Atrocity propaganda
(media.kotakuinaction2.win)
Comments (90)
sorted by:
SupremeReader, one of our best contributors who unfortunately went mad as a Pole due to the Ukraine war that the West provoked, used to get very angry when I pointed out to him that the British and the Americans covered up the Katyn massacre - and even threatened the Polish government in exile to stop complaining about it.
There are no good guys in politics. None.
But Britain totally entered the war to save Poland. That's why they didn't lift a finger when Germany invaded, made sure that they didn't have to declare war on the Soviet Union when they did and immediately sold out half of Europe to Communist terror rule.
Just good guys doing good guys things.
Britain and France entered the war to maintain the balance of power. Poland was a pretext. Everybody knows that.
When you can't handle one foe, it is not wise to add another one to the list. That is also why they decided against attacking Baku in order to sabotage the USSR's attack on Finland,
You mean after the war?
No. That decision was already made during the war. Poland was a sacrificial pawn to force Germany into a war.
Germany deciding to invade Poland with the Soviets was a ploy to force Germany into a war? The decision they made?
Ok.
Germany invaded Poland as Poland refused any and all peaceful resolutions to the corridor question because Britain and France gave them a guarantee. Hitler was actually willing to cede the eastern territories in exchange for a corridor to East Prussia. So yes it was a ploy to force a war.
Germany allied with the Soviet Union as Germany wasn't anywhere ready for a war. If the war with Poland had dragged on too long Germany would've actually run out of supplies. If Britain and France had decided to invade when they declared war Germany would've collapsed in a matter of months.
Sounds like that's an argument for that decision having prolonged the war, but Poland has every right not to cede territory to anyone. Still not on board blaming Britain and France for Germany's decision to invade Poland.
That decision is the primary reason for the war.
Hitler didn't want Poland to cede any territory. He would have ceded the German territories in exchange for a corridor to East Prussia. They refused and in the end lost everything.
And besides a nation also has every "right" to take back its occupied territories.
If you tell someone "we'll support you no matter what" you involve yourself directly and then you are at the very least partially responsible for their actions. Whether you like it or not. Britains guarantee made sure that Poland would refuse any and all peaceful resolutions to the corridor problem and thus it directly caused an escalation.
I don't wanna take on his argument for him, but I agree with the original statement: pawn. A piece that you sacrifice. Britain wasn't going to save Poland, but they were willing to use it as a reason to go to war with Germany. As well you'd expect. Going to war with Germany was an existential risk for Britain. They wouldn't do it to save Poland's ass, and I don't think you'd expect them to. So Britain must've thought it was just as well for them to go to war with Germany.
Which specific decision are you referring to?
The decisions made at Tehran and Yalta. And the decision to supply the Soviet Union. They never intended to save Poland. They could've easily done so by actually making good on their promise when the war began, which is the reason why Poland steadfastly refused any and all peaceful resolutions with Germany but they decided to do nothing and watch.
Duh. Both are just Realpolitik. You think they're supplying Ukraine out of the goodness of their hearts? Or for that matter, that they supplied anti-Soviet Nazis and mass murderers in the aftermath of WW2 because they had sympathy for Nazis?
Now you have arrived at a valid criticism. Their 'strategy', such as it was, was appallingly bad. Actually, the French had promised Poland an offensive into Germany. So they stepped in, took 200 meters of land (or something, it was notional), then withdrew. This even though Germany's western border was close to being undefended.
They thought they could strangle Germany with a blockade like they did in WW1.
Yes. But the official WW2 narrative is a fairy tale and that's precisely what I'm attacking.
And they probably didn't want to have to deal with the Soviet Union. In any case they were unbelievable retarded and that's pretty much the only reason why Germany was as successful as it was.
I was thinking about him the other day. Wonder what he's doing now.
I hope he's doing well. He wasn't doing too good when last we spoke.
The Allies knew from the beginning who the perpetrators of the Katyn Massacre were. They would've kept that lie going if it weren't for Ray Madden.
Actually, they'd have kept that lie going until they suddenly 'discovered' that it was the Soviets all along when the Cold War started. In 1948 or something.
Like they suddenly discovered that Saddam Hussein using chemical weapons was Very Bad when they wanted to justify a war against him... when at the time he was using them, they were supporting him with arms and satellite data, and even covering for his use of those very same chemical weapons.
They were covering him because it was our chemical weapons.
This is why I always had a problem with people just asserting that there were no WMD's in Iraq. Of course there were. They were our WMDs. It was Rumsfeld who sold it to him!
Lo and Behold, we found them, covered it up, and let several NBC servicemen get injured and be uncompensated for trying to dispose of the weapons in a safe manner. The NBC guys were eventually helped after the federal courts had to step in and stop the VA from covering up the injuries.
Your incoherent ranting has no point and I don't respect it.
Madden Commission in the 50s. That's why I mentioned him.
I didn't know about that, but it's interesting that it turned out that they did it when the Cold War started. Of course, you don't exactly have to be a genius to figure that out.
The Nuremburg Judges were going to prosecute Wehrmacht officers for Katyn (at the insistence of the Soviets) until the OSS and MI6 unofficially informed the Allied judges that the identity of the Katyn perpetrators was an open secret and had been for years. The Nuremburg trials, as a whole, were decried as show trials at the time by respectable legal experts all over the world, but that has been memory holed.
Who are the legal experts you're talking about. I know H.L.A. Hart thought prosecution was appropriate.
Here is a fairly neutral write-up. Interestingly (I'm having trouble finding sources atm), much of the contemporary criticisms around Nuremburg came from folk involved in setting up the Tokyo Tribunal. They felt that they needed to do a better job establishing proper legal principles than what came out of Nuremburg.
Thanks, I love this sort of review article. I'll look into it.
The Gulf Wars banked on the fact that Americans hadn't the slightest clue what was going on with Iraq. Not that they should have a reason to. But Americans aren't gonna remember and care, for instance, that Saddam used to be the USA's friend. Or which ones are the "good guys" over there. Actually, you can pretty much just tell Americans, that one wants to get Israel. And Saddam did want that.
Another war the world was clearly lied into by the mainstream media?
I didn't realize this was a real or at least apocryphal thing
The ending of an awful WW1 movie called Passchendaele has a Canadian soldier end up crucified by an artillery shell.
Had no idea it was at least partially based on true events.
I always thought the whole scene was retarded.
Good thing that the Germans had been committing atrocities since the first day they entered Poland.
Well at least they waited until they invaded unlike Poland who waged war on every single one of it's neighbors and treated every minority like absolute dogshit in the interim period of WW1 and WW2.
Poland didn't treat its minorities right? Wait till you hear about how the Germans treated minorities... and majorities in the lands they conquered.
This is the WW2-era equivalent of pro-Confederate people saying they dislike Lincoln because he was allegedly a racist.
Not really, no. I'm just pointing out that Poland was*nt some poor innocent victim.
Poland and most of the Slavic countries spent the majority of their existence either being invaded by Muslims, Germans/ Prussians, Asians, Austrians, or being mass enslaved by the same. They spent the 200 years before WW2 as a territory war, and then when finally getting independence after WW1 they fought Soviet bolsheviks…
The entirety of Europe spend most of their existence being invaded and doing the invading themselves. What's your point?
Who did Poland invade?
Western Kievan Rus territories after Rus was hit hard by mongols and Russia during the Time of Troubles.
I assume you meant to say 'was not'.
I also assume that everyone knows that there are no good guys in politics. Also, you've been complaining about what was done to Poland by the Soviets. I assume it's also 'not some poor innocent victim' when discussing the Katyn massacre or communist terror? The fact that Poland was not 'some poor innocent victim' (like no country is), doesn't justify anyone else's depredations.
Yes, I mistyped.
Have I? I'd say I've been complaining about Germany being blamed for things they haven't done. And that Poland was used as a sacrificial pawn to start a war.
But it calls the official WW2 narrative into question.
The things that have been known for decades? Alright.
So Poland was a poor, innocent victim?
What is the 'official narrative' and which part do you call into question? Is there a Department of Official Narratives somewhere? I guess the USSR had an official narrative, though you probably wouldn't be happy to know what it is.
Is that a serious question? Next you're going to ask me what the official narrative about the Ukraine-Russia war is.
LMAO! You actually blamed Poland!
They were literally invaded by the Bolsheviks, fought with German troops to defend their border, defeated the Red Army at the Battle of The Vistula, then had issues with Germany refusing to leave. It was such an enemy to it's neighbors that all of it's neighbors that weren't Russia and Germany signed a mutual non-aggression treaty called the Warsaw Accord. Finland didn't sign the treaty because Germany pressured them not to, because even prior to the Nazis, Germany didn't want peace breaking out in Eastern Europe.
Poland was at war with Ukraine, Lithuania, Czechoslovakia, Germany and the Soviet Union during the interim period. You can pretend that all of them were defensive wars but Józef Piłsudski wasn't exactly known for his non-expansionist views.
Neither Lithuania nor Czechoslovakia signed it. Finland, Latvia and Estonia weren't and still aren't direct neighbors and weren't involved in wars with Poland.
Finland isn't a neighbor of Poland and had no reason to sign that accord. The Fins didn't want to align with the Baltics. Germany at the time had absolutely no leverage to pressure anyone into anything. They couldn't even stop Poland from annexing Upper Silesia.
Like I already stated Germany was incapable of doing anything at the time. The economy was in the toilet, the military basically non-existent, partially occupied and was actively being bled dry by the Treaty of Versailles.
You're crying about the scramble for territory with the fall of the Russian Empire, and you ignore Germany's aggression for it's German unification movement, along with the Bolsheviks invasion of all of Eastern Europe, and you ignore the major German military effort in response to that very action because "Germany was incapable of doing anything". idiocy.
Germany has never been incapable of doing anything. That's actually kind of the problem with them.
What exactly are you talking about? There was no German aggression during the Weimar Republic.
But I don't ignore it. Neither did Hitler. That's why he wanted an alliance with Poland and the rest of Europe against the Soviet Union as he was very aware of the threat the Bolsheviks posed. That's why he invaded in 1941. To eliminate that threat before it couldn't be stopped anymore.
Okay, tell me of that "major German military effort" during the Weimar Republic. Because I know of none. It is kinda difficult to do much with a little over 100k soldiers and no heavy equipment to speak of while your most important industrial region is occupied by hostile forces.
You seem to have a serious hate boner for Germany. Are you Polish by any chance? That would at least explain it.
You don't know anything about the German Unification movement, so you try deflect to Weimar. I'm not even sure you've heard of it. You don't know anything about the Interwar Period, so you assume that the German government just never involved itself in those wars taking place to it's immediate east. Because you don't know anything about the Interwar Period, you are assuming there wasn't a damn good reason why the Poles didn't tolerate a German """"alliance""". Here's a hint: it's for the same reason Stalin shouldn't have tolerated a German """alliance""".
I don't have a hate boner for Germany, I just don't take every piece of Nazi propaganda as gospel truth. You're not even historically equipped to talk about this.
Fortunately I have you to teach me. Unfortunately you're one of those individuals who refuse to bring forth any arguments backed up with anything.
If with "German Unification movement" you mean the desire to get their own lost territories back, that wasn't a movement. That was a universal desire. Which isn't exactly surprising.
Also I never said that the Weimar Republic never involved themselves. I said they were incapable of doing anything. To be fair I should've added "of significance" to that statement but I guess I thought the context made that clear. Germany wasn't a position to economically or militarily influence anything. That's why the conflict in Oberschlesien involved the Freikorps and not the Reichswehr. It's also one of the reasons why Hitler was elected in the first place.
But if you wanna pretend Poland is just a poor victim who dindu nuthing and isn't responsible for her own stupidity and was always just bullied by the big bad mean Germans and Russians, okay, I won't press you further on it as you're not interested in an honest discussion.
And look how that turned out for Poland. You'd think at that point you'd ask yourself what could I've done better to avert such an outcome but nah. Better blame everyone else.
Oh, he didn't. He just underestimated Hitler and couldn't fathom that he would fuck up his plans. Stalin created the by far largest standing army in the entire world by sacrificing millions of Russian lives for a reason. And here's a hint: That reason wasn't defense.
Poland was such a belligerent neighbor that they actually invaded Czechoslovakia together with the Germans in March 1939, they captured a small chunk of Sudetenland that they fought over with the Czechs years prior.
Hilariously, Putin mentioned that in passing during the infamous Carlson interview, which caused an utter meltdown in Czech media. I remember one article on novinky.cz by Alex Švamberk (a retard with a freakishly large head, hairy neck, and a total lack of knowledge of literally anything he writes about) where he spent about five paragraphs seething about how Putler is a Nazi and tries to rewrite history and Carlson should be jailed for platforming him, followed by a paragraph admitting that what Putin said was true, followed by several more paragraphs of unhinged seething. I hope that retard gets stabbed by a gypsy.
Such a belligerent neighbor that they had similar levels of aggression as the rest of Eastern and Central Europe.
What you're looking at is the inherent flaw of Progressive Nationalism. The claim that a government has an inherent obligation to represent all of an ethnic group, wherever that group may lie. If they are a majority of a region, then that land should fall under the control of a government. If they are a minority, then the government should step in to protect them. They may even offer duel citizenship to the ethnos within that political boundary, then claim that "discrimination" gives them the right to invade across that political boundary and claim it for themselves. Germany did all the same shit. As you noticed, sometimes in the same place at the same time.
Poland's rush for land and power after having come into existence is what it is, but it's also not too different from what happens when any other countries emerge from the collapse of empires, and it also not an excuse to start making ridiculous claims that Germany was the international dindu nuffin.
If you really want to argue that Progressive Nationalism is the problem, then fine, but blame Progressive Era Leftism and Woodrow Wilson.
That's just back-neck hair. He needs to go to a different barber.
This is how fucking stupid you are.
First of all, no one would call them "NatSocs" or "Nat Socks" as a historical term in the 1920's-1940's. Even "National Socialists" was clunky for the written word. After all, thier real name was the NSDAP. Or, in german:
Enhance.
Enhance.
ENHANCE!
MOTHER OF GOD
IT WAS IN THE NAME THE WHOLE TIME
That is how fucking stupid you are.
Also, David Irving is an explicit liar.
It's literally in the name you idiot.