# Hitler's Germany invades Poland... September 1, 1939



## v2 (Sep 1, 2012)

September 1, 1939 -- A DAY THAT SHOOK THE WORLD. As this vintage newsreel from British Pathe notes, the German invasion of Poland gave the world a new word, "blitzkrieg." Question: Who came to Poland's aid when she was so viciously attacked?

Germany invades Poland - British Pathé


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Sep 1, 2012)

Thanks for posting. An event that started a world tragedy.


----------



## evangilder (Sep 1, 2012)

To the brave Poles that fought hard against overwhelming odds, . It's a crying shame that Poland was abandoned in her time of need.


----------



## Vassili Zaitzev (Sep 1, 2012)




----------



## davebender (Sep 1, 2012)

France did. Unfortunately for Poland the newly constructed German West Wall fortress system worked as advertised, stopping the invasion so quickly that France could not create a breach for their army to pour through.


----------



## parsifal (Sep 1, 2012)

> Who came to Poland's aid when she was so viciously attacked?



Britain, her Commonwealth and empire and france and her empre declared war on Germany as a result of the german agression. The war was not resolved until 5 1/2 years later. It caused the French a humiliating defeat, abd broke the back of the British economy, for which she gained very little.

In 1944 when faced with the submersion of the Polish free state, Churchill did all that he could to try and save the democratic movement. By then Britains power was just about done, and it was beyond Britains abaility to save Poland from nearly 50 years of oppression. 

I always get a lump in the throat when reading about the destruction of Poland, and our inability to do anything about it. What happened in warsaw later in the war was an heroic tragedy


----------



## davebender (Sep 1, 2012)

*French Plan. *
West Wall defenses were strongest between Saarlouis and Saarbrucken.
French 4th Army would advance to Saarbrucken. This was probably a diversion to pin German defenders in place.
French 3rd and 5th Armies were to breach West Wall defenses North of Saarlouis and East of Saarbrucken and drive into Germany. 
.....Follow on French infantry would probably encircle German defenses between Saarlouis and Saarbrucken. Starve them out. 







*The Results.*
French 3rd Army appears to have advanced no futher then the border. 
French 4th Army advanced to the West Wall as planned.
French 5th Army attempt to breach German defenses east of Saarbrucken was a failure. 
.....Sustained about 2,000 casualties.
.....It appears the French Army did not comprehend how the German defensive system worked. Otherwise the attack would have begun with French combat engineers creating lanes in West Wall minefields for armored units to drive through.
.....Britain did not participate in the offensive and encouraged France to end the operation. That certainly factored into the French decision to quit rather then keep attacking.


----------



## Gnomey (Sep 1, 2012)

A day of infamy that will never be forgotten.


----------



## vikingBerserker (Sep 1, 2012)

I always wondered why the Allies went to war with Germany over this, but not Russia who also invaded them.


----------



## mikewint (Sep 1, 2012)

Let us not forget that the Poles also faced a second invasion. Soviet forces had been holding fast along their designated invasion points waiting for the conclusion of the 5 month long undeclared war with Japan. On 15 September 1939 the Ambassadors Molotov and Shigenori Togo completed their agreement ending the conflict. Now cleared of any "second front" threat from the Japanese, Soviet premier Joseph Stalin ordered his forces into Poland on 17 September. By this date, the Polish defense was already broken and the only hope was to retreat and reorganize along the Romanian Bridgehead. However, these plans were rendered obsolete nearly overnight, when the over 800,000 strong Soviet Red Army entered and created the Belarussian and Ukrainian fronts after invading the eastern regions of Poland in violation of the Riga Peace Treaty, the Soviet-Polish Non-Aggression Pact, and other international treaties, both bilateral and multilateral. Soviet diplomacy claimed that they were "protecting the Ukrainian and Belarusian minorities of eastern Poland since the Polish government had abandoned the country and the Polish state ceased to exist".
Polish border defense forces in the east consisted of about 25 battalions. Edward Rydz-Śmigły ordered them to fall back and not engage the Soviets. Some clashes and small battles still occurred, such as the Battle of Grodno, as soldiers and local population attempted to defend the city. The Soviets murdered numerous Polish officers, including prisoners of war. The Soviet invasion was one of the decisive factors that convinced the Polish government that the war in Poland was lost. Prior to the Soviet attack from the east, the Polish military's fall-back plan had called for long-term defense against Germany in the south-eastern part of Poland, while awaiting relief from a Western Allies attack on Germany's western border. 
Meanwhile, Polish forces tried to move towards the Romanian Bridgehead area, still actively resisting the German invasion. From 17–20 September, Polish armies Kraków and Lublin were crippled at the Battle of Tomaszów Lubelski, the second largest battle of the campaign. The city of Lwów capitulated on 22 September because of Soviet intervention; the city had been attacked by the Germans over a week earlier, and in the middle of the siege, the German troops handed operations over to their Soviet allies. 
Despite a Polish victory at the Battle of Szack, after which the Soviets executed all the officers and NCOs they had captured, the Red Army reached the line of rivers Narew, Bug River, Vistula and San by 28 September, in many cases meeting German units advancing from the other direction. Polish defenders on the Hel peninsula on the shore of the Baltic Sea held out until 2 October. The last operational unit of the Polish Army, surrendered after the four-day Battle of Kock near Lublin on 6 October marking the end of the September Campaign


----------



## davebender (Sep 1, 2012)

Isn't it obvious? 

Britain and France didn't declare war on Germany to save Poland. That was only a convenient a casus belli.


----------



## nuuumannn (Sep 2, 2012)

> Isn't it obvious?



Not really. Enlighten us, Dave. 

Do you actually have evidence to support your claim of a convenient casus belli?


----------



## Marcel (Sep 2, 2012)

evangilder said:


> To the brave Poles that fought hard against overwhelming odds, . It's a crying shame that Poland was abandoned in her time of need.


Let's not forget that Czechoslovakia was even more a crying shame. At least the UK and France declared war after Poland was invaded. The Czech's were left to their faith while the British celebrated "Peace for our Time".


----------



## parsifal (Sep 2, 2012)

nuuumannn said:


> Not really. Enlighten us, Dave.
> 
> Do you actually have evidence to support your claim of a convenient casus belli?



Its the latent claim that the real aggressors of WWII were the allies, particularly Britain. Germany was only acting defensively with Poles gettng in the way of her defensive bullets. if you beleive the first lie, than you should also believe that the Poles were guilty of starting WWII


----------



## nuuumannn (Sep 2, 2012)

Yes, Parsifal, I know; I was just wondering exactly what on Earth Dave was going to enlighten us all with


----------



## tyrodtom (Sep 2, 2012)

Casus belli is just a fancy latin expression for pretext or excuse for making war.
The League of Nations recconized three reasons as being legitimate for entering into a war. Defense of one's own territory, Fullfillment of a mutual defense treaty with another country who is attacked, or when approved by the League.
Britain and France had the treaty with Poland, so there was no casus belli, or excuse for war.

Now Germany had a casus belli, or excuse with the faked attack or the radio station at Gleiwitz.


----------



## davebender (Sep 2, 2012)

Several people on this forum are easily offended when discussing national politics and international diplomacy relating to WWII. So why don't we avoid that discussion and remain friends?


----------



## tyrodtom (Sep 2, 2012)

davebender said:


> Several people on this forum are easily offended when discussing national politics and international diplomacy relating to WWII. So why don't we avoid that discussion and remain friends?



You are the one who lead the discussion into this direction, as you often do. Thinking, I suppose, no one would challange your remarks.


----------



## davebender (Sep 2, 2012)

I didn't lead the discussion anywhere. I simply answered a question posted by another forum member.


----------



## tyrodtom (Sep 2, 2012)

davebender said:


> I didn't lead the discussion anywhere. I simply answered a question posted by another forum member.



The accuracy of that answer has lead this discussion into this direction. And when asked to the defend that answer you come up with a excuse .


----------



## mikewint (Sep 2, 2012)

Doesn't both sides in a war think that "RIGHT" is on their side? In a very real sense the Poles and others did "get in the way". Germany was being crushed by the Treaty of Versailles. Britian and France wanted super-powerdum and Germany wanted a piece of that pie too. Sooner or later the big boys on the block are going to duke it out to see who is the biggest and baddest big boy. There is plenty of blame to go around. Neither side wears a pure white hat


----------



## tyrodtom (Sep 2, 2012)

I'll have to disagree some with that mikewint, there was definitely wrong and right at stake in WW2, but the Allies muddied the issue by having to choose the lesser of two evils by taking Stalin as a partner.
I think the world would be in far worse a state if the Germany had be given free rein to accomplish what they wanted. As bad as Stalin was to the people he had power over, Hitler would have been far worse.


----------



## Shortround6 (Sep 2, 2012)

True to some extent, but Britain and France had a signed treaty with Poland. It was not a secret, the Germans knew it existed. The British and French did not see Poland get attacked and think after a few weeks it was a good opportunity to go to war with Germany. The Germans ( or Hitler?) thought the British and French would NOT HONOR their treaty obligations. 
That is a rather different thing than what seems to be being implied here.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Sep 2, 2012)

davebender said:


> Several people on this forum are easily offended when discussing national politics and international diplomacy relating to WWII. So why don't we avoid that discussion and remain friends?



No, I think they are just offended by revisionist histories.

That goes for people on both sides of the coin (axis/allies).


----------



## parsifal (Sep 2, 2012)

mikewint said:


> Doesn't both sides in a war think that "RIGHT" is on their side? In a very real sense the Poles and others did "get in the way". Germany was being crushed by the Treaty of Versailles. Britian and France wanted super-powerdum and Germany wanted a piece of that pie too. Sooner or later the big boys on the block are going to duke it out to see who is the biggest and baddest big boy. There is plenty of blame to go around. Neither side wears a pure white hat



Of course it takes two to make a fight. However, by 1939, Germany was not being crushed by Versailles. Most of the elements of Versailles, and then some were repeated after the war in 1945, and Germany was not crushed under that additional load. Its a convenient excuse often used to pedal German innocence pre-1939. Germany was not innocent, and Versailles was not crushing Germany by 1939. Versailles crushed Weimar, but not Hitlers Germany. Hitler had systematically torn up the treaty restrictions 1935-8. Thats what led to the re-occupation of the Rhineland, Anschluss, German rearmament, Sudeten and finally the destruction of the Czech state. In 1939 Hitler wanted to bluff his way through yet again on the issue of Danzig and the Danzig corridor, but the Allies were in no mood to trust him any more. if the allies are guilty or reacting to help a friend and no longer allowing the germans to trample allover a neighbour, then Britain and France (and Australia, Canada, New Zealand and South Africa, as well as the territoies of the French and Britiah Empires) are all guilty as charged 

A corner had been turned with the destruction of the Czech nation. Whereas everything that had gone before that had some legitimacy about it. hitler crossed a line in March 1939 with the final destruction of Czechoislovakia. That was a transformation from legitimate restoration of national pride to overt acts of aggression and enslavement of neighbouring states and peoples. Thats the difference between Hitlers Germany and countries like Britain and France. Whatever their shortcomings, the western powers were not characterised by overt aggression and wars of conquest in Europe (outside Europe is a different story, but colonial oppression was also coming to an end thankfully) . By 1939, that was exactly what the Germans were (acting overtly aggressively and in contravention to the rules of the League in Europe), and therin lies the difference between Britain and France on the one hand, and germany on the other. and its why, Germany was responsible for causing the war. And finallyk, to try and restore this thread back to what it should be about, its what caused the Poles 6 years of hell, and a further 50 years of occupation.

If Germany had acted in the same way as Britain and France, ther would have not been a war.


----------



## psteel (Sep 6, 2012)

Wars are never about right and wrong, and almost always about strategic interests. The Right and Wrong is to mobilize the population to die for the cause. Britain and France became great powers by virtue of centuries of imperialistic aggression around the world. 
The last thing they wanted was some upstart European powers stealing those empires from them. That was the basis of WW-I, but in simplistic fashion it was also the basis of WW-II

The Axis on a simplistic level believed they were doing the same thing....or at least that was there POV. Hitler declared that he was going to do to Eastern Europe and Russia, what the USA had already done to the American continent...I believe Americans referred to it as “manifest destiny”.

Britain for its part, needed war to finance the arms build up, through emergency powers. The key problem was to not let German rebuild before it initiated a European wide war. Basic Allied strategy was to act defensively and let the Germans bash themselves to pieces through the Maginot line for a couple of years, while the allied combined airpower bombed the Germans back to the Stone age. So any help to Poland was mostly a symbolic gesture.


----------



## nuuumannn (Sep 10, 2012)

> Several people on this forum are easily offended when discussing national politics and international diplomacy relating to WWII.



I'm not easily offended by these things, Dave, I just think that what you are implying is a big pile of faeces and that you should know better than to believe the Nazis were innocent of the direct cause of WW2.

Geez, next you'll be claiming the Japanese were tricked into bombing Pearl Harbour...


----------



## stona (Sep 10, 2012)

psteel said:


> Britain for its part, needed war to finance the arms build up, through emergency powers.



Rubbish. Britain needed war like a hole in the head. You don't need a war to justify rearmament in a democratic state.The mere threat of war,an entirely different thing,suffices.

The idea that anyone but the usual lunatic fringe in Britain or France wanted a war with Germany is ridiculous. The Great War was still well within living memory and many of those countries leaders had fought in it. You could more reasonably argue that this led to a desperate urge to _avoid_ war,almost at any cost. The appeasement policies of the 1930s simply reflect this.

Germany was a different kind of State. Here is not the place to discuss the sophisticated and complicated methods used bythe NSDAP to infiltrate its way into the everyday life of the German people nor the way German youth was being militarised. 
As a simpler example the reaction of the average German,those that "went along" on the morning after "Kristallnacht" is revealing. Many threw stones at the remains of the shattered windows of Jewish businesses as they went to work.

Steve


----------



## DonL (Sep 10, 2012)

> Germany was a different kind of State. Here is not the place to discuss the sophisticated and complicated methods used bythe NSDAP to infiltrate its way into the everyday life of the German people nor the way German youth was being militarised.
> As a simpler example the reaction of the average German,those that "went along" on the morning after "Kristallnacht" is revealing. Many threw stones at the remains of the shattered windows of Jewish businesses as they went to work.
> 
> Steve



One of the most ridiculous statements I have read on this forum!

What do you want to imply stona?
What is your source.

From Neitzel and Momsen it is statistically proved from primary sources that the majority of the german people were dis gusted after and about the "Kristallnacht".
Next it is also statistically proved from primary sources that the majority of the german people didn't want war at summer 1939!

THe lost of WWI and the Versaille Treaty is a major impact, also the infiltration of the NSDAP but it is wrong and a myth that the majority of the german citizen wanted war or more worse were trigger-happy.

To me your statement and the message is completely wrong and plays in the same league as Dave statements about the german foreign policy.

Your statement has a touch of revisionist histories.


----------



## stona (Sep 10, 2012)

It's a quote from a victim. Part of an interview conducted for "The Nazis:A warning from history." I don't know if it got transmitted in the finished programme. Is that "primary" enough for you.
When further asked if a single person had expressed a condolence he paused and said,quietly "No,Noone".

Revisionism?

Stanley Baldwin November 1936.

" Supposing I had gone to the country and said that Germany was rearming and we must rearm, does anybody think that this pacific democracy would have rallied to that cry at that moment! I cannot think of anything that would have made the loss of the election from my point of view more certain..."

He said that,in a debate in the House of Commons when being needled by Churchill. I post it to make the point that in the UK we still had debates and politicians were still mindful of public opinion. This is not something you could say of Germany in November 1936. Germany had elected a regime which,to quote Churchill was going to lead Europe into a "new Dark Age made more sinister, and perhaps more protracted, by the lights of perverted science."
Or maybe they were just the victims of Anglo-French agression.

And Neville Chamberlain,on appeasement.

"It is not the duty of a Prime Minister to take his country into a war he believes it cannot win."

Steve


----------



## DonL (Sep 10, 2012)

I don't think that we must discuss about Nazi politics.
I don't deny your statement about german politics and the Nazi party!

But what makes me realy angry ist that:


> Germany was a different kind of State.





> As a simpler example the reaction of the average German,those that "went along" on the morning after "Kristallnacht" is revealing. Many threw stones at the remains of the shattered windows of Jewish businesses as they went to work.



This in context with your statement about the will of peace at France and GB implies the "normal" german citizen and the majority of the citizen were pro violence and pro war. But that's wrong proved from primary sources.
The normal citizen didn't do the politics at the third reich, so please make your statements about Nazi politics but don't paint such a picture about normal german people, because this is revisionist history!


----------



## michaelmaltby (Sep 10, 2012)

"... The normal citizen didn't do the politics at the third reich, so please make your statements about Nazi politics but don't paint such a picture about normal german people, because this is revisionist history ....!"

That is a fair point for a modern German to ask for, DonL, and one has to respect such a request ... but, one asks in return, that you, a modern German, acknowledge that the German people _bought Adolph Hitler and all that he was selling_ -- as a means of _reversing_ the disaster that had been WW1 -- to the ultimate destruction and discreditation of the German State in 1945.

Agreed?



MM


----------



## stona (Sep 10, 2012)

Those that "went along" was an expression used several times by people of that generation,sometimes to describe themselves.
Cheers
Steve


----------



## DonL (Sep 10, 2012)

> That is a fair point for a modern German to ask for, DonL, and one has to respect such a request ... but, one asks in return, that you, a modern German, acknowledge that the German people bought Adolph Hitler and all that he was selling -- as a means of reversing the disaster that had been WW1 -- to the ultimate destruction and discreditation of the German State in 1945.



I don't have in general a problem with this statement but I would formulate it more sophisticated.
At the end Hitler did a coup to get the whole power at germany and the army and the police were more pro Nazi and not democratic.
So I have my problems with "the German people" bought Adolf Hitler!

Reichstagswahl 31 Juli 1932 NSDAP 37,4 %
Reichstagswahl 06 November 1932 NSDAP 33,1 %

This was the last free vote.
So you can say 1/3 of the voter bought Adolf Hitler and the Nazis but as you know voters are not eligible voter, so you can't say 1/3 of the german citizen bought Adolf Hitler. 
So you can do the interpretation but it is a myth that the majority of the german people were pro Hitler, pro violence and pro war!


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Sep 10, 2012)

nuuumannn said:


> I'm not easily offended by these things, Dave, I just think that what you are implying is a big pile of faeces and that you should know better than to believe the Nazis were innocent of the direct cause of WW2.
> 
> Geez, next you'll be claiming the Japanese were tricked into bombing Pearl Harbour...



Lets not resort to personal attacks. 

Personal attacks only lower the attackers own credibility. 

We have gone over this a thousand times!

And to everyone else: 

In the end I suggest that this thread gets back to the topic at hand, or I will close it, and then another interesting discussion will be ruined.


----------



## stona (Sep 10, 2012)

DonL said:


> So you can say 1/3 of the voter bought Adolf Hitler and the Nazis but as you know voters are not eligible voter, so you can't say 1/3 of the german citizen bought Adolf Hitler.



That is about the same percentage of the electorate than typically vote for the party that forms the government in the UK. Around 10m votes will get you in to represent all 60m of us.

Noone is claiming that the majority of German people were pro-violence,pro-war or even pro-nazi. They did what people everywhere tend to do,they just keep their heads down,and try and get on with their lives. It's a sort of apathy that can be dangerous,even in a democracy. 
Many people deny direct knowledge of what was going on whilst admitting to having at least a feeling. You have a useful word "ahnung" which is often used. 

Of course when confronted with direct evidence,like the lady in the film who had signed her denunciation of a lesbian neighbour to the "Gestapo", things get a bit more difficult. She couldn't deny her own signature. That neighbour died in Ravensbruck. It is difficult for us now to understand the insidious influence of the nazi state on its citizens.

Steve


----------



## nuuumannn (Sep 10, 2012)

> Lets not resort to personal attacks.



Sorry Moderator. It wasn't intended as an attack against Dave personally, just against what he was implying.


----------



## meatloaf109 (Sep 11, 2012)

Sept. 11, 1939, FDR writes Mr. Chamberlain a personal note. It hearlds what will become known as "Lend-lease"


----------



## parsifal (Sep 11, 2012)

I dont think the majority of germans supported war, I dont think the majority of Germans were pro Nazi either, in the sense that the Nazis wanted war. Most germans in the early 30's wanted relief from the economic hardships of the depression , they also wanted some justice (as they saw it) from the humiliation of Versaille.

In the beginning Hitler worked to those aspirations. Using an essentially keynesian economic model, Hitler got germany working again......and then gradually many of those workers were tranferred to armament production, a subtle but dangerous shift . 

Hitler at the same time worked to right the perceived "injustices" brought about by Versailles. Whether Versailles was in fact an injustice or not is an altogether different debate. i happen to think it was not. Germany at the end of WWI should have been forced to the negotiating Table unconditionally, as Pershing had advocated. But they werent. The treaty was supposed to follow Wilsons "14 points" but ended up being a nasty petty but inneffective treaty. Because it was a relatively benign negotiated settlement, but with typically French nastiness about it, it fostered the myth in post war germany that she had been "stabbed in the back","betrayed", and "undefeated".

Whatever the truth about Versailles, the perception across Europe in the 1930s was that it had injustices about it, so as Hitler worked to eliminate those "injustices", many European neighbours, anxious for peace, allowed the Germans to tear up the treaty restrictions. Fair enough. I dont agree with the thinking but i can understand it. But Hitler never had the slightest intention of just getting rid of Versailles. as is clearly set out in his manifesto, he intended to embark on an aggressive war of conquest and enslavement in Europe, with the objective of establishing "colonies" and "living space" in Eastern Europe. It was consciously decided in those formative years that the current occupants were not human, "untermenschen" that were like vermin to be ruthlessly exterminated. How anyone can work or believe that position to be reasonable or justafiable at any level is beyond me. It was that thinking, and the actions that served to achieve that outcome, that led to the outbreak of WWII in the traditional sense, and the immense suffering of the Polish people. We should never forget that.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Sep 11, 2012)

While I agree with your post parsifal, I did ask a few posts above that we get back to the topic.


----------



## parsifal (Sep 12, 2012)

sorry chris, I did think i was doing that, but will try a different approach in the next posts


----------



## psteel (Sep 13, 2012)

stona said:


> Rubbish. Britain needed war like a hole in the head. You don't need a war to justify rearmament in a democratic state.The mere threat of war,an entirely different thing,suffices.
> 
> The idea that anyone but the usual lunatic fringe in Britain or France wanted a war with Germany is ridiculous. The Great War was still well within living memory and many of those countries leaders had fought in it. You could more reasonably argue that this led to a desperate urge to _avoid_ war,almost at any cost. The appeasement policies of the 1930s simply reflect this.
> 
> Steve




You misunderstand me. The Chancellor of the Exchequer told HMG that Rearmament could not continue at the pace it was in the late 1930s, without emergency powers to pay for further the buildup. Otherwise they would have to cut back , just at the wrong time. The German invasion of Poland gave them the justification they needed to start emergency powers.

I wonder if there was a way initiating "emergency powers" short of declaring war?


----------



## parsifal (Sep 13, 2012)

One of the enduring myths of the Polish campaign was that the PAF was removed from the battle within the first 48 hours or so of the campaign. In fact, despite being heavily outnumbered, and flying largely obsolete aircraft, the PAF continued to fight very effectively for an extended period. It was evacuated to Rumania in the finish, where unformatunately for the Poles their equiipment was impounded and then expropriated by the Rumanians.

During the fighting in Poland, the Luftwaffe took a bit of a hit, losing about 500 aircraft to all causes. The plucky Polish Fighter groups perhaps best exemplified the Polish fighting spirit. There were about 110 P-11s at the start, and to that were added about 30 p-7s, and about 20 or so various other types during the campaign. The P-11s are credited with shooting down about 120 German a/c during the campaign, whilst losing about 60 or so to all causes. From memory, about 40 escaped to Rumania, the remainder were unserviceable and reportedly were burnt to avoid capture.

It was not just aircrew that escaped to fight another day. Several large warships, including a submarine and a destroyer (perhaps more), and entire Army Corps, the enigma secret (just prior to the outbreak of war....perhaps the greates asset to escape the collapse of the country), all escaped, and wrote many glorious pages in the following ars events. In my opinion, there were none who fought so valiantly and forlornly as the Poles, who faced such hardships and setbacks during the war. We should not in particular forget the efforts of the Home Army and the uprisings in the warsaw Ghetto, I believe it was from that suffering that such a concerted push to establish the state of Israel after the war emerged.

As a small aside, there were uncomon concentrations of jews in Poles stretching back to the middle ages. since that time, Poland had shown remarkable tolerance toward the Jews whilst other nations had shown a large amount of racism. For that reason, over the period of several centuries, Jews had tended to concentrate in Poland....


----------



## michaelmaltby (Sep 13, 2012)

".... In my opinion, there were none who fought so valiantly and forlornly as the Poles, "

Agreed. And again and again, they found themselves on the fuzzy end of the stick .... Falaise, Market Garden ... to name 2 .....

MM


----------



## parsifal (Sep 13, 2012)

They fought at Cassino and for the russians (less their officers) on the Eastern Front. A Polish manned cruiser of the RN was scuttled to help form the breakwater of the artifical harbour at Normandy

A total of 249000 Poles fought in the Army with manpower derived from the following sources
Deserters from the German Wehrmacht 89,300
Evacuees from the USSR in 1941 83,000
Evacuees from France in 1940 35,000
Liberated POWs 21,750
Escapees from occupied Europe 14,210
Recruits in liberated France 7,000
Polonia from Argentina, Brazil and Canada 2,290
Polonia from the United Kingdom 1,780

Until July 1945, when recruitment was halted, some 26,830 Polish soldiers were declared KIA or MIA or had died of wounds. After that date, an additional 21,000 former Polish POWs were inducted.

After the country's defeat in the 1939 campaign, the Polish government in exile quickly organized in France a new army of about 80,000 men. In 1940 a Polish Highland Brigade took part in the Battle of Narvik (Norway), and two Polish divisions (First Grenadier Division, and Second Infantry Fusiliers Division) took part in the defense of France, while a Polish motorized brigade and two infantry divisions were in process of forming. A Polish Independent Carpathian Brigade was formed in French-mandated Syria, to which many Polish troops had escaped from Romania. The Polish Air Force in France comprised eighty-six aircraft in four squadrons, one and a half of the squadrons being fully operational while the rest were in various stages of training.

After the fall of France, numbers of Polish personnel had died in the fighting (some 6,000) or been interned in Switzerland (some 13,000). Nevertheless, General Władysław Sikorski, Polish commander-in-chief and prime minister, was able to evacuate many Polish troops to the United Kingdom. In 1941, following an agreement between the Polish government in exile and Joseph Stalin, the Soviets released Polish citizens, from whom a 75,000-strong army was formed in the USSR under General Władysław Anders. Without any support from the Soviets to train, equip and maintain this army, the Polish government in exile followed Anders' advice for a transfer of some 80,000 (and around 20,000 civilians), in March and August 1942, across the Caspian Sea to Iran. In the Middle East, this "Anders' Army" joined the British 8th army, where it became the Polish II Corps.

The Polish Air Force first fought in 1939 against the german aggression into Poland (Case White). Outnumbered and with its fighters outmatched by more advanced German fighters, as mentioned previously, the PAF inflicted significant damage out of proportion to its numbers on the Luftwaffe. The Luftwaffe lost, to all operational causes, 585 aircraft, while the Poles lost 333 aircraft.

After the fall of Poland many Polish pilots escaped via Hungary to France. The Polish Air Force fought in the Battle of France as one fighter squadron GC 1/145, several small units detached to French squadrons, and numerous flights of industry defence (in total, 133 pilots, who achieved 53-57 victories at a loss of 8 men in combat, what was 7,93% of allied victories).

Later, Polish pilots fought in the Battle of Britain, where the Polish 303 Fighter Squadron claimed the highest number of kills of any Allied squadron. From the very beginning of the war, the Royal Air Force (RAF) had welcomed foreign pilots to supplement the dwindling pool of British pilots. On 11 June 1940, the Polish Government in Exile signed an agreement with the British Government to form a Polish Army and Polish Air Force in the United Kingdom. The first two (of an eventual ten) Polish fighter squadrons went into action in August 1940. Four Polish squadrons eventually took part in the Battle of Britain (300 and 301 Bomber Squadrons; 302 and 303 Fighter Squadrons), with 89 Polish pilots. Together with more than 50 Poles fighting in British squadrons, a total of 145 Polish pilots defended British skies. Polish pilots were among the most experienced in the battle, most of them having already fought in the 1939 September Campaign in Poland and the 1940 Battle of France. Additionally, prewar Poland had set a very high standard of pilot training. The 303 Squadron, named after the Polish-American hero, General Tadeusz Kościuszko (and the highest mountain in Australia), claimed the highest number of kills (126) of all fighter squadrons engaged in the Battle of Britain, even though it only joined the combat on August 30, 1940. These Polish pilots, constituting 5% of the pilots active during the Battle of Britain, were responsible for 12% of total victories in the Battle.

126 German aeroplanes shot down by the 303 squadron during the Battle of Britain. The Polish Air Force also fought in 1943 in Tunisia (Polish Fighting Team, so called "Skalski's Circus") and in raids on Germany (1940–45). In the second half of 1941 and early 1942, Polish bomber squadrons were the sixth part of forces available to RAF Bomber Command (later they suffered heavy losses, with little replenishment possibilities). Polish aircrew losses serving with Bomber Command 1940-45 were 929 killed. Ultimately 8 Polish fighter squadrons were formed within the RAF and had claimed 629 Axis aircraft destroyed by May 1945. By the end of the war, around 19,400 Poles were serving in the RAF.

Polish squadrons in the United Kingdom:
No. 300 "Masovia" Polish Bomber Squadron (Ziemi Mazowieckiej)
No. 301 "Pomerania" Polish Bomber Squadron (Ziemi Pomorskiej)
No. 302 "City of Poznań" Polish Fighter Squadron (Poznański)
No. 303 "Kościuszko" Polish Fighter Squadron (Warszawski imienia Tadeusza Kościuszki)
No. 304 "Silesia" Polish Bomber Squadron (Ziemi Śląskiej imienia Ksiecia Józefa Poniatowskiego)
No. 305 "Greater Poland" Polish Bomber Squadron (Ziemi Wielkopolskiej imienia Marszałka Józefa Piłsudskiego)
No. 306 "City of Toruń" Polish Fighter Squadron (Toruński)
No. 307 "City of Lwów" Polish Fighter Squadron (Lwowskich Puchaczy)
No. 308 "City of Kraków" Polish Fighter Squadron (Krakowski)
No. 309 "Czerwien" Polish Fighter-Reconnaissance Squadron (Ziemi Czerwieńskiej)
No. 315 "City of Dęblin" Polish Fighter Squadron (Dębliński)
No. 316 "City of Warsaw" Polish Fighter Squadron (Warszawski)
No. 317 "City of Wilno" Polish Fighter Squadron (Wileński)
No. 318 "City of Gdansk" Polish Fighter-Reconnaissance Squadron (Gdański)
No. 663 Polish Artillery Observation Squadron
Polish Fighting Team (Skalski's Circus){attached to No. 145 Squadron}
No. 138 Special Duty Squadron Polish Flight "C"
No. 1586 Polish Special Duty Flight

For the navy on the eve of war, three destroyers — representing most of the major Polish Navy ships - had been sent for safety to the British Isles (Operation Peking). There they fought alongside the Royal Navy. At various stages of the war, the Polish Navy comprised two cruisers and a large number of smaller ships. The Polish navy was given a number of British ships and submarines which would otherwise have been unused due to the lack of trained British crews. The Polish Navy fought with great distinction alongside the other Allied navies in many important and successful operations, including those conducted against the German battleship, Bismarck. During the war the Polish Navy, which comprised a total of 27 ships (2 cruisers, 9 destroyers, 5 submarines and 11 torpedo boats), escorted 787 convoys, conducted 1,162 patrols and combat operations, sank 12 enemy ships (including 5 submarines) and 41 merchant vessels, damaged 24 more (including 8 submarines) and shot down 20 aircraft. 450 seamen out of the over 4,000 who served with the Navy lost their lives in action.

Cruisers: Dragon– Dragoon (British Danae class), Conrad (British Danae class)

Destroyers: Wicher– Gale (Wicher class) sunk September 1939, Burza– Storm (Wicher class), Grom– Thunder (Grom class) sunk 1940, Błyskawica– Lightning (Grom class), Garland (British G class) Orkan (British M-class destroyer Myrmidion) sunk 1943, Ouragan, sometimes called Huragan– Hurricane (French Bourrasque class), Piorun– Thunderbolt (British N class), 

Escort destroyers: Krakowiak– Cracovian (British Hunt class) 1941–1946, Kujawiak– Kujawian (British Hunt class), Ślązak– Silesian (British Hunt class)

Submarines: Orzeł– Eagle (Orzeł class) lost 1940, Sęp– Vulture (Orzeł class) interned Sweden, Jastrząb– Hawk (British S class), Wilk– Wolf (Wilk class) to reserve 1942, Ryś– Lynx (Wilk class) interned Sweden, Żbik– Wildcat (Wilk class) interned Sweden, Dzik– Boar (British U class) 1942–1946
Sokół– Falcon (British U class) 1941–1945

Heavy minelayers: Gryf– Griffin (Gryf class) sunk 1939

Light minelayers ("ptaszki"– "Birds"): Jaskółka– Swallow, sunk 1939
ORP Mewa– Seagull
ORP Rybitwa– Tern
ORP Czajka– Lapwing
ORP Żuraw– Crane
ORP Czapla– Heron

The Polish River Fleet

A number of minor ships, transports, merchant-marine auxiliary vessels, and patrol boats. Polish Merchant Navy contributed about 137,000 BRT to Allied shipping; losing 18 ships (with capacity of 76,000 BRT) and over 200 sailors during the war


----------



## parsifal (Sep 13, 2012)

The Polish forces in the East
(from wiki) 

"Broadly speaking, there were two formations among the Polish Armed Forces in the East. First was the Polish government-in-exile-loyal Anders Army, created in the second half of 1941 after German invasion of the USSR. In 1943 this formation was transferred to the Western Allies and became known as the Polish II Corps. Additionally, remaining Polish forces in USSR were reorganized into the Soviet-controlled Polish I Corps in the Soviet Union, which in turn was reorganized in 1944 into the Polish First Army (Berling Army) and Polish Second Army, both part of Polish People's Army (Ludowe Wojsko Polskie, LWP). In 1944, following the takeover of Poland by Soviets from Nazi Germany, the Polish People's Army was reorganized into a Poland-based military formation.

In the aftermath of the Operation Barbarossa, Stalin agreed (Sikorski-Mayski Agreement) to release tens of thousands of Polish prisoners-of-war held in Soviet camps from whom a military force was formed. The Anders Army, as the formation became known, was loyal to the Polish government in exile, and as such its formation was obstructed by the Soviets. Eventually, with about 40 000 combatants and 70 000 civilians, it was transferred to the British command in the Middle East, becoming the Polish II Corps and part of the Polish Armed Forces in the West.

To utilize the potential of the remaining Polish soldiers in USSR, without actually allowing them to become independent from Soviet control, a fact which allowed Anders Army to leave USSR, the Soviet Union created a Union of Polish Patriots (ZPP) in 1943 as communist puppet counter-government to the Polish government in exile. At the same time a parallel army (Polish People's Army or LWP) was created which, by the end of the war, numbered about 200,000 soldiers. The Soviet created guerilla force called Armia Ludowa was integrated with the Polish People's Army at the end of the war. These Soviet controlled units on the Eastern Front included the First, the Second and the Third Polish Armies (the latter was later merged with the second), and Air Force of the Polish Army with 10 infantry divisions, 5 armored brigades and 4 divisions of air force.

The Polish First Army was integrated in the 1st Belorussian Front with which it entered Poland from Soviet territory in 1944. Ordered to hold position by the Soviet leadership, it did not advance towards Warsaw as Germans suppressed the Warsaw Uprising. It took part in battles for Bydgoszcz, Kolobrzeg (Kolberg), Gdańsk (Danzig) and Gdynia losing 20,000 people in the winter of 1944-45 battles. In April–May 1945 the 1st Army fought in the final capture of Berlin. The Polish Second Army fought as part of the Soviet 1st Ukrainian Front and took part in the Prague Offensive. In the final operations of the war the losses of the two armies of the LWP amounted to 32,000.


----------

