Who are your personal heroes?

The Scandanavians, the Danes and the Poles fought like ally cats against overwhelming odds. They were true heroes.



Charlie

quote:

Poles were busy kicking the sh*t out of the Jewish and Gypsy population themselves.

Not to the same degree as the Nazis.
Check the timelines GB purged the Jews way back when,as did most countries at one time or another.

quote:

It is also well to remember that the Russians were at that time such a fearful foe that some people found it preferably to side with the Nazis!

Oh yes indeed. And, while I can't remember the source, I did read some time ago that the Soviets were responsible for more dead (military) Poles than the Germans in WWII.

Dear James,

A little bit of History for you. The Soviets and Nazis formed an Alliance called the Ribentrop/Molotov Pact before the invasion of Poland. This was broken when the Nazis invaded the USSR of course.

Up until the outbreak of hostilities the Poles were under significant pressure from the UK and French Governments not to mobilise their armed forces as that would appear potentially as aggressive, with the result that when the Nazis invaded on the First of September 1939 the Poles were only one third mobilised. The Nazis invaded on three fronts, from the west, from East Prussia and through Slovakia. On the Sixth of September the British Government declared War as we were obligated to under our Alliance with Poland. The French soon joined the War. On the Seventeenth of September the Soviets invaded Poland! The plans in the Nazi/Soviet Alliance would see Poland divided into three, with the Western sector occupied by the Nazis, the Eastern by the Soviets, and the area round Warsaw under what was called the General Government, which was of course run by Frank who was a Nazi.

Now if you are going to claim that the Poles who fought the Soviets so bravely were fighting with the Nazis, I am going to disagree, as the same military organisation that was fighting the Russians was also fighting the Germans! Poland has been divided between these two great powers several times in its remarkably turbulent history and the Poles have done well to survive intact as nation let alone retain a proud, noble and distinctive culture at all.

The Government of Poland came to London before the Polish military collapsed under the onslaught of two massive military machines in October. Hardly the act of a pro-Nazi Government.

I could not possibly comment on your assertion that the Soviets killed more Polish military than the Nazis, but it is certainly true the Nazis killed as many Polish civilians, military and academics, Priests, and others, as Jews in Poland during the War. Six million of each in round terms. After the Nazis were forced out in the later days of the War the Soviets carried right on where the Nazis left of, and Lublin was the camp used by the Russians to carry on this action, and it was used as a transit camp for those the Soviets found undesirable who would be transported to a certain future fate in Siberia!

Strangely the Nazi attack on Poland would see many parallels with their attack on Norway, which was nominally neutral unlike Poland at the time. The USA, of course, was also neutral at the time, though they only suffered the occasional attack on shipping in these early days, and not invasion at all.

So in September 1939 we find the Russians and Germans in Alliance and the US neutral. Poland, France and Britain were the major Western Allies! It is clear where these nations stood in relation to Nazism, even if each nation would produce individuals who were in any case pro-Nazi. The governments of these three major Allies were clear in their anti-Nazi stance.

A good read, as a starting point on this is Churchill's history of the Second World War, which puts the aspects into better perspectives than unremembered and un-referenced sources, which cannot be subsequently checked of course.

The Churchill makes an excellent start [if six volumes long] for subsequent examinations of the actions of the governments of the various concerned countries, and even the actions of a few who did not follow the various national government positions.

Churchill for example wanted to blockade Norwegian waters, and mine large parts of the Norwegian coasts, but this was not done to avoid compromising that nation's neutrality, though the fact was that Norway was neutral but very pro-British. Of its merchant shipping only less than a handful fell to the Axis, by being in the wrong place at the wrong time, and this very significant merchant marine served loyally the Allied cause throughout the War, as the elements of the Polish military who escaped Poland’s fall, to Nazis and Soviets.

I hope that you do not mind me filing in a few gaps in your post! I can fill a few more in if you want! George

quote:

I hope that you do not mind me filing in a few gaps in your post! I can fill a few more in if you want! George

Of course not George. Clearly a subject on which you have spent much time! If only I had the time to read Churchill's six volumes, it is certainly something I would consider undertaking...

I can loan you them! Look after them, they are an original print and the first impressions date from the various dates of issue, on utility papr and bindings. Yes it is subject I am passionate about as I think the general education spends too much time on the Nazis and not enough o the remarkable efforts that ultimately overthrew them. Fortunately I was never subjected to Twentieth Century History at school and studied it subsequently, after long talks with my late Norwegian grandfather, who fought in the Resistance, and became a "non-person" who had eighteen months in literal limbo before the end. He could not possibly risk seeing his wife and two small daughters in that period, and he had a few very tragic tales to tell which will never surface now, as he rarely got more than half way through, before emotion overtook him. War is a very dirty business, where apparent heroism all too often takes second place to the need to be pragmatic. Sometimes the pragmatic action is the bravest course in reality as it can make a significant beneficial difference. But it is not pleasant...

Email, if you are intersted. Address in profile.

ATB from George

Aha, thank you for your offer George. If only I had the opportunity to take you up on it.

However between a full working life (forum contributions excepted), a 3 month old baby, a now slightly jealous 3 year old daughter and a 16 year old who's completely bodged his exams and can't be arsed to get out there and sort his life out, any reading is restricted to the 10 mins between going to bed and my wife deciding whether it's lights out or playtime...However you may find me taking you up on your offer when I get some peace, say about 2025?

Dear Jamie,

I expect that you have seen what I am aiming to do, and I sincerely hope that my own life will allow for more reading time for myself if things can be changed from manual labouring to something better!

No kids, no responisibilities that are obvious, though which still exist!

But nothing takes it out of you like heavy work when you get to my age, and having to wear strong reading glasses, which I cannot afford the correct prescription for, makes sustained reading a real headache, which can literally occur all to easily as well.

The Churchill is so well written and stylish, however, that it is an easy and fascinating read. One can almost imagine the voice reading it too you, such is the style!

Of course it is a partial view - his view - but apart from down-playing certain aspects, it is not historically wrong, and represemts a splendid framework to hang other sources from as well. His views on Norway are particularly fascinating to me as some chimes so well with what my grandfather said about it as well, so the books gain credibility in that case for me...

ATB from George

PS: I would say it is no exageration for me to describe Churchill as a hero of mine I suppose! Never considered that before!

Shakespeare

quote:

Originally posted by David Scott?:
Shakespeare

Craig Shakespeare was indeed a fine attacking midfield player in his days at Walsall - good choice.