1939, the Polish authorities began mass arrests of Germans in Upper Silesia. Thousands of arrested Germans were sent inland. Thousands of Germans tried to flee to Germany. German firms and organizations closed, consumer cooperatives and trade associations dissolved.

Back in February 1939, Warsaw began to develop a plan of war with Germany and was ready to expose 39 infantry divisions and 26 cavalry, border, mountain and motorized brigades. The Polish army numbered 840 thousand people.


Handshake of the Polish Marshal Edward Rydz-Smigla and the German attache, Major General Bohislav von Studnitz, at the Independence Day parade in Warsaw on November 11 1938 of the year. The photograph is notable for the fact that the Polish parade was especially tied to the capture of Tesinska Silesia a month earlier


Disaster of the Second Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth


Seeing that the Anglo-Franco-Soviet negotiations on the conclusion of a pact of mutual assistance had reached an impasse, despite all the efforts of Moscow, the Soviet government came to the final conclusion that the West wanted to overcome the crisis of capitalism at the expense of the USSR. In the Far East, in May 1939, fighting began on the Halkin-Gol River. Behind the Japanese stood the United States and England, which set the Japanese Empire on China and the USSR.

In the summer of 1939, Berlin held yet another secret negotiations with London. The British were plotting with Hitler at the expense of Soviet civilization. Not without reason a significant part of the British government documents about this period are still a secret. Negotiations with the Nazis were not only politicians, lords, but also members of the royal family. Moscow was aware of these negotiations and their contents. Stalin was well aware of secret German-British contacts. It was clear that the West wanted to come to an agreement at the expense of Russia.

It was necessary to make a reciprocal move, to gain time for the rearmament and modernization of the armed forces. In mid-August 1939, negotiations began between Moscow and Berlin. August 23 1939 Molotov and Ribbentrop in Moscow signed the "Non-aggression pact between Germany and the USSR." Also, two great powers distinguished spheres of influence in Eastern Europe.

Obviously, Stalin, like Western military analysts at that time, thought that the war in the West, following the example of the First World War, would have a long, positional character. The French trumpeted the whole world about the “inaccessibility” of the Maginot line. Nobody would have known and would not have believed in a blitzkrieg when the Wehrmacht defeated the Poles in two or three weeks, who were considered a serious military power and themselves threatened to take Berlin. The fact that the Germans in a few weeks will end with France, Belgium and Holland, and even the expeditionary British army. In the West, they did not think about defeat, and when the war between the USSR and Finland began, in Paris and London they began to prepare for war with Russia! Who could have foreseen that the armies of Poland, France, England, Holland, Belgium, Norway, Greece, Yugoslavia would be completely defeated, flee, and leave the Germans all their arsenals. That factories throughout Europe, including the “neutral” Swedes and Swiss, will work for the Third Reich.

In Moscow, they thought they were getting several years of peace. While Hitler will deal with Poland, France and England, the USSR will complete its programs for the rearmament of the Red Army, the creation of the ocean fleet. At the same time, having signed an agreement with Berlin, Molotov with one stroke of a pen ended the war in the Far East. In Tokyo, this non-aggression pact made a stunning impression. In Japan, it was decided that Germany had so far postponed plans for a war with the USSR. The fighting on Halkin-Gol ends, Tokyo makes a strategic decision on the offensive in the south (colonies and possessions of the Western powers).

1 of September 1939 of the year Germany attacked Poland. On September 3, England and France declared war on the Reich, but in reality did not fight. The "strange war" (Why England and France betrayed Poland), when the Anglo-French troops fraternized with the Germans, drank and played, “bombed” Germany with leaflets. Paris and London “merged” Poland, deciding that after its defeat Hitler would finally start a war with Russia. France and England had every opportunity to stop the great war in Europe at the very beginning. It was enough to start bombing the industrial centers and cities of Germany, to move their significantly superior forces against the weak second-rate divisions of the Germans on the Western Front (they did not even have tanks and planes!) To bring Berlin to its knees and make him ask for peace. Or play on fear of the German generals, bruised by the memories of the First World War, who was very afraid of a war on two fronts and was ready to overthrow the Führer. German generals did not know what Hitler knew - London and Paris would not wage a real war. They will give him Poland, as they gave Czechoslovakia, and how they will give France and almost all of Europe.

As a result, the Allies did not lift a finger to help a dying Poland. The Polish armed forces were actually not as strong as the Polish propaganda trumpeted. The Poles were more prepared for war with the Russians than with the Germans. The Polish military-political leadership overslept the qualitative strengthening of the German army. And the West, in which they believed so, did not help, betrayed. Already 5 September 1939 g. Followed the order of the Polish high command to withdraw the remaining troops to Warsaw, 6 September Polish front collapsed. The Polish leadership, before the war so proud and brave, turned out to be rotten. Already on 1 September, the president of the country Moscitsky fled from Warsaw, on 4 on September the evacuation of government agencies began, on 5 on September the government fled, and on the night of 7 on September the Polish commander-in-chief Rydz Smigly also fled from the capital. On 8 of September the Germans were already on the outskirts of Warsaw.

On September 12 the Germans visited Lviv, on September 14 they completed the encirclement of Warsaw (the city capitulated on September 28). The remaining Polish troops were dissected, isolated from each other. Basically, the Polish resistance from this time continued only in the Warsaw-Modlin region and to the west - around Kutno and Lodz. The Polish command gave the order to defend Warsaw at all costs. The Polish command hoped to stay in the areas of Warsaw and Modlin, and near the border with Romania, and wait for help from France and England. The Polish leadership at this time asked the French for asylum in France. The Polish government fled to the Romanian border and began to ask for transit to France. On 17 of September, the Polish government fled to Romania.

Thus, the Polish state by 16 — 17 September actually ceased to exist. The Polish armed forces were defeated, the Wehrmacht captured all the main vital centers of Poland, only a few large centers of resistance remained. The Polish government fled, not wanting to die heroically during the defense of Warsaw. With further movement, Germany would easily occupy the remaining regions of Poland. In Paris and London, this was well understood (that Poland was no longer), therefore they did not declare war on the USSR when the Red Army crossed the Polish border.


Adolf Hitler welcomes German troops crossing the bridge over the San River (the right tributary of the Vistula) in the Yaroslav region of Poland. First right: Colonel General Walter von Brauchitsch, Commander-in-Chief of the Wehrmacht Ground Forces. 15 September 1939



View from the plane of the broken Polish armored train No.13 "General Sosnkovsky" in the vicinity of Warsaw


Polish campaign of the Red Army


Moscow faced the question: what to do in this situation? It was possible to start a war with Germany, violating the just-concluded non-aggression pact; nothing to do; occupy the West Russian regions occupied by the Poles after the death of the Russian Empire. To fight Germany and Japan, with the hostile attitude of England and France, was suicide. This scenario would clearly please the French and British, who wanted a clash between Germany and the USSR. It was impossible to do nothing - German troops would occupy all of Poland and save a few weeks in the 1941 year, which allowed them to implement the blitzkrieg plan and take Moscow in August - September 1941.

It is clear that the Soviet leadership made the most reasonable decision. On the night of September 17, Moscow informed Berlin that in the morning the Red Army would cross the Polish border. Berlin requested that the German aviation did not act east of the Bialystok - Brest - Lviv line. At 3 o’clock. 15 minutes. On the morning of September 17, the Polish ambassador in Moscow, Grzhibovsky, was handed a note stating:
“The Polish-German war revealed the internal failure of the Polish state. During the ten days of the war of military operations, Poland lost all of its industrial areas and cultural centers. Warsaw, as the capital of Poland, does not exist anymore. The Polish government broke up and shows no signs of life. This means that the Polish state and its government have virtually ceased to exist. ”


As a result, the agreements between Poland and the USSR lose their significance. Poland may become a convenient bridgehead from which a threat to the USSR may arise. Therefore, the Soviet government can no longer observe neutrality, and Moscow can no longer indifferently look at the fate of the West Russian population (half-Ukrainians and Belarusians). The Red Army was ordered to cross the border and take control of the population of Western Belarus and Western Ukraine.

It is worth noting that in Paris and London they understood everything perfectly. On September 18, the British government decided that, according to an agreement with Warsaw, England is obliged to defend Poland only in the event of German aggression, so Moscow should not send a protest. The governments of England and France recommended that the Polish leadership did not declare war on the USSR. In Poland, the reaction to the Soviet note and the appearance of the Red Army on Polish territory was controversial. So, the Commander-in-Chief of the Polish Army Rydz-Smigly issued two conflicting orders: in the first he ordered to resist, in the second, on the contrary, he did not enter into battle with the Russians. True, the benefits of his orders were few, the management of the remaining troops was long lost. Part of the Polish command generally regarded the Soviet troops as "allied."

In general, the Polish army in the east of the country did not show serious resistance to the Red Army. So on the first day of the Polish campaign, the loss of Soviet troops amounted to 3 people killed and 24 wounded, another 12 people drowned. Already on 17 of September Baranavichy was occupied, in the area of ​​which about 5 thousand Polish soldiers were captured. On the same day, our troops liberated Rivne. Dubno, Rogaczów and Lutsk occupied September 18 on September, Vladimir-Volynsky took September 19. 18 - On 19 of September, Soviet troops captured Vilna. In battles for the city, the 11 Army lost 13 people killed and 24 wounded, 5 tanks and 4 armored vehicles were shot down. About 10 thousand people and large reserves were captured in the Vilna region. On 19 of September, Soviet troops took the city of Lida and Volkovysk. On 20 of September, battles for Grodno began; on 22 of September, Soviet troops occupied the city. Here the Poles put up noticeable resistance. The Red Army lost 57 people killed, 159 wounded, 19 tanks were destroyed. 664 Poles were buried on the battlefield, more than 1,5 thousand people were captured. On 21 of September the Red Army occupied Kovel.

12 — On 18 on September, the German army surrounded Lviv from the north, west, and south. From the east to the city came out of the Red Army. The parties demanded from each other to withdraw troops from the city and not interfere with its assault. By the evening of 20 September, the Wehrmacht received the order of the high command to withdraw from Lviv. As a result, the Red Army took the city of 22 on September.

On 21 of September 1939, the troops of the Belarusian and Ukrainian fronts received an order from the people's commissar of defense to stop on the line reached by the advanced units. Meanwhile, the leadership of the USSR and Germany conducted intense negotiations over the demarcation line. On September 22, units of the German army began to retreat, gradually yielding to occupied territories that were within the sphere of influence of the USSR and the Red Army. In particular, on 22 of September, Soviet troops occupied Bialystok and Brest. By 29 September, the campaign was completed.

Thus, the Polish army did not show serious resistance. The Polish units immediately surrendered, or after a small battle, or retreated, abandoning fortifications, heavy weapons and supplies. During the Polish campaign from September 17 to October 2, October 1939, the Red Army lost 852 people killed and dead, missing 144 people. For comparison, in the conflict with Japan on the river. Khalkin-Gol, our loss of life amounted to over 6,8 thousand people and more than 1,1 thousand people missing. The Polish losses were, of course, higher - about 3,5 thousand killed, about 20 thousand wounded, about 450 thousand prisoners.

28 September 1939 in Moscow Ribbentrop and Molotov signed an agreement on friendship and border between the USSR and Germany. As a result, Russia returned the lands of Western Belarus and Western Ukraine-Little Russia: an area of ​​196 thousand square meters. km and with a population of about 13 million people. In November, these territories, according to the organization of the will of the people organized with the participation of the Soviet side, were annexed to the Ukrainian SSR and BSSR. The territory of the Vilnius region along with Vilnius was transferred to Lithuania in October. This event was of great military strategic importance - the borders of the USSR were moved to the west, which led to a gain in time.


Soviet tank T-28 fording a river at the town of Mir in Poland. ZiS-5 truck is moving along the bridge



T-26 tanks from the 29-th light tank brigade of the Red Army on the street Brest-Litovsk. 22-23 September 1939



Heinz Guderian, commander of the 19th Wehrmacht Army Corps, and Semen Moiseevich Krivoshein, commander of the 29th Red Tank Brigade of the Red Army, during the transfer of the Red Army to the city of Brest-Litovsk. 22 September 1939 g. Source of photos: http://waralbum.ru/
59 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +5
    18 September 2019 05: 58
    Pans still dream of Poland from sea to sea.
    1. +15
      18 September 2019 06: 06
      Pans still dream of Poland from sea to sea.

      Yeah, but what kind of propaganda this goes on in Belarus and cannot be described. Like we are with the Poles of the same blood, and the Russians are invaders)))
      1. The comment was deleted.
        1. +2
          18 September 2019 08: 03
          Well done Sasha! Well done article author! He writes well - in short and in detail!
          We were not taught history in such detail at school or university. In addition, a lot of things have already begun to be forgotten, even because of the prescription of school and student years.

          The author helps not only to remember the world history and the history of our country, but also to look at everything that has happened in history more meaningfully and more truthfully.
          I learn many new details briefly from his historical articles for the first time, as if I had studied history anew, as if for the first time.

          If nations want peace, if young people want peace, then there must always be many such truthful and detailed historical articles. They will certainly be read, because the questions of history are always controversial and truth is born in a dispute. And in no case should the Russians in international controversy retreat and give way to propaganda for Western liars and hostile manipulators.
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. +5
        18 September 2019 10: 15
        Quote: lucul
        Pans still dream of Poland from sea to sea.

        Yeah, but what kind of propaganda this goes on in Belarus and cannot be described. Like we are with the Poles of the same blood, and the Russians are invaders)))

        As Stanley Kubrick said correctly: "Large and strong states behave in world politics like bandits, and small and weak ones behave like women with reduced social responsibility" ...
      4. +2
        18 September 2019 11: 09
        Quote: lucul
        Yeah, but what kind of propaganda this goes on in Belarus and cannot be described. Like we are with the Poles of the same blood, and the Russians are invaders)))

        Yeah ... and then the hop - and again Kresy Wschodnie, the besiegers and violent polonization. smile
      5. +2
        18 September 2019 19: 36
        Quote: lucul
        Like we are with the Poles of the same blood, and the Russians are invaders)))

        It would be nice to study in Belarus the "joint" life with the Poles during the occupation under the Germans. There was such a "brotherhood" that even today, with the word "Pole", a hand reaches for a pistol .... You just there, in Belarus, forgot many things and do not want to remember historical milestones. For example, how the Poles, who came with the Germans to the villages and cities of Western Belarus, surrendered to the Nazis all the local national leadership and the underground, even not entirely communist, in order to occupy the administrative bodies. In that quarter of the population that died at the hands of the occupiers, a significant part of the blood is on the hands of the Poles.
      6. 0
        25 September 2019 13: 04
        Yes, I agree. We were in Smolensk in the summer of that year right in front of the Mundial of 2018, so a rather young (35 years old) guide of the Thunder Tower (a Belarusian by birth, but a citizen of Russia) said that when groups of tourists from Belarus come, not all of course, but quite a lot groups opposed to Russia and for Poland. And it’s quite difficult to communicate with them when they rest against the horns and do not want to perceive anything.
  2. +8
    18 September 2019 06: 04
    And the West, in which the Poles believed so, did not help, betrayed.
    As the current political situation in Europe shows, the history of the Psheks has not taught anything unfortunately ....
  3. +4
    18 September 2019 06: 33
    Who will fit for hyenas? And for the finished ..
  4. -7
    18 September 2019 07: 03
    The West could have prevented a major war in Europe, but London and Paris needed a war - the “crusade” of Germany against Russia.

    Such an agreement could change the course of history, stop the further expansion of the Third Reich and World War II. However, most of the British and French elites preferred to continue the policy of bleeding Germany and Russia. Therefore, the summer negotiations of the USSR with the Western powers were in fact sabotaged by Paris and London.


    The West categorically did not want to fight: neither against Hitler against the USSR, nor against the USSR against Hitler. He did not care where Hitler went to the South, East or to the Moon. The main thing is not to be on them. This was called a policy of appeasement.
    ostrich politics, of course, but it was.

    Western countries have not changed since WWI. But before it, Russia managed to agree with them on joint defense, but the USSR did not. Why? The answer is simple: the West trusted the USSR with its Comintern (then ISIS) not
    much more than Germany.
    It was necessary to make a return move, gain time for re-equipment and modernization armed forces. In mid-August 1939, negotiations between Moscow and Berlin began. On August 23, 1939, Molotov and Ribbentrop in Moscow signed the "Non-aggression pact between Germany and the USSR." .

    It was not the agreement that gave time (Hitler wanted to spit on him, as shown on June 22), but that Hitler needed to resolve issues in the West. As decided there, prepared, and went east. As for modernization and rearmament, it is known that Hitler during that time became not percent (like the USSR) stronger, but at times,
    It was necessary to make a reciprocal move, to gain time for the rearmament and modernization of the armed forces.
    . Also, two great powers distinguished spheres of influence in Eastern Europe.

    This really needed to be done - under the conditions of the imminent occupation of Poland by Germany, they pushed back their borders. Nobody would be better off if Hitler was 100-200 km east.
    1. +7
      18 September 2019 07: 46
      Quote: Olgovich
      The West categorically did not want to fight: neither against Hitler against the USSR, nor against the USSR against Hitler.

      Yes, in general, the author burns:
      In May 1939, fighting began on the Khalkin-Gol River in the Far East. Behind the Japanese stood the United States and England, which set the Japanese Empire on China and the USSR.
      although actually
      Since December 1937, a series of events (the attack on the American gunboat Panei, the massacre in Nanjing, etc.) turned the public opinion of the United States, France and Great Britain against Japan and aroused certain fears regarding Japanese expansion. This prompted the governments of these countries to begin providing the Kuomintang with loans for military purposes. In addition, Australia did not allow one of the Japanese companies to acquire an iron ore mine on its territory, and in 1938 banned the export of iron ore to Japan. In order to put pressure on the Japanese army in China, the United States, Great Britain and the Netherlands imposed an embargo on oil and steel trade with Japan. The loss of oil imports made it impossible for Japan to continue the war in China. What subsequently resulted in the attack of the Japanese imperial fleet on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941.
      Why so distort?
    2. +6
      18 September 2019 09: 16
      The West trusted the USSR with its Comintern (then ISIS) not
      much more than Germany.

      Unable to resist, and having smeared the USSR and its peoples at the same time, with shit, you reset your foul-smelling comment.
    3. +2
      18 September 2019 11: 14
      Quote: Olgovich
      It was not the agreement that gave time (Hitler wanted to spit on him, as shown on June 22), but that Hitler needed to resolve issues in the West. As decided there, prepared, and went east. As for modernization and rearmament, it is known that Hitler during that time became not percent (like the USSR) stronger, but at times,

      The problem is that at the time of signing the Treaty no one could have imagined that the armies of the victorious countries of the First World War would merge France in a couple of weeks. It was assumed that the war in the West would be WWII No. 2 - long and exhausting, and this war would not have the best effect on the military and industrial potential of both the Allies and the Axis.
      1. +1
        18 September 2019 11: 49
        Quote: Alexey RA
        The problem is that at the time of signing the Treaty no one could have imagined that the armies of the victorious countries of the First World War would merge France in a couple of weeks.

        this problem was only in distant minds who did not know the recent History (which had put everything on the shelves long ago) and did not want to draw conclusions from it.

        The Germans in WWI in 1914 in France wasand stopped only by RUSSIA in the East.
        Quote: Alexey RA
        It was assumed that the war in the West wouldt PMV №2 - long and exhausting, and this war will not have the best effect on the military and industrial potential of both the Allies and the Axis.

        MV, even the First, even the Second, without Russia, it does NOT happen!
        Whoever does not understand this, then .. In general, further, everything is known ....
        1. +1
          18 September 2019 13: 01
          Quote: Olgovich
          this problem was only in distant minds who did not know the recent History (which had put everything on the shelves long ago) and did not want to draw conclusions from it.

          The Germans in WWI in 1914 in France were stopped only by RUSSIA in the East.

          So these are the Doversal Germans. And for the post-Versailles Reich, the forces of France and Britain in theory were enough to turn the war into a positional one.
          Quote: Olgovich
          MV, even the First, even the Second, without Russia, it does NOT happen!

          The question is when Russia enters into it.
          1. -1
            18 September 2019 13: 34
            Quote: Alexey RA
            So these are the Doversal Germans. And for the post-Versailles Reich, the forces of France and Britain in theory were enough to turn the war into a positional one.


            In theory......
            Remember how the French were cheated in 1924, (the Ruhr conflict) how they did it in 1936 in the Rhineland, and Munich 1938 "I brought you PEACE!" (England)?
            What else is unclear?

            NOBODY was going to fight there.

            And in 1914 it would be the same — if not for Russia had not crashed from the East. Or who has doubts?
            Quote: Alexey RA
            The question is when Russia enters into it.

            History in the WWII showed clearly WHEN it is necessary.

            Someone considered himself smarter than her.
    4. +1
      18 September 2019 13: 25
      Quote: Olgovich
      The West categorically did not want to fight: neither against Hitler against the USSR, nor against the USSR against Hitler.

      This is a very superficial judgment!

      Germany then declared war - how to continue to live with it?
      It is appropriate to say under what conditions the peace treaty was seen after the defeat of Poland by Hitler and Great Britain, France.
      And, despite the fact that Hitler after the capture of Poland, proposed to conclude peace in Britain and France and was refused ...

      Hitler proclaimed October 6, 1939 "peaceful offensive". He did this in his lengthy speech in the Reichstag, during which - after the exaltation of the German victory in Poland - he began to develop, as if nothing had happened during this time, his argument for the Western powers. The conflict arose because of the Polish question. Now the Polish question has been resolved, and Germany is inclined to support the reconstruction of the Polish state, provided that it provides guarantees that it will not become the center of intrigues directed against Germany and the USSR. Germany has nothing to demand from the Western powers; it only cares about the formation of a stable peace. Hitler assured that he did not want other changes on the political map of Europe. Yes, he demanded the return of the colonies, but did not make of this ultimatum condition. He expressed the desire to convene an economic conference on reconstruction and stabilization in Europe and suggested that all this should be discussed at a conference of the great European powers. Otherwise, Germany will continue the war to the end and by all means at its disposal.

      The first official response to Hitler’s speech came on October 10 from the French, when Daladier confirmed that the Allies would agree to peace only if they received security guarantees. Security that will not be called into question every six months. Britain's answer was given on October 12 by Chamberlain in a speech in the House of Commons. Great Britain, he said, under no circumstances will accept a peace based on recognition of the German conquests. Peace must be genuine, lasting and guaranteed, so it cannot be based on the promises of a government that no one else trusts. Having received no convincing evidence “in the form of clear actions and effective guarantees” of the sincerity of the German desire for peace, the democratic powers will continue the war.

      https://the-books.biz/mejdunarodnyie-otnosheniya-knigi/534-mirnoe-nastuplenie-gitlera-anglo.html

      At the end of Strange War:
      Ten days after the start of the German offensive in the West, on the very evening when German tanks reached Abbeville, General Jodl, describing in his diary how the Führer was “overjoyed,” added that he “was working on a peace treaty” and that "England may receive a separate peace at any time after the return of the German colonies." That was May 20th. Then, for several weeks, Hitler, apparently, had no doubt that after France left the war, England would seek peace. The conditions put forward by him, from the point of view of the Germans, seemed extremely generous, insisting that England was defeated in Norway and in France. On May 24, the Fuhrer detailed them to General von Rundstedt, while expressing his admiration for the British Empire and emphasizing the need for its existence. From London, he demanded one thing - free hands in continental Europe.
      e-reading.club

      From Halder’s diary, we learn that Britain’s reluctance to negotiate peace with Germany was seen by the Nazi elite as an expression of British hopes for the Soviet Union.


      And even after the defeat and surrender of France, Great Britain followed its course:

      The English response was completely unexpected for the Nazi elite; on July 3, by order of Churchill, British troops attacked the French military vessels in Oran, Alexandria and Dakar. French ships in English ports were captured. England decided to insure itself against the unpleasant and dangerous prospect of the capture of the French fleet by the Germans or its use with the approval of the French government of the defeatists Marshal Pétain for the war against England.

      The "answer" of the British plunged Hitler into anger and confusion. However, the "peaceful offensive" continued. Hitler delivered a lengthy anti-English speech at a Reichstag session on July 19. But he ended her offer of England to make peace. On the same day, the founder and head of the Dutch aviation company KLM Alfred Plesman arrived in the capital of the fascist Reich. He arrived at the invitation of the Reichsmarschall Goering. Although, from the outside, the idea of ​​a meeting seemed to belong to Plesman, in fact it was initiated by Hermann Goering. The "second person" in the Reich, and now, in the conditions of war, he tried to make himself a "man of peace", seeking agreement between Western states. Despite the fact that on July 22, the British Foreign Minister, Lord Halifax, on behalf of the government rejected Hitler's proposals, the discussion of the "conditions of peace" between Plesman and Goering continued. The meeting on July 24 agreed on the conditions under which, according to Goering, England and Germany could come to an agreement. These conditions were summarized by Plesmann in the confirmation memorandum of July 30: Germany insisted on the return of only its former colonies, which it lost as a result of the First World War. Germany “generously” agreed not to demand the surrender of the English fleet. However, further “conditions of peace” demanded from England the recognition of German hegemony in Europe, i.e. just what England did not recognize, did not want, and could not recognize. The disguise of actual Nazi intentions looked awkward: Poland and Czechoslovakia did not seem to be deprived of “national development,” but regulation remained with Germany, and interference from other states was not allowed. Norway, Denmark, the Netherlands, Belgium and France supposedly remained free to choose the forms of their government and government, but this “choice” was supposed to ensure their cooperation with Germany. In practice, this meant recognition of German dominance in Europe. The British government did not allow Plesman to arrive in London. Plesman's proposals transmitted to him through the Dutch envoy in Stockholm, after studying them by the English Ministry of Foreign Affairs, were rejected.

      http://www.k2x2.info/istorija/1941_22_iyunja/p12.php

      On July 3, 1940, Halder wrote in his diary: “In the foreground are the English problem, which should be developed separately, and the eastern problem. The main content of the latter is: how to deliver a decisive blow to Russia in order to force it to recognize the dominant role of Germany in Europe. ”

      At a meeting in Berghof on July 13, 1940, Hitler emphasized several times that "England still relies on the Soviet Union and therefore does not capitulate." He believes that England will have to be forced into peace by force. However, Hitler is somewhat reluctant to do so. Reason: “If we defeat England militarily, then the entire British Empire will collapse. However, Germany will not benefit from this. The defeat of England will be achieved at the cost of German blood, and Japan, America and others will reap the benefits. ” It is hard to say whether he really thought so or looked for arguments to explain the impending renunciation of the invasion of England. However, in mid-July, a group of operatives of the German General Staff began to develop a plan of war against the Soviet Union.


      And more
      One of Hitler's first public statements about his hopes for a peace with England was his interview with Carl von Wiegand, a correspondent for newspaper mogul Hurst, which was published on June 14 in New York Journal American. Two weeks later, Thomsen informed the German Ministry of Foreign Affairs that he had printed an additional 100 thousand copies of this interview and that he was also able, through a reliable agent, to convince the isolationist, Rep. Torkelson (Republican from Montana), to include the Fuhrer’s interview in “ Congregational Record ”(“ Protocols of Congress ”) of June 22.
      e-reading.club

      “He (Raeder) is convinced that England can be forced to request peace by cutting its supply arteries through the merciless war of the submarine fleet, air raids on convoys and strong air raids on its main centers ... Therefore, the commander of the naval forces (Raeder) cannot act in supporting the idea of ​​invading England, as is the case with Norway. ” Further, the admiral began to explain in detail and for a long time the difficulties associated with such an invasion, which probably somewhat cooled Hitler. Chilled, but also convinced. For Raeder noted that "the Führer also sees invasion as a last resort." e-reading.club


      That is, from the sources cited, it is clear that Hitler made a mistake - superficially assessing the change in public opinion and changes in the composition of the ruling cabinets in Great Britain and France: I mean, the appearance on the stage of such figures as Churchill, Daladier and other supporters of tough measures after the failure of the policy of "appeasement ".
      1. 0
        18 September 2019 13: 54
        Quote: DimerVladimer
        This is a very superficial judgment!

        This is just a fact.

        Thanks for the very informative calculations. hi

        But what do you want to say by them? What did England want to fight?
        I think not, I didn’t want to.
        But she was cornered and fought.
        1. 0
          18 September 2019 14: 41
          Quote: Olgovich
          But what do you want to say by them? What did England want to fight?
          I think not, I didn’t want to.
          But she was cornered and fought.


          Here rather the following proposition suggests itself:
          the parties did not agree on the conditions for concluding peace - Great Britain felt deceived about Hitler's promises, felt threatened and did not believe the words of the upstart "corporal", was looking for an excuse to teach him a lesson - therefore Churchill and his cabinet appear on the scene as the most appropriate public figure.

          It is difficult to corner a country that lives on an unsinkable aircraft carrier when it is threatened ... by tank troops :) - would Britain be a continental power - they definitely would not last even a month (those warriors - remember how they dragged from Tobruk).
          If it were not for the English channel, arrogance would have diminished among the Britons.

          Prin’s raid on Skappa Flow was a click on the nose, Dunkirk became a slap in the face, but the battle for Britain had a great influence on the mood, the Britons believed in themselves, although the battle for the Atlantic almost cost them a victory ...
          Unlike the ground forces, the British fleet basically fought excellently, boldly, inventively, and initiatively. The Royal Air Force as a whole also solved its tasks - it was these components that did not leave Germany a chance to win.

          Few people want to fight, but here either there is a will to resist (Great Britain) or not (France).
      2. 0
        18 September 2019 14: 11
        Quote: DimerVladimer
        That is, from the sources cited, it is clear that Hitler made a mistake - superficially assessing the change in public opinion and changes in the composition of the ruling cabinets in Great Britain and France: I mean, the appearance on the stage of such figures as Churchill, Daladier and other supporters of tough measures after the failure of the policy of "appeasement "

        Hitler made a mistake earlier - accepting Chamberlain's pacification policy for Britain's desire to surrender. While Chamberlain himself wrote in the late 30s that a policy of appeasement was needed only to restore British armed forces before the World War II. That is, it was a policy purely for peacetime. If the war had already begun, then no one planned to give up.
    5. 0
      18 September 2019 20: 01
      Quote: Olgovich
      He did not care where Hitler went to the South, East or to the Moon.

      Chamberlain would not agree with you. At a time when a serious industrial force began to rise on the continent, represented by the USSR, England was vitally interested in creating the conditions for the weakening of this force. England in those days was about the same world leader as the United States today. And so her guarantees weighed a lot. Another thing is that England itself did not want to fight for anyone, but sought to manipulate European states in its interests. Its main interest on the continent was the condition when in Europe there were no real strong states comparable with England, especially with communist ideology. The results of the first five-year periods showed that the development of the USSR was going much faster than they desired. So she began to fuss about the outbreak of war in Europe, in which England, together with the United States, decided to use German National Socialism as the main penetrating force.
      Quote: Olgovich
      The West trusted the USSR with its Comintern (then ISIS) not
      much more than Germany.

      You are partly right. In the European crisis of the late 30s, there were no "herbivores" in Europe, including the USSR. Here, to live with wolves .... not to carrots ... But according to the unanimous opinion of the "carnivores" of that time, such as Churchill and Roosevelt, the leadership of the USSR consistently and purposefully stood on the positions of the interests of their country. That is why they won ... Poland, at the end of the 2nd Republic, dangled in her affections like a flower in an ice-hole. Encouraging domestic nationalism, striving to rip everything she could reach from her neighbors, she earned herself a reputation as "the vilest of the vile." The result is logical. But today it is on the same track. Looks like they have difficulties with self-education there. laughing
      1. 0
        19 September 2019 06: 38
        Quote: Den717
        At a time when a serious industrial force began to rise on the continent, represented by the USSR, England was vitally interested in creating the conditions for the weakening of this force.

        The USSR was not a competitor to England, did not lay claim to its markets.

        You don’t tell, what did England further plan after the Nazi campaign, allegedly directed by her, to the east. A defeat of the USSR would lead to the repeated strengthening of Germany .

        And England understood this perfectly and she needed it least of all. ... And it helped US, and did not "direct" us to the East.

        Chamberlain would like to listen in a direct oven.
      2. +2
        23 September 2019 20: 47
        Quote: Den717
        Encouraging domestic nationalism, trying to tear from neighbors everything that she could reach

        I have another question, why didn’t Vladislav Rachkevich shoot himself in the Warsaw bunker at the end of September 1939?
        1. 0
          23 September 2019 20: 58
          Quote: Oleg (Kharkov)
          I have another question, why Vladislav Rachkevich did not shoot himself

          And what is this fruit famous for besides the fictitious presidency of a non-existent country? He commanded the AK branch? knocked out a tank? Sang the Bombrowski Mazurka to Eric von Dem Bahu? A miserable, insignificant person. I don’t even know why he is so interesting to you?
  5. +1
    18 September 2019 07: 16
    "It is possible that it was these kilometers that saved Moscow from a fall in 1941."
    Mussolini's Balkan adventure saved Moscow.
    1. +3
      18 September 2019 08: 27
      Moscow in October 1941 was saved by a whole "bouquet": the heroism of our army, and the adventurism of the Fuhrer, and the miscalculations of the German generals-designers of the Barbarossa, and the help that had already gone through the "Lend-Lease", and the diversion of Guderian's group to Kiev, and ... much more, but the Balkan adventure of the spring of 1941 also seriously affected. But the courage and heroism of the Red Army is what is paramount !!! I do not take the weather conditions into account - the weather affected both sides equally. Do you agree?
      1. 0
        18 September 2019 10: 30
        We must add the defeat of the Japanese at Khalkhin Gol. After him, Japan "turned" to the south and the Headquarters was able to transfer the Far East divisions for a counter-strike.
        1. +1
          18 September 2019 12: 32
          Khalkhin-Gol is accepted, but Japan's "turn" to the south - here, in my opinion, until October-November, the Japanese could not determine for sure themselves. However, I will not say for sure - I am incompetent in this ...
          1. +1
            18 September 2019 13: 09
            Indeed, the Emperor gave the official go-ahead for the attack on Pearl Harbor on December 1st, when the fleet was already en route. The attack itself was being developed since the spring of 1941. So the Japanese really made up their minds somewhere in September / early October - which coincides with the failure of the German blitzkrieg strategy.
            The role of Khalkhin Gol is that the Japanese did not attack the USSR after June 22. Most likely because the main direction of Expansion had already been determined and they did not see the point of "linking up" to the unpromising northern direction. In the south there were "ownerless" colonies, oil and other raw materials, in the north there was only forest ...
    2. +4
      18 September 2019 08: 38
      Quote: Nycomed

      Mussolini's Balkan adventure saved Moscow.

      Well, you, it was saved by the heroic resistance of Luxembourg and Denmark. Joke. So the Serbs still believe that they saved Moscow, as much as 12 days resisting the Wehrmacht ...
      Quote: Olgovich
      But before it, Russia managed to agree with them on joint defense, but the USSR

      Was it possible to agree or had to fulfill the duties of the debtor and the patient?
      Quote: Olgovich
      The West trusted the USSR with its Comintern (then ISIS) not much more than Germany.

      If the Comintern is, in your terminology, an analogue of ISIS (a terrorist organization is banned in the Russian Federation), and the CPSU (b) is essentially one of its branches before the war, does this mean that the USSR is a terrorist state?
      1. +1
        18 September 2019 08: 43
        And the Balkans does not mean Serbs. It is only the Serbs who think that the Balkans are just them.
      2. -2
        18 September 2019 09: 53
        Quote: Moore
        So the Serbs still believe that they saved Moscow, as much as 12 days resisting the Wehrmacht ...

        Not saved, but delayed the attack on the USSR is a fact
        Quote: Moore
        Was it possible to agree or had to fulfill the duties of the debtor and the patient?

        comparison of English / French losses in WWI and WWII clearly
        meet
        Quote: Moore
        If the Comintern is, in your terminology, an analogue of ISIS (a terrorist organization is banned in the Russian Federation),

        Let me remind you: The main goal of creating the Comintern (Communist International) was to spread the socialist revolutions around the world.
        To build communism, the proletariat must become the master of the world, conquer it. But you can’t think that this can be achieved only with the movement of a finger. To achieve our tasks need bayonets and rifles.
    3. 0
      18 September 2019 08: 43
      Quote: Nycomed
      "It is possible that it was these kilometers that saved Moscow from a fall in 1941."
      Mussolini's Balkan adventure saved Moscow.

      What is it like?)
      1. +1
        18 September 2019 09: 05
        Read, estimate on time and everything will become clear.
        1. 0
          18 September 2019 10: 57
          I'm afraid you need to read. For example, the directive 20 of the Wehrmacht from 40
          1. -1
            18 September 2019 11: 07
            I don’t want, besides it’s not me, but you asked me a question. I have no questions.
            1. +1
              18 September 2019 11: 20
              Advice to read instead of the minimum argumentation of the unfounded statement, it came from you.
              Read the real story and not bearded Internetnails rooted in Sovagitprop
              1. 0
                18 September 2019 11: 27
                That's what what, and I have never been a fan of agitprop.
      2. -1
        18 September 2019 13: 42
        Quote: Town Hall
        Not saved, but delayed the attack on the USSR is a fact


        So you think that Hitler’s offensive, if it started earlier, would be fatal for Moscow?
        I doubt that in the spring thaw, in general, it would have been possible to advance the divisions by any significant distance :)
        At least not earlier than May. Since the capacity of the roads of the USSR was no luck for the Red Army and unfortunately for Germany




        On our roads, and wheeled-tracked sometimes skidded and horse-drawn :)

        And the blitzkrieg required a maneuver - bypassing the centers of resistance that are tied to large road junctions.
        Therefore, in the spring autumn thaw - offensives develop extremely slowly.
        1. +1
          18 September 2019 14: 04
          Quote: DimerVladimer
          Quote: Town Hall
          Not saved, but delayed the attack on the USSR is a fact

          I did not write such garbage)
    4. 0
      28 September 2019 21: 51
      Quote: Nycomed
      Mussolini's Balkan adventure saved Moscow.

      Probably still the sacrifice of Soviet patriots.
  6. +3
    18 September 2019 07: 16
    Why did Poland die?
    She died at the moment when her ruling elite ceased to feel "the ground under their feet" and their desires were no longer compared with their capabilities, and they also believed in the help of France and England.
  7. +4
    18 September 2019 07: 21
    In Brest-Litovsk there was not a joint "parade", but a very subtly executed humiliation of Hitler in the style of Stalin, and along with Guderian. Look carefully at the photo - some Germans and next to the Aryan general Guderian there is a Soviet brigade commander (colonel) Jew Krivoshein! That is, Stalin, and after all, without his participation in the development of the plan, tank columns did not go, very subtly hinted to Hitler about the price of everything that was happening and at the same time showed the importance of this "show" for the people of the future. What's the "parade"? Humiliation! As well as the fact that the general of the tank forces Krivoshein took Berlin in 1945, this is not a mere coincidence. Comrade Stalin, the great political poker player, did not allow simple coincidences. It was the “great player” who beat the great political cheats.
  8. +2
    18 September 2019 08: 29

    3 September 1939 Hitler, in the presence of Ribbentrop, receives the new USSR Plenipotentiary Envoy to Berlin Shkvartsev, as well as the USSR military attache Purkayev.


    Captured Polish soldiers.


    Coordination of the promotion of the Red Army with German representatives.
  9. +1
    18 September 2019 09: 04
    Why did Poland die? I’ll tell you right away - because I stood on the distinction between Russians and the rest. She was between, like the Slavs, but like not, Catholics ... You can’t sit on two chairs.
    1. 0
      18 September 2019 12: 36
      No, the point is not in the Catholic faith, but in the fact that the Poles have become a puppet in the hands of others ... And, starting from the 17 century, they did well, that’s all wrong and everything’s wrong! Even their power was dropped ...
  10. +1
    18 September 2019 09: 25
    At the same time he signed an agreement with Berlin, Molotov with one stroke of a pen ended the war in the Far East. In Tokyo, this non-aggression pact made a stunning impression. In Japan, they decided that Germany had so far postponed plans for a war with the USSR. The fighting on Halkin-Gol ends, Tokyo makes a strategic decision on the offensive in the south (colonies and possessions of the Western powers).
    At that time it was a brilliant move by Stalin and the Soviet government, only enemies, Russophobes and our liberal democrats can spew out slanderous lies against the Molotov-Ribentrop Pact. The most important thing was the war with Japan was terminated; all Western countries and the United States still cannot forgive Stalin.
    1. +1
      18 September 2019 12: 22
      At that time it was a brilliant move by Stalin and the Soviet government,

      Especially vividly this "genius" became visible on 22 of June 1941 of the year.
      1. +3
        18 September 2019 12: 44
        Yes and no. It's just that there is a whole complex of reasons, but German disinformation turned out to be on top. Plus, the machinations of the Trotskyists and other enemies at all levels of the Red Army ... And Comrade Stalin himself believed in what he wanted to see and desire! ...
        PS Gentlemen! We remember June 22, 1941 for the billionth time, but for some reason we do not say that Roosevelt "missed" Pearl Harbor too ... And the British, with their all-knowing superintelligence, missed May 1940 ...
      2. +2
        18 September 2019 16: 16
        Quote: Arzt
        Especially vividly this "genius" became visible on 22 of June 1941 of the year.

        Nobody here and does not argue, but if there was a second front with Japan, then we would be "crazy".
        1. 0
          18 September 2019 18: 55
          Nobody here and does not argue, but if there was a second front with Japan, then we would be "crazy".

          I agree, but the question is different. In Moscow, negotiations were underway between the USSR and France and England on military cooperation. Continuing to lead them, the USSR enters into an agreement with Germany. The British and French are in shock. Everyone else too.
          1. +2
            18 September 2019 23: 37
            Well, given that the delegation in Moscow had NO authority at all and was dragging out time, and the fact that the time limit was almost exhausted, Stalin signed an agreement with Germany.
      3. 0
        28 September 2019 21: 57
        Quote: Arzt
        This "genius" became especially vivid on June 22, 1941

        Or maybe Hitler's treachery on June 22 made the Japanese fear that after the USSR Germany would attack Japan itself. And precisely because of Stalin's ostentatious gullibility, on June 22, Japan waited for the USSR to bleed the German army to take its share to the Omsk meridian, keeping its troops intact ..
  11. +2
    18 September 2019 11: 34
    Bad article. Even comment laziness.
  12. +1
    18 September 2019 13: 49
    Quote: Andrey Zhdanov-Nedilko
    No, the point is not in the Catholic faith, but in the fact that the Poles have become a puppet in the hands of others ... And, starting from the 17 century, they did well, that’s all wrong and everything’s wrong! Even their power was dropped ...

    Puppets are all to one degree or another. And in what I agree with you - they miscalculated their power.
  13. +1
    18 September 2019 16: 19
    Died by the "Hyena of Europe". Poland did not die - the Russians saved it. Not the Americans, not the British, not even the French. And some people should at least start to squeeze out of themselves, drop by drop, the servility of the "Hyena of Europe", because history tends to repeat itself. I am sure that Russians have many friends in Poland.
    1. The comment was deleted.
  14. 0
    21 September 2019 20: 09
    I am more and more inclined to think that in general Nazism was originally an Anglo-Saxon project, though it later got out of the control of its creators! The goal was the domination of the Anglo-Saxons in Europe by playing off their main competitors - Germany and Russia, Poland, located between them, was just a "bargaining chip" - it is quite possible that its pro-English elite was actually pursuing an anti-Polish policy! Indeed, for the Anglo-Saxons, the main thing was not the greatness of Poland, but to play off Germany and Russia! We could be convinced of the treacherous position of the elites of their own states on the example of the late USSR and present-day Ukraine! They act in the selfish interests of their members, AGAINST the interests of their peoples, their states!
    England and France subordinate to it were DIRECTLY INTERESTED in bleeding Germany and the USSR!
    And we took and outplayed them, concluding the Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact! I admire him more and more (despite howls from abroad and internal "common people")! At first it seemed to me - this Pact - just delayed the Great Patriotic War for two years and gave us additional territory, read more literature - it became clear that we managed to SPLIT THE IMPOSED ANTI-SOVIET COALITION, forcing potential aggressors to fight among themselves! But the history that preceded it clearly shows - in what a shithole we lived! And the "victim of aggression" Poland WAS THE AGGRESSOR ITSELF! And the West was not even interested in "pacifying" Hitler, but in PUTTING HIM ON THE USSR, and the Pact destroyed it all, and Hitler attacked, first of all, not on us, but on THEm! But - I am absolutely sure of this - if we had not signed this Pact - England and France, or we would have been "the third rejoicing" in the mutually exhausting war between Hitler's Germany and the USSR (there could be no question of any alliance with them), or DIRECTLY BECAME ALLIES OF HITLER IN HIS ATTACK ON THE USSR! And since we signed the Pact, everything did not go according to their script, and they showed the world their treacherous essence! The betrayal of Czechoslovakia before that, it seems, had not been noticed in the world, BUT (!) Further - more: they promised to help the Poles - they did not provide it, the same thing - with Finland, which fought with the USSR, France, which itself betrayed everyone, was itself betrayed England - this is already some kind of betrayal squared! And they tried to betray us, feeding us breakfasts about the opening of the Second Front until 1944, which was opened not being afraid of Hitler, but of the fact that we would occupy all of Europe WITHOUT THEM! Even the United States was betrayed by England - there is information that Churchill knew in advance exactly and specifically about the impending Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, which was unexpected for the Americans!
  15. 0
    2 October 2019 11: 26
    "Hyena" of Europe got what it deserves
  16. +1
    17 October 2019 22: 19
    “The Polish-German war revealed the internal failure of the Polish state. During the ten days of the war of military operations, Poland lost all of its industrial areas and cultural centers. Warsaw, as the capital of Poland, does not exist anymore. The Polish government broke up and shows no signs of life. This means that the Polish state and its government have virtually ceased to exist. ”


    In 10 days from June 22 to July 2, we also lost more than one Poland on our territory, if we compare by area. The length of Poland from west to east is about 600 km. It is in modern borders. In the 39th it was 200-300 km more.

    We often laugh at Poland, they say she could not provide decent resistance to Hitler in 1939.
    But one must be more objective and honest with oneself. In the 41st we were no better - after 2 weeks of the war the Germans were already standing near Smolensk.
    And so that they would not throw eggs at me, for those who did not understand, by "we" I mean our "skillful" leadership and readiness for war.
    The feat of ordinary soldiers and commanders does not dispute.

    For reference, the Belarusian strategic defensive operation:
    Duration: 18 days. (June 22 - July 9, 1941)
    The width of the front of hostilities: 450-800 km.
    Depth of retreat of Soviet troops: 450-600 km.