In 1945 the British general staff assessed the possibility of war against the USSR for Poland and concluded it wasn't feasible. It was codenamed Operation Unthinkable.
this post was submitted on 07 Jan 2025
257 points (96.4% liked)
A Comm for Historymemes
1602 readers
537 users here now
A place to share history memes!
Rules:
-
No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia, assorted bigotry, etc.
-
No fascism, atrocity denial, etc.
-
Tag NSFW pics as NSFW.
-
Follow all Lemmy.world rules.
Banner courtesy of @setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
So it was thinkable π€
The British always had funny names for stuff. Their name for their super heavy tank design was Flying Elephant. Funnily enough, the German project of the same was named the Rat.
Explanation: Due to negotiations during WW2, it was agreed between the Western Allies and Stalin that Eastern Europe would be occupied by the USSR - including Poland, which had fought fiercely against the Nazis and against Soviet domination, and whose government-in-exile and partisans were a major ally of the Western powers. It is, understandably, still seen as a betrayal by many in Poland.
Poland was given large swaths of german land though. But it is funny that the war ended almost the same way it started - dividing eastern europe between west and russia. Just the "west" side changed from hitler to "allies".
It is, understandably, still seen as a betrayal by many in Poland.
??? Do you have a source that it was seen as a betrayal? Poland was under Soviet control before the war ended.
That's like French communist partisans that fought for 5 years being angry at the Soviets for selling France to the Western Allies.
You can't sell what you don't own.
The war in Europe started to protect Poland's sovereignty. Many Poles see Poland being left to communist influence as betrayal by the Allies. However, one could argue that the intention was to protect Poland from the Nazis, not from the Soviets. And additionally, the Soviets were allies of the Allies.
But as one person mentioned, at the very least Poland received land from the German territory, which is a huge deal so it probably assuaged the anger felt by many Poles. Also, the West had been very generous and welcoming to allow Poles to remain in their country for those who don't want to return to communist Poland. So yeah, the Poles were compensated in that regard.
To add to other links:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoney_War
Also Russia actually invaded Poland together with Germany:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pact
It was only after Hitler attacked Russia they switched sides and became allies to the West, but West let them keep the land they took.
To Poland events of world war 2 continued until 1989 when it finally escaped Russia's control.
Queue in tankies spouting slurs and *no russia saved the wurld *
I read that entire first article and nowhere does it claim the Polish people thought that the West sold them to Soviets.
"This [agreement on Poland] is so elastic that the Russians can stretch it all the way from Yalta to Washington without ever technically breaking it,β Admiral William Leahy, Chief of Staff to Franklin Roosevelt.
βI know, Bill, but it is the best I can do for Poland at this time,β Franklin Roosevelt.
It reiterated what I wrote: You can't sell what you don't own.
The other links are paywalled. But I can see the last one was written by Robert Novack- a notorious right wing journalist. He would write anything to make a Democrat look bad. In this case, FDR.
I read that entire first article and nowhere does it claim the Polish people thought that the West sold them to Soviets.
Clearly you didn't read it thoroughly enough. Early on in that first article:
For Poles, Balts, and many others in Central Europe, Yalta means a betrayal of their countries and the United Statesβ abandonment of its core values on the altar of Great Power politics; they (and Ukrainians) fear the United States will be tempted by a βsecond Yaltaβ in which Washington and Moscow make deals at their expense.
The author is talking for Poles without showing that's actually what Poles said.
It would be like saying "For French partisans, Yalta meant a betrayal by Soviets."
I claim a majority of Poles did not like Soviet rule but did not blame America because it was out of America's control.
The author is talking for Poles without showing thatβs actually what Poles said.
Then you admit that it did claim that the Polish people thought the West sold them to the Soviets, contrary to what you said.
But hey, here, have the Polish PM in exile's own words:
β(β¦) the decisions made by the βBig Threeβ were prepared and taken not only without the involvement of the Polish Government, but also without its knowing. This kind of behavior in relation to Poland is not only a denial of elementary principles which apply to allies, but it is an unquestionable violation of the letter and spirit of the Atlantic Charter and the right of everyone to defend his own interests. For this reason, the decisions taken at the Conference cannot be recognized by the Polish Government and cannot be binding upon the Polish Nation. The Polish Nation sees the detachment of the eastern lands by imposing the so-called Curzon Line as the Polish-Soviet border as a new partition of Poland, this time by Polish allies.β
Hell yeah brother. Fact check those fascists
Wouldn't really call it a sale considering that the Western powers never actually had control of Poland at any point.
The alternative would have been a brutal war with the USSR, given that the USSR had unilaterally asserted military and political control over Poland by the time negotiations began. Poland was also granted vast swathes of territory that had previously been part of Germany for centuries (approximately 1/4 of the pre-war territory of Germany, from which 12 million Germans were permanently expelled). So I'd have to argue they got a better deal than many other nationalities in the long run.
well they were "sold" at the Yalta Conference imo. but don't worry this Stalin guy seems like he's a strong trustworthy guy "because the Russians had greatly sinned against Poland", "the Soviet government was trying to atone for those sins" you know by completely controlling it as a buffer defense zone for WWIII
The βpriceβ, again, would have been war with the Soviets. While it may well have been beneficial to do so, you can look to Churchill to see how much public opinion there was behind the idea.
Yeah so why not avoid war by appeasement. Give Hitler France when we are at it shall we?
This is the fucked up part. Poles fought like demons for their freedom and got sold out. Now people say shit "oh we couldn't do anything else" when they actually mean "Poland wasn't worth it". Poland had mutual defense agreements that if followed through with, would've ended the war in 1940 with the French in Berlin. Then they got betrayed a second time in Yalta.
The real fucked up part was that the British made the Polish fighter pilots who fought and died for them in the Battle of Britain go back to their now-occupied country.
Much like them stiffing the people who helped them in Afghanistan.
Do you also believe the Soviet Union had a moral obligation to conquer France because of the communist French partisans that fought for 5 years?
And America didn't sign any of the pre war pacts with Poland that Britain and France signed. So you can blame France for not invading the Soviet Union to protect Polish democracy, but not America.
Yeah, the US waited out most of the war against fascism and only joined after victory was likely.
The US were much more cowards than traitors.
A significant percentage of the US voters were fascists before WW2.
Uh huh, great job rewriting history. The US are traitors, same as the UK and France. Fuck em all, one after the other. Your country sold out brothers in arms.
and what ideal utopia do you hail from friend?
every country has been or is being run by bastards at some point or another. your rage is poorly articulated and pathetically targeted.
Re writing history? The US did not sign a mutual defense pact with Poland. By definition they couldn't be a traitor to Poland.
By your definition, Poland is a traitor to Ukraine for only sending aid and not invading Russia to support Ukraine.
Might makes right, eh
Always has been.
Not at all?
Might makes it too costly in human lives and money. It has nothing to do with right or wrong.
Pretty much, yeah
In hindsight it's obvious that the allies should have betrayed USSR, overthrow their shit dictator and make them give back the countries they stole during WW2. But in 1945 everyone was so ready to stop fighting.
Even worse, we might have lost and that would've been a shitshow on a completely different level then.
Maybe they also saw what happened when Hitler tried to invade Russia. In my hindsight it's obvious why they made the choice they did. Trying to start a new invasion of the Soviet Union in 1945 would have been insane.
Okay buddy MacArthur
βthe Westβ?
I feel like the text doesn't go well with the image here. Norman Osborne is the bad guy in that movie. We're not supposed to think he's making a good point.
I mean, at this point in the movie he's not the bad guy, yet. He gives a report to the board about how things are going well in the company, and then is told that the board is effectively firing him, because they got a sweet offer to sell.
Poland is a bad guy. A cool bad guy.