NationStates Jolt Archive

Keeping you up to date on dates in history, today marks the 65th Anniversary of the beginning of the Second Great War in Europe. On September 3rd, 1939, the two ultimatums delivered to Germany from both France and Great Britain expired, and the two countries went to war with Germany, France about 3 hours after Great Britain. Of course, not all the major European participants were in it yet, the Soviets had yet to march into Eastern Poland, the Balkans had not yet bent to the Triple Alliance, Italy was too timid to enter and would not until June 10th, after it was clear France was beaten, and still not make headway against the French Armee des Alpes, and the United States would not enter until 1942. The Asian war had been going since either 1931 (Seizure of Manchuria) or 1937 (Invasion of Central and coastal China).

On a sidenote, the Franco-British (and later Commonwealth) Declerations of War did away with any need for Hitler to declare war, keeping the way open for the first and only country Hitler would ever declare war on, the United States.

Keeping you up to date on dates in history, today marks the 65th Anniversary of the beginning of the Second Great War in Europe. On September 3rd, 1939, the two ultimatums delivered to Germany from both France and Great Britain expired, and the two countries went to war with Germany, France about 3 hours after Great Britain. Of course, not all the major European participants were in it yet, the Soviets had yet to march into Eastern Poland, the Balkans had not yet bent to the Triple Alliance, Italy was too timid to enter and would not until June 10th, after it was clear France was beaten, and still not make headway against the French Armee des Alpes, and the United States would not enter until 1942. The Asian war had been going since either 1931 (Seizure of Manchuria) or 1937 (Invasion of Central and coastal China).

On a sidenote, the Franco-British (and later Commonwealth) Declerations of War did away with any need for Hitler to declare war, keeping the way open for the first and only country Hitler would ever declare war on, the United States.

Wow! Didn't even think of the date.

Granddad was in the field back then(Poland).

Wow! Didn't even think of the date.

Granddad was in the field back then(Poland).

In that case, he had been at war since September 1st, when Germany attacked Poland (for attacking a military outpost, an attack staged by SS troops against other Whermacht forces). Damn shame how myths of Polish cavalry charging panzers have been spread, or of the general unreadiness of the Polish Army, it was it's horrid deployment (if they only listened to Frederick the Great) that did it in, not lack of equipment or training.

The polish did have a beutiful cavalry so are you saying they didnt use them against the hun?Those stuka sure are horrid aye

The polish did have a beutiful cavalry so are you saying they didnt use them against the hun?Those stuka sure are horrid aye

Not in the Second World War, 1939 Cavalry tactics intended for the cavalry to ride to the battle, dismount, then fight as essentially light infantry. Or stay mounted and act as scouts, but not to engage enemy forces while mounted. The Polish had the best cavalry in Europe at the time, but even using those tactics cavalry was outdated, it could not carry heavy/medium weapons to deal with hard targets, like tanks, or GPMG's or HMG's to effectively defend an area (maybe a few LMG's, and little supporting artillery).

The story of Polish Lancers charging German tanks is mostly a Nazi propaganda myth, hyped up to show how inferior the Poles (and in general, slavs) were to the Aryan Germans. It does have a basis in reality, but not nearly the idiocy it sounds like. During the opening weeks, a Polish Lancer patrol happened upon some German artillery (which was horse-drawn), deciding to charge and scatter the gun crews, and capture the weapons, the Lancers moved to attack. Unfortunately for them, there was a nearby Panzer unit, which quickly deployed several armoured vehicles to defend the artillery, at which point the Lancers beat a quick retreat.

And this was not the last cavalry charge, there was even a successful one during the Western Offensive of 1940. It was the last successful charge of a cavalry unit in Western history, and was carried out by a British cavalry unit, which spotted German infantry advancing. The German units expected the Cavalry to advance, dismount, then fight as infantry as was doctrine, but the cavalry instead charged the Germans, scattering them before they could set up an effective defense (as they hadn't been expecting a charge), unfortunately it did not change the outcome of the offensive.

On a sidenote, the Franco-British (and later Commonwealth) Declerations of War did away with any need for Hitler to declare war, keeping the way open for the first and only country Hitler would ever declare war on, the United States.
I never realised that. But it is true...

Also, I think the result of WWII would have been different had Hitler not declared war on the United States.

I never realised that. But it is true...

Also, I think the result of WWII would have been different had Hitler not declared war on the United States.
Of course, but then had Britian accepted Hitlers offers and stayed out of things and consolidated it's own power the world would also be a different place, I'm not saying better only different. As Britian would not have had to squander it's power and wealth fighting a war. It could have concentrated on holdiong onto the far east and remained a dominant power in the world. The US on the other hand would not have risen as it has, so the world would be very different.

Free of the evils of American pop culture! :D and Republicans and the Bush family... :D (and you know what evils I mean... all those god-aweful "musicians", the colloqualism and clothing styles...)

Even though I'm British, I see September the 1st 1939 as the start of WW2 as it was when the German offensive against Poland began. I disagree with the 1937 Sino-Japanese war as being the start as no one else fought in that conflict until Dec. '41.

Germany would still have attacked France even if Britain had stayed out of the war, in my opinion. Its destiny lay to the East, and it wouldn't attack the Soviet Union before first dealing with a large and hostile power to its West. When Germany attacked France, to maintain the Balance of Power Britain would have to join one side or the other. It couldn't allow France to be defeated by Germany unless Britain secured the French north coast and colonies. But, I doubt the British public would support a siding with Germany against the French unless then BUF had been elected. They'd maybe support Germany against the Soviet Union, but not against another democracy.

yeah it might have been you sword and sheild* that said dolfs children had to paint over cross on tank turret as it gave poles something to aim at

On September 3rd 1939 all four of my grandparents were refugees in the then British Crown Colony of Hong Kong because the Japanese had occupied their homelands in nearby Foshan, near Canton.

The story of Polish Lancers charging German tanks is mostly a Nazi propaganda myth, hyped up to show how inferior the Poles (and in general, slavs) were to the Aryan Germans. It does have a basis in reality, but not nearly the idiocy it sounds like.


There was a quite bizarre discussion of this on the Matrix Games (a computer wragames company) website a few years back: halfway through the thread it was revealed that the grandfather of one poster was serving in one of the Panzers, while the grandfather of one of the other posters was part of the cavalry attacking them. Mighty strange.

Not in the Second World War, 1939 Cavalry tactics intended for the cavalry to ride to the battle, dismount, then fight as essentially light infantry. Or stay mounted and act as scouts, but not to engage enemy forces while mounted.

YAY. Someone else that knows that :)

I keep telling people, but no, the Polish are stereotyped as dumb, suicidal maniacs...


My grandfather was Lithuanian...they were invaded first by the Russians, who apparently weren't so bad to them (got lucky, maybe :p)...then enslaved by the Germans upon their invasion for almost 4 years, where he worked as an interpreter and labourer...then liberated by the Brits. He survived the firebombing of Dresden, and once didnt salute Hitler when he passed by while he was in Berlin (he didn't see him, and he got away with that excuse). He was badly burnt in yet another firebombing, this time of a German airfield he was working at (miraculously, only received minimal scarring) and on his recovery was told to keep away from the front. After a time, he and some countrymen gathered the courage to go to town and were told "front? what front?" upon inquiring about it...(and also refused aid because they weren't Germans) so they crossed over the border and walked straight into the British encampment. The Allies probably could have taken Berlin first if they wanted to.

My other grandfather was an Aussie digger, and he served in New Guinea along the famous Kokoda trail...survived the war also. The Australian soldiers used to break into the American camps and steal their supplies because they were running short (of course, 2 extra years of rationing must be taken into account, etc...)...and in the end, the Americans just laid them out for them, and conveniently rescheduled their patrols so that they wouldn't catch our troops.

And my Great Grandfather had the distinctive honour of being in the Australian Army supply corps while in North Africa...an honour, because he was in charge of looking after the beer :)

Just some little stories...anyone else want to share? :)

yeah it might have been you sword and sheild* that said dolfs children had to paint over cross on tank turret as it gave poles something to aim at

I may have said it before on these forums, it did happen though, the Polish tacked up a remarkable tank kill ratio with their AT weapons, which were some of the best for that era.

The Allies probably could have taken Berlin first if they wanted to.

Had Eisenhower left the Ruhr pocket to be contained rather than reduced, freeing up a large number of forces, and started an offensive immediately, the West probably could have reached Berlin before the Soviets, and linked up with them on the outskirts on the Eastern side, but Berlin had been promised to the Soviets, and they were far more willing to suffer casualties.

My other grandfather was an Aussie digger, and he served in New Guinea along the famous Kokoda trail...survived the war also. The Australian soldiers used to break into the American camps and steal their supplies because they were running short (of course, 2 extra years of rationing must be taken into account, etc...)...and in the end, the Americans just laid them out for them, and conveniently rescheduled their patrols so that they wouldn't catch our troops.

Hehe, considering how extravagantly supplied American units were in comparison to any other unit, it would have been most unkind of them to not share any of it.

Just some little stories...anyone else want to share? :)

My grandfather was serving in the American 24th Infantry Division, fighting across the Philippines in 1944, and his unit (I believe it was a company level mission), was clearing an area of Luzon (I believe, it may have been another island). They employed a number of guns from the divisional artillery, along with their own mortars, and advanced using cover & fire tactics. By the time they cleared the area, 3 soldiers had been wounded, a large number of artillery shells expended, hundreds of rounds of small-arms used up, and five hours exhuasted.... it would have been worse had there actually been Japanese in the field.

Even though I'm British, I see September the 1st 1939 as the start of WW2 as it was when the German offensive against Poland began. I disagree with the 1937 Sino-Japanese war as being the start as no one else fought in that conflict until Dec. '41.

Well, no one else was fighting in the European War until June 1941, when the Soviets were attacked, and December, 1941, when the US entered the war.

Germany would still have attacked France even if Britain had stayed out of the war, in my opinion. Its destiny lay to the East, and it wouldn't attack the Soviet Union before first dealing with a large and hostile power to its West. When Germany attacked France, to maintain the Balance of Power Britain would have to join one side or the other. It couldn't allow France to be defeated by Germany unless Britain secured the French north coast and colonies. But, I doubt the British public would support a siding with Germany against the French unless then BUF had been elected. They'd maybe support Germany against the Soviet Union, but not against another democracy.

You seem to be confusing the Great War and the Second World War, for in the Second World War, Britain did not have a choice of whether or not ot fight with France, as it had gone to war due to an alliance with Poland, not becuase France was attacked. In the Great War, there was a huge divide between those who supported interventionon France's behalf, and those who favored continuing "Splendid Isolation", the German attack on Belgium decided it in the francophile's favor.

I may have said it before on these forums, it did happen though, the Polish tacked up a remarkable tank kill ratio with their AT weapons, which were some of the best for that era.

Yep, they exported them to Britain where they served for the duration of the war. Forget the designation, but I can look it up.

Had Eisenhower left the Ruhr pocket to be contained rather than reduced, freeing up a large number of forces, and started an offensive immediately, the West probably could have reached Berlin before the Soviets, and linked up with them on the outskirts on the Eastern side, but Berlin had been promised to the Soviets, and they were far more willing to suffer casualties.

Oh yeah. I don't think the Allies would have been too keen to get in on the street to street urban fighting the Soviets saw there. Besides, the Russians knew how to do it :)


My grandfather was serving in the American 24th Infantry Division, fighting across the Philippines in 1944, and his unit (I believe it was a company level mission), was clearing an area of Luzon (I believe, it may have been another island). They employed a number of guns from the divisional artillery, along with their own mortars, and advanced using cover & fire tactics. By the time they cleared the area, 3 soldiers had been wounded, a large number of artillery shells expended, hundreds of rounds of small-arms used up, and five hours exhuasted.... it would have been worse had there actually been Japanese in the field.

LOL.

Well, no one else was fighting in the European War until June 1941, when the Soviets were attacked, and December, 1941, when the US entered the war.
Ok, so I guess then Canada and others never fought in this war...:rolleyes:

Canada, since they used the power granted to their government in 1933 by the passing of the Westminster Act, which gave them the power to make choices free from the British government's approval, the delayed on a decision. They went to war with Germany seven days after Britain and France declared war on Germany and Italy.

Oh, let's not forget Mussolini's Italy. Even the Italian surrendered when the Americans took Italy from the Nazis, they for the first part of the war were allies with the Nazis.

Further, on September 3rd, 1939, when the British and French declared war on Germany, Australia and New Zealand also declared war Germany.

Moreso, let's not forget that Poland in 1939 was divided in half between the Germans and the Soviets. Yes, in September of 1939, the Soviets invaded Pland after the Nazis did. So, in a way they were involved, even if not against the Nazis. Also, in the same year, later though, in December, the Soviets attacked Finland.

Yep, they exported them to Britain where they served for the duration of the war. Forget the designation, but I can look it up.

It was a modification of the Bofors 37mm AT gun, the Polish designation was the "Armata pp.wz.36", and when exported to Britain (200 guns and a production license) it became the "Ordnance QF 37mm Mk.1" and remained in service with the British Army as an AT gun until well into the 1950's.


Oh yeah. I don't think the Allies would have been too keen to get in on the street to street urban fighting the Soviets saw there. Besides, the Russians knew how to do it :)

Barring a rush offensive like the Russians took, if the west was going to fight in Berlin they would have encircled it, and bombarded it for a very long time. Berlin would not have fallen until June or July at that rate, since the West would advance slowly and deliberately, making full use of their air forces and artillery. At that rate, even if they rush across the Elbe, the Russians will still penetrate the city from the East before the West makes headway into it, the only way Berlin would likely fall to the West would be if the Sovits got held up on their Oder offensive, and the West was able to complete an encirclement of Berlin, since it is highly unlikely Eisenhower would endorse a crashing offensive into the city.

In that case, he had been at war since September 1st, when Germany attacked Poland (for attacking a military outpost, an attack staged by SS troops against other Whermacht forces). Damn shame how myths of Polish cavalry charging panzers have been spread, or of the general unreadiness of the Polish Army, it was it's horrid deployment (if they only listened to Frederick the Great) that did it in, not lack of equipment or training.

Why is do the major bad things always happen it in/around september?
A Major outbreak of plague, the fire of London, 9/11, double plane crash and hostage situation in Russia.

It was a modification of the Bofors 37mm AT gun, the Polish designation was the "Armata pp.wz.36", and when exported to Britain (200 guns and a production license) it became the "Ordnance QF 37mm Mk.1" and remained in service with the British Army as an AT gun until well into the 1950's.

Thats the one! I knew it was Ordinance QF something or other.

Barring a rush offensive like the Russians took, if the west was going to fight in Berlin they would have encircled it, and bombarded it for a very long time. Berlin would not have fallen until June or July at that rate, since the West would advance slowly and deliberately, making full use of their air forces and artillery. At that rate, even if they rush across the Elbe, the Russians will still penetrate the city from the East before the West makes headway into it, the only way Berlin would likely fall to the West would be if the Sovits got held up on their Oder offensive, and the West was able to complete an encirclement of Berlin, since it is highly unlikely Eisenhower would endorse a crashing offensive into the city.

Good point.

Ok, so I guess then Canada never fought in this war, since they used the power granted to their government in 1933 by the passing of the Westminster Act, which gave them the power to make choices free from the British government's approval. They went to war with Germany seven days after Britain and France declared war on Germany and Italy.

I never mentioned who I said was fighting the war, only who wasn't fighting the war on September 3rd. And technically that means Sept.1 isn't the start date either, since France and GB were not at war until the 3rd, the entire Commonwealth wasn't at war until October, Italy wasn't until June 1940. For my money, the war started with the Marco Polo Bridge Incident in 1937, the Euro-centric date is September 1st, and the America-centric date is December 7th. The Great Patriotic War is much simpler, having only one start date, June 22nd, 1941, but outside of Russia where that title is used, it is the Second World War, with multiple start dates.

Oh, let's not forget Mussolini's Italy. Even the Italian surrendered when the Americans took Italy from the Nazis, they for the first part of the war were allies with the Nazis.

Technically Italy stayed in the Axis until the end of the war, just not the King's Italy. Italy under Victor Emmanuel III, with Mussolini as "Prime Minister" entered the war on June 10th, seeing France collapse, but even then the Italian Army, numbering at least 30 odd divisions in their initial assault, could not make headway against the French Armee des Alpes of 2 1/2 divisions. When the Americans (And British/Commonwealth) landed on the boot of Italy and at Salerno, the King's Italy began peace talks, and switched sides, but the Northern half of Italy was etained under German control, and eventually became the Italian Socialist Republic, under Benito Mussolini, and still maintained an Army, while the King's Italy joined the Allies and eventually contributed to Allied forces late in the war.

Further, on September 3rd, 1939, when the British and French declared war on Germany, Australia and New Zealand also declared war Germany.

Did I ever say they didn't?

Further, let's not forget that Poland in 1939 was divided in half between the Germans and the Soviets. Yes, in September of 1939, the Soviets invaded Pland after the Nazis did. So, in a way they were involved, even if not against the Nazis. Also, in the same year, later though, in December, the Soviets attacked Finland.

The Winter War is a seperate entity from the Second World War, unlike the Continuation War, which is considered part of WW2, and the Soviets entered Poland on the 18th of September, but faced little resistance, firstly becuase a lot of Polish thought the Red Army was coming to their aid and did not fight, and becuase the bulk of the army was encircled in Western Poland or part of the new line on the Bug and Vistula.

Thats the one! I knew it was Ordinance QF something or other.

Whew, good thing, I was guessing at the letters, I knew it was Ordnance Q something, I wasn't entirely sure if it was an F or not. My Polish designation might be a tad bit off, since it is either pp.wz. or wz.pp., I went with the former, which I'm fairly certain is right.

I wouldn't know that from your wording, now would I? After all, the connocation of your text implies that no one else had joined the war until 1941, even though others clearly had.

I wouldn't know that from your wording, now would I? After all, the connocation of your text implies that no one else had joined the war until 1941, even though others clearly had.

Ah, well, sorry for the mis-understanding, when I referred to the European War in my first post on page 2, I was counting only major powers as of January 1st, 1940, hence the reason I didn't mention nations like Greece, Yugoslavia, etc. I didn't feel like going through every single date that a nation joined the war, so I used only the major powers. Sorry for the mis-understanding.

Bump, just to remind everyone, time to look up tommorow for my Sept. 4th thread.

Just some little stories...anyone else want to share? :)

One of my grandfathers worked on the Burma Railroad. As you can imagine, no hilarious anecdotes of his time there were passed down to us.

My grandfather was an American Marine serving in the South Pacific. Fought in Guadalcanal, among others. To this day does not wear shorts, even in 90 degree weather (sorry non-Americans, I'm too lazy to do the Celsius conversion right now). Why you put the best rifle shot in your unit on a boat in the middle of an ocean, I'll never know... He could (and probably still can) bounce a tin can 9 times with his .22 cal. revolver. Probably more, if that revolver could hold more than 9 shells... Still has his full dress uniform in the attic, I look at it once in a while.

[QUOTE=The Winter War is a seperate entity from the Second World War, unlike the Continuation War, which is considered part of WW2, and the Soviets entered Poland on the 18th of September, but faced little resistance, firstly becuase a lot of Polish thought the Red Army was coming to their aid and did not fight, and becuase the bulk of the army was encircled in Western Poland or part of the new line on the Bug and Vistula.[/QUOTE]
what is the continuation war?

My great-uncle was in the British Merchant Navy, he, along the rest of the ship's crew in the convoy, had to dodge the German U boats that pursued him.

He lost many of his realtives to the Blitz.

My Grandfather was in REME (Royal Electrical Mechanical Engineers).

He was said to be one of the first on the scene of a concentration camp. He refused to watch any TV documentaries about concentration camps in later years because he knew already he had seen them with his own eyes, and the smell of the dying and the dead would come back. He died when I was young, but from what I understand, the concentration camp he came across traumatised him for the rest of his life.

My grandfather's brother fought at El Alamein. He took pictures of the aftermath, burnt out panzers, blown up guns, bodies that sort of thing. We've got them in a photo album somewhere.

My grandmother lived in London at the time of the blitz. She still does live in London. On one of the many times the Germans carried out an air raid, she and a large number of others stayed in a cinema after being warned "that man (Hitler) is here again, those wish to leave, leave quietly, those who wish to stay can" and she and the others that stayed watched a film whilst the bombs fell.

My grandmother is tough, tough or daft.

I think today is the beginning of the 60th anniversary of 'Operation Market Garden'.

And some historians consider WWI and WWII as the same war as well.

And some historians consider WWI and WWII as the same war as well.
You can argue that way. The "solution" of Versailles wasn´t a solution. Germany didn´t accepted it.
The treaty even created other problems: like Czechoslovakia (collapsed fortunately peacefully finally in 1993 when the Slovaks declared themself independent), Yugoslavia (formed in 1919 as Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenians under Serbian supremacy - collapsed already in 1941 when the Croats allied themselfes with the Germans; finally collapsed in the 1991 when Croatia and Slovenia declared their independence).
Well: it depends how you count: But most conflicts have long histories - even if they aren´t always fought out via war. But sometimes they are.

The polish did have a beutiful cavalry so are you saying they didnt use them against the hun?Those stuka sure are horrid aye

The Greatest Horseback units have and only would be the Australian Light Horse (Mounted Infantry)

Their records speak for themselves, I suggest you look it up.

The Greatest Horseback units have and only would be the Australian Light Horse (Mounted Infantry)
Their records speak for themselves, I suggest you look it up.
Well a cavalry is no of no use against tanks. The war against Poland was in that sense an asymmetric war. A great military power ruled by a mad tyrannt invaded a small country (ruled by a Pildusky - a military ruler) against an underdeveloped one. And that was even added by a secret provision in the German-Soviet non-agression pact leading up to the Soviet Invasion of Eastern Poland.
That is indeed a strategic dilemma of Poland. It was actually first devided between Prussia, Austria and Russia in 1771. It didn´t exist as a sovereign state (except for the Napoleonic years) up until 1918.
And between 1945-90 it was forced to ally itself with the Soviets. Today it is over. It is now part of the west. And that actually also requires an alliance and partnership with todays Germany. Otherwise - well, it would strategically a mistake not to go for a good relationship with its biggest trading partner.

Well a cavalry is no of no use against tanks. The war against Poland was in that sense an asymmetric war. A great military power ruled by a mad tyrannt invaded a small country (ruled by a Pildusky - a military ruler) against an underdeveloped one. And that was even added by a secret provision in the German-Soviet non-agression pact leading up to the Soviet Invasion of Eastern Poland.
That is indeed a strategic dilemma of Poland. It was actually first devided between Prussia, Austria and Russia in 1771. It didn´t exist as a sovereign state (except for the Napoleonic years) up until 1918.
And between 1945-90 it was forced to ally itself with the Soviets. Today it is over. It is now part of the west. And that actually also requires an alliance and partnership with todays Germany. Otherwise - well, it would strategically a mistake not to go for a good relationship with its biggest trading partner.
well, they showed just yesterday that their goverment doesnt want a good relationship with germany.

well, they showed just yesterday that their goverment doesnt want a good relationship with germany.
No, it doesn´t. It was the parliament. And it is legally not binding. The Polish government CLEARLY declared yesterday that it is NOT going to demand reparations. So, it is showing that it wants good relations with Germany.
Since the decision of the parliament is legally not binding and the government has declared that it is not going to do it I consider it IRRELEVANT.