NationStates Jolt Archive

Shortly following the first world war, Poland and The Soviet Union clashed in a struggle of tremendous importance to the west, and we don't even learn about it in school. What do you think about the importance of this war, and should it be taught in schools?

Here's a link to information about it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish-Soviet_War

bump

Poland had absolutely no relevance for European politics ever since the divisions of Poland in the 18th century. And every nation in Europe was more concerned with itself after WW1, so this war really is not important to know about.

Poland had absolutely no relevance for European politics ever since the divisions of Poland in the 18th century. And every nation in Europe was more concerned with itself after WW1, so this war really is not important to know about.
If you read the article, espescially the points about the Bolshevik plans for once they conquered Poland, the article shows that Poland actually was vital to Europe.

I'm saying that western prejudices against Poland obscure Polish importance.

And? Poland vanished from the map only a few years later anyways. And Poland has not gained any real relevance since then. Poland has not been a big player in Europe for a very long time.

And? Poland vanished from the map only a few years later anyways. And Poland has not gained any real relevance since then. Poland has not been a big player in Europe for a very long time.
I'm trying to say in this thread that this war was important, the rest of Polish history is not what I'm trying to debate.

I'm trying to say that without the Polish victory, the Bolshevik armies could have been able to take Germany and perhaps even France. But Poland won, and western Europe stayed free. I'd say that that's pretty important.

How many other wars do we ignore or skim rapidly over. Do you know anything about the Paraguay War for example?
If you are Polish or Russian. or live in Poland or Russia, then the war may have some significance today, and should be discussed. If you live in Italy, the USA, Australia, Brazil, Mars or anywhere else, then unless this war had some direct effect on the history of where you are, then passing over it is probably necessary to allow time in our education scheme for things like Chemistry.

I'm trying to say in this thread that this war was important, the rest of Polish history is not what I'm trying to debate.

I'm trying to say that without the Polish victory, the Bolshevik armies could have been able to take Germany and perhaps even France. But Poland won, and western Europe stayed free. I'd say that that's pretty important.I doubt that. It is quite a distance from the Russian-Polish border to Germany (except for East Prussia). And Russia had enough to do with itself anyways.

I don't know where you are all from, but at school here in Melbourne Australia we studied the Russian Revolution, and the Polish War was mentioned, its significance explained, and we moved on. In school that's all it deserves.
It was a horrible event, and important in its way, which means it should be pursued and studied, just not in school when it is important to wrap your head around more important events, such as the Russian Revolution as a whole.
Plus, if were talking about Poland and its place in the world wouldn't a study of how it was affected and changed during and after WW2 be more important?

Here in America there's a tremendous bias towards American-only history. While I think it would be nice if this war was taught in American history classes, perhaps we should start a little more fundamental, say with Roman history?

I don't know where you are all from, but at school here in Melbourne Australia we studied the Russian Revolution, and the Polish War was mentioned, its significance explained, and we moved on. In school that's all it deserves.

That's basically what I'm saying should be done.

Of course, this also relates to my belief that we should have a 20th century history course in our high school years in the US.

Wait you don't study 20th century history? How is that possible?

And Sdaeriji, as the Romans pretty much set the borders of the Eastern and Western world, which has impacted for the last two millenia on the whole world, i can't think of anything more sensible to study in history than the Romans, but even in Australia where we tend to ignore our own history we didn;t do the Romans.
Crazy huh

Here in America there's a tremendous bias towards American-only history. While I think it would be nice if this war was taught in American history classes, perhaps we should start a little more fundamental, say with Roman history?
What would "American-only" history be? Or even US-American-only history. Those few years and events are not really too interesting IMO.
History teaching should start with ancient history such as Irano-mesopotamian, Egyptian, Chinese, and central Asian (from 5500 BCE or so). And more details should be tought instead of just superficial crap, because the cultural concepts of those times still define what goes on today.

All of Russian history is important to know. When Russia gets its act together, it will be a major economic force for the rest of the century.

What would "American-only" history be? Or even US-American-only history. Those few years and events are not really too interesting IMO.
History teaching should start with ancient history such as Irano-mesopotamian, Egyptian, Chinese, and central Asian (from 5500 BCE or so). And more details should be tought instead of just superficial crap, because the cultural concepts of those times still define what goes on today.

Well, the American-only history that I can remember being taught the majority of my public school years was usually split into two year pieces. One year, we would cover the time from 1620 and the colony at Plymouth, through the American Revolution and the War of 1812, and would end right after the Civil War. Then, the next year, we would start from the Reconstruction, through the Depression and WWI, and usually end with WWII, although sometime we would get to the Korean War. That was probably 90% of the history I learned in high school.

Wait you don't study 20th century history? How is that possible?

And Sdaeriji, as the Romans pretty much set the borders of the Eastern and Western world, which has impacted for the last two millenia on the whole world, i can't think of anything more sensible to study in history than the Romans, but even in Australia where we tend to ignore our own history we didn;t do the Romans.
Crazy huh
We do US 20th century history as part of a general US history class, but we don't really talk about anywhere else in the world. I think a 20th century world history course would be a good thing, and help people to understand why the world is as it is today.

Wait you don't study 20th century history? How is that possible?

And Sdaeriji, as the Romans pretty much set the borders of the Eastern and Western world, which has impacted for the last two millenia on the whole world, i can't think of anything more sensible to study in history than the Romans, but even in Australia where we tend to ignore our own history we didn;t do the Romans.
Crazy huh

We do, but we pretty much only study American 20th century history. For instance, we completely ignore everything about Germany from WWI to WWII. We learn about how Germany was defeated in WWI, and how the Treaty of Versailles crippled them, and then we go back and study the Great Depression in America until BAM!, Nazis. We don't learn anything about what happened in the intervening years, just that Nazis are suddenly around conquering Europe.

"And Sdaeriji, as the Romans pretty much set the borders of the Eastern and Western world, which has impacted for the last two millenia on the whole world, i can't think of anything more sensible to study in history than the Romans, but even in Australia where we tend to ignore our own history we didn;t do the Romans.
Crazy huh "


still havent got the hang of quoting on this forum...


Anway, i dont know why you didnt study it in school, especially since you live in melbourne, and i'm from a small town in qld, but i studied both modern and ancient history.

Here in America there's a tremendous bias towards American-only history. While I think it would be nice if this war was taught in American history classes, perhaps we should start a little more fundamental, say with Roman history?

It's very true what s/he said. Every event in the world is looked at from an American perspective in America. In fact, all we really hear about WWI is Prince ferdinand was assassinated, Germans, Chlorine gas, Stupid French, We come in, Allies win, Germany castrated until later Hitler comes to power. Then WWII. Germany invades Poland, submarines shoot things, Cash and Carry Politics. Lusitania sinks, along with lots of other vessels. We declare war. Battle of the bulge, Dunkirk, Russia, Eisenhauer, Normandy, Rommel, Tanks, D-Day, Genocide, gas chambers, concentration camps. Japanese Kamakazees, Midway, Island hopping, Cold war, Stalin, Churchill, Roosevelt. Yalta. Truman orders Hiroshima and Nagasaki to be nuked, Japs surrender. Game over. That's about it. Of course this is super-abridged, but yeah. Only through personal inquisition can you find out the little details

Gran type [ quote ] [ / quote] before and after the passage you want to quote. But leave out the spaces

What does OCC: mean?

Poland had absolutely no relevance for European politics ever since the divisions of Poland in the 18th century. And every nation in Europe was more concerned with itself after WW1, so this war really is not important to know about.

I beg your pardon? Without Poland WWII might never of been won by the allies. If not for Poland "Enigma" would probably of never been decoded. I for one think Poland is quite relevant.

Poland - You will not be forgotten (www.youforgotpoland.com)!

What's funny is that Poland has lots of shiny rocks, burning rocks, and black, burnable water, but they don't know what to do with them. So many vital resources that could easily make the economy boom, but no. You're asking Poland, a country that practically used swords against German Tiger tanks.

I don't see why it matters. I mean who reads about any history that dosen't pertain to them. How often do you resd about the Great Northern War, in which Sweden, once a great power, lost out to the Russians, who then began to really assert themselves in that region? Or for that matter the importance of the Russo-Japanese War, which halted Russian expansion in the East, and gave Japan the standing to eventually try its own imperialism in WWII.

I don't see why it matters. I mean who reads about any history that dosen't pertain to them. How often do you resd about the Great Northern War, in which Sweden, once a great power, lost out to the Russians, who then began to really assert themselves in that region? Or for that matter the importance of the Russo-Japanese War, which halted Russian expansion in the East, and gave Japan the standing to eventually try its own imperialism in WWII.
That's an immensely shallow viewpoint my friend.

Shallow?!

Shallow?!

Yes, "anything that does not directly pertain to me is unimportant" is a very shallow viewpoint.

how much do you know about things not pertaining to you? (as in your culture)

Poland - You will not be forgotten (www.youforgotpoland.com)!

how much do you know about things not pertaining to you? (as in your culture)

Well, I've read about the Great Northern War and the Russo-Japanese War, for starters.

Wait you don't study 20th century history? How is that possible?

And Sdaeriji, as the Romans pretty much set the borders of the Eastern and Western world, which has impacted for the last two millenia on the whole world, i can't think of anything more sensible to study in history than the Romans, but even in Australia where we tend to ignore our own history we didn;t do the Romans.
Crazy huh

I don't know what school you attended, but here, in backward Queensland we study Australian history in High and Primary school, plus there was also a subject caled 'Ancient history' which covers Rome/Greese intensivly and skims over the rest.

This war was important! The fact that Poland could hold off the soviets (even though they were still locked in a civil war) was incredible. The Poles are the world's bravest people! :mp5: :sniper:

how much do you know about things not pertaining to you? (as in your culture)
You'd be surprised...

I learnt about this in school and I think it's pretty important..

So, we have a very large majority who think that this should be taught, and a majority who believe it is important.

So, we have a very large majority who think that this should be taught, and a majority who believe it is important.

Yes, And I believe strongly that the war tought that there was, and still is a lot of hope for Poland. According to Wikipedia, the Poles had 500,000 men, and the Russians had 5,000,000 or something. Poland is good at fighting..

Yes and no.. Actually more yes.

I see the problem about this war, was that the land mass of the countries, during those times were different compared to now.

So maybe they don't bother teaching as it would be confusing?

History classes should stop exulting war and the murderers who start them and devote more time to peace, how to perpetuate it, and the people who preserve it.

In the United States we tell each other the lie that in every war, including the current one, soldiers fight and die for freedom, instead of being honest and admitting that damn few wars are about protecting freedom or even self defense.

History classes should stop exulting war and the murderers who start them and devote more time to peace, how to perpetuate it, and the people who preserve it.
That is called "Peace Studies." http://buckeyelink.osu.edu/masterschedule/msched.aspx

Select the "int stds" option on the department scrolly thing, and you'll see peace studies right on top.

History is about what occured in the past, and that is almost universally war. There are precious few moments of peace in human history.

Oh, I've never had a history class that has "exulted" war.

Yes, And I believe strongly that the war tought that there was, and still is a lot of hope for Poland. According to Wikipedia, the Poles had 500,000 men, and the Russians had 5,000,000 or something. Poland is good at fighting..

But you must also remember that while the Poles were using a lot of leftover equipment (and many different types), they were still 500,000 motivated, experienced, and organized troops. The vast majority of the Soviet Army thrown against the Poles was ill-trained, most were the same peasant class the fought on both the White and Red side simply because they were conscripted, not because of ideology (contrary to White, and especially, Red propoganda) and largely indifferent after the catastrophes of the First World War and Revolution. The Poles also did not fight alone, they relied heavily on western aid in both material and a large number of "observers".

The problem with teaching the Polish-Soviet War is the general confusion of the days of the Russian Civil War. To properly explain the War, you have to delve into the various factions that fought in it (it wasn't just the Soviets and Poles), and into a war which didn't really change anything, just stopped things from changing. It's like the Battle of Vienna, how many classes study this turning point (Ok, I'll admit Tours is learned), not many. Because of time constraints, there is simply no time to do this because usually this is studied along with WWII and beyond (I know where I teach, it would be covered in post-1815 History), and studying the conditions prevalent in Germany during the Weimar Years and Japan in the 30's is simply more relevant.

Like I said earlier, I'm not asking for an in depth discussion, but a bsic overview of the war, maybe 15 minutes in class, so as to display it's importance.

I mean, hell we spent a full week on the War of 1812 in the US and that changed nothing either, just perceptions of the US as its own nation.

Of course, this still goes with my 20th century history course idea, and a greater understanding of the world situation (Ukrainian-Polish relations, etc.)

Like I said earlier, I'm not asking for an in depth discussion, but a bsic overview of the war, maybe 15 minutes in class, so as to display it's importance.

I mean, hell we spent a full week on the War of 1812 in the US and that changed nothing either, just perceptions of the US as its own nation.

Of course, this still goes with my 20th century history course idea, and a greater understanding of the world situation (Ukrainian-Polish relations, etc.)

Well, you can get into a lot more detail when studying strictly US history (it's not even that long), which is what you do in US History. I think it's a good idea to have a history class on the nation you live in, though I wish for an expanded world history (personally, I hate American History classes, because while major world events are going on you have to talk about trends and developements in American Life, which doesn't get interesting until after WWII, with small breaks in the Progressive Era and Great Depression). Currently, where I teach it is required to take 2 years of World History (Post Rome to 1815, and Since 1815, Ancient History is taught in the grade that precedes high school).

*bump into the daytime*

No, what's really important is Poland-Lithuania in the 16th and 17th centuries. It looks so cool on the map next to all of the other cruddy kingdoms.

In Britain, we are taught very little history which extends outside the borders of Europe. However I do agree with you that this war should be taught in schools. It should be added with empehisis as an extention of the WW1 course because many students you talk to believe that the period between WW1 and WW2 were very quiet (In terms of conflict). Wether or not Poland is powerful now is irrelevent to the importance of this conflict. Many could argue that Egypt is no longer a significent power but we still learn about Egyptian anchient history.

Isn't "Poland" a Slavic word for "exit" or "ausfahrt"?

It's mostly a collection of highways, railroads, and airports on the way to somewhere else.

Isn't "Poland" a Slavic word for "exit" or "ausfahrt"?

It's mostly a collection of highways, railroads, and airports on the way to somewhere else.

It comes from the Latin (I think) Polanie, which means "dwellers in the field".

Isn't "Poland" a Slavic word for "exit" or "ausfahrt"?

It's mostly a collection of highways, railroads, and airports on the way to somewhere else.
I cannot find any reference to this name meaning, but I'd assume that it's more a reference to the people who live there, the Poles.

And Poland occupies the vast open plain between Germany and Russia, two nations with severe attitude problems. But it's far more than just a transit center. Poland is growing industry these days, and agriculture as well. So, while transportation is important for Poland, it isn't the only thing there.

The real forgotten war is the NApolianic wars, the 4th biggest war (About, at elast in countrys ivolved) in histroy, and what do you here of it. Nowt.

The real forgotten war is the NApolianic wars, the 4th biggest war (About, at elast in countrys ivolved) in histroy, and what do you here of it. Nowt.
I learned about the Napoleonic war in my ninth grade "World Studies" class, in the same superficial detail as we did WWI, so I wasn't thinking that way.


And admittedly, a better title for this thread would be "A Forgotten War" but "The Forgotten War" is more recognizable and eye catching than it.

But you must also remember that while the Poles were using a lot of leftover equipment (and many different types), they were still 500,000 motivated, experienced, and organized troops. The vast majority of the Soviet Army thrown against the Poles was ill-trained, most were the same peasant class the fought on both the White and Red side simply because they were conscripted, not because of ideology (contrary to White, and especially, Red propoganda) and largely indifferent after the catastrophes of the First World War and Revolution. The Poles also did not fight alone, they relied heavily on western aid in both material and a large number of "observers".

Yeah, and you also have to remember that the Soviets were locked in a civil war, and just lost 2 million men in World War I. Still amazing, considred how outnumbered the Poles were, and How new they were. I mean, you'd think that after 100 years of being split among 3 other nations, Poland would be too weak to raise a good fighting army in just 1 year. Left over troops from Germany, Austria, and Russia must have helped rebuilding, though. ;)

No, what's really important is Poland-Lithuania in the 16th and 17th centuries. It looks so cool on the map next to all of the other cruddy kingdoms.

Yeah, I couldn't have said it better. Poland will rise again!

Edit: Yeah, cruddy kingdoms like Germany, and Russia at the time. To bad Poland never occupied them, they're peaceful.

Yeah, I couldn't have said it better. Poland will rise again!

Not just Poland, Poland-Lithuania. And it's gonna be my personal left-wing utopia. (j/k) :D

My nose is itching. What's going on in here?

Not just Poland, Poland-Lithuania. And it's gonna be my personal left-wing utopia. (j/k) :D

Same here. If j/k means joke, well i'm not joking! Poland's people are the bravest in the world! :D

My nose is itching. What's going on in here?

Nothing, just talking about a certain piece of dirt of which its main tourist attractions are former death camps and a fallen-over tower. :D (kidding)

Do I smell a third Tannenberg in the forming?

You Forgot Poland,


No, I never forget about Poland. (joke)

Do I smell a third Tannenberg in the forming?

What do you mean? Oh, you think this will become a flame thread, don't you. :(

Never mind the fact that we had to cover all of World War II in three days when I was in high school, there must be a place for Poland in the curriculum!

Never mind the fact that I have no idea what happened to America after 1947 because that was where the semester ended!

The children must hear the tales of our great Pole forebearers! They must not be forgotten!

Nothing, just talking about a certain piece of dirt of which its main tourist attractions are former death camps and a fallen-over tower. :D (kidding)

Don't forget, there are also lots of forest in Poland!

No, I never forget about Poland. (joke)

Oh, I get it. A Polish joke. Don't you have some crosses to be burning?

Never mind the fact that we had to cover all of World War II in three days when I was in high school, there must be a place for Poland in the curriculum!

Never mind the fact that I have no idea what happened to America after 1947 because that was where the semester ended!

The children must hear the tales of our great Pole forebearers! They must not be forgotten!

Seriously, 1947, I usually get to at least the 1970's.

Don't forget, there are also lots of forest in Poland!

Oh yeah. I hear they have ticks that crawl into your ears and such.

What do you mean? Oh, you think this will become a flame thread, don't you. :(

Actually I was referring to the ideas of a Polish-Lithuania Rising again, since both Battles of Tannenberg can be said to have led to these natiosn rising (the second more indirectly).

Oh, I get it. A Polish joke. Don't you have some crosses to be burning?

What? Why would I burn crosses? Seriously, did you forgot that 90% of Poles are catholic? :rolleyes:

Actually I was referring to the ideas of a Polish-Lithuania Rising again, since both Battles of Tannenberg can be said to have led to these natiosn rising (the second more indirectly).

Yeah, sounds like the Poles need another Tannenberg. By the way, I am American, but I am part Polish, so good enough.

Seriously, 1947, I usually get to at least the 1970's.

What are these "1970s" of which you speak?

What are these "1970s" of which you speak?

That was about the time that Poles were still in Communism, and America was fighting Vietnam, with lots of protest by the hippies.

I learned about the Napoleonic war in my ninth grade "World Studies" class, in the same superficial detail as we did WWI, so I wasn't thinking that way.


And admittedly, a better title for this thread would be "A Forgotten War" but "The Forgotten War" is more recognizable and eye catching than it.
We don't d anything over here, you wouldn't know it existed, let alone it was the 3rd biggest war in British History.

Other than in war colleges, where wars are studied to learn strategy and tactics, wars are studied in schools because of the impact they had on society and history. This war, to my knowledge, had very little impact on European or world history. I fail to see the "tremendous importance to the west."
So having Germany, and possibly France in the hands of the USSR in the 1920's isn't of tremendous importance?


However, one area of tremendous importance to the west, often overlooked in history texts and classes, is the degree to which Poles collaborated with their Nazi invaders in exterminating the largest Jewish population in Europe just a few decades after the Soviet-Poland skirmish. Certainly Poland suffered at the hands of the Germans during World War II, since Hitler believed Poland was not a legitimate national entity with no right to sovereign existance.

However, it was in Poland that mass murder of the Jews began and was perfected. The death camps were located in Poland, not Germany. While the Nazis established concentration camps throughout the occupied countries of Western Europe, all but one of the death camps was located in Poland. And in Poland the Germans found many willing participants to help them and few Poles interested in protecting the Jews. While no Polish governmental agency had any connection with the death camps, individual Poles did work in the camps and did assist the Germans in rounding up and killing Jews. When the war ended few Poles returned the land or property to the survivors and even participated in murders of those who managed to live through the Holocaust.
There were collaboraters in Poland, but there were collaboraters all over Europe. But there were far more people killed by the Nazis in Poland than those who worked for them. Over one million Poles died in camps.

The reason the death camps were in Poland is because the Nazis didn't want the extermination camps in their precious Germany. Not because the Poles asked for the camps to be placed there.

so many battles, so little time...

So having Germany, and possibly France in the hands of the USSR in the 1920's isn't of tremendous importance?

Sure, that would have been important if that was what this skirmish was about. However, it is not. This was a conflict over the borders between Poland and Russia, with the Poles hoping to take advantage of the Civil War in Russia to make inroads into Ukraine (a long standing historical conflict between those two peoples). The Soviet Union had no intention (or ability) of rolling into Germany or France.

Germany did have its own Sparticist (Communist) Revolution led by Karl Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemburg, but it was put down prior to the conflict you are referring to.

This war had little impact on historical events in Europe.

Sure, that would have been important if that was what this skirmish was about. However, it is not. This was a conflict over the borders between Poland and Russia, with the Poles hoping to take advantage of the Civil War in Russia to make inroads into Ukraine (a long standing historical conflict between those two peoples). The Soviet Union had no intention (or ability) of rolling into Germany or France.

Germany did have its own Sparticist (Communist) Revolution led by Karl Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemburg, but it was put down prior to the conflict you are referring to.

This war had little impact on historical events in Europe.
Did you even read the article? Did you read about Lenin's goals with this conflict? That seems to contradict your statement that it was a border dispute.

And, more than that, even though the Soviets might not have had the ability to go into western Europe in 1920, who's to say that they wouldn't have had that ability in five years, or ten years?

Yes there were attempts by the Poles to take land in the Ukraine, but it was unorganized by any government, and was just a militia attempt.

Yes, non-Jewish Poles were also victims of the Nazis, but you cannot ignore the long history of Polish anti-Semitism that made it convenient for the Germans to place all but one of their death camps in Poland. In Poland they found a population receptive to their "Final Solution" to the "Jewish Problem."
Why Poland then? Every nation in Europe has a history of anti-semitism. The Poles weren't nearly as complicit in the holocaust as you paint them.

I don't see the charges you're making anywhere online, just a few links on Google, namely three. And beyond that there are far more links about IBM's ties to the holocaust than the Polish ties.

Your characterization of the Poles as implicit in the Holocaust is incorrect.

And just for everyone's information, just so you don't assume that I'm a Polish nationalist or anything, I'm an American of English and Bavarian descent, so, yeah.

There are literally thousands of little “forgotten wars” similar to the Soviet-Poland border dispute referred to here. Among the other conflicts just during the same time period of this minor conflict also not taught in world history survey courses are China’s conquest of Tibet, civil wars in Syria and Morocco against French colonial overlords, uprisings in Nigeria, Iraq, and especially India against the British, a revolution in Mexico, and a genocide against Armenians by Turkey that saw at least 1.5 million people killed. Even the 1918-1919 Influenza Epidemic, which killed more people worldwide than died in World War I, gets short shrift in history books.

It makes little sense to teach a minor border conflict that had essentially no impact on later events when there are much more monumental events of this time period, such as the Russian Revolution, the Russian Civil War, the post-WWI peace treaties, the formation of the League of Nations, the beginning of the end of colonialism, and the sowing of the seeds of fascism and World War II.

And that is just political history.

I would much rather spend time teaching about Surrealism and Cubism in Art, Jazz and Blues in music, the rise of youth culture with the advent of radio and automobiles, discoveries in physics and science, and a whole host of developments taking place in the 1920s, all far more important and more interesting than another battle over boundaries between countries.

There are literally thousands of little “forgotten wars” similar to the Soviet-Poland border dispute referred to here. Among the other conflicts just during the same time period of this minor conflict also not taught in world history survey courses are China’s conquest of Tibet, civil wars in Syria and Morocco against French colonial overlords, uprisings in Nigeria, Iraq, and especially India against the British, a revolution in Mexico, and a genocide against Armenians by Turkey that saw at least 1.5 million people killed. Even the 1918-1919 Influenza Epidemic, which killed more people worldwide than died in World War I, gets short shrift in history books.

It makes little sense to teach a minor border conflict that had essentially no impact on later events when there are much more monumental events of this time period, such as the Russian Revolution, the Russian Civil War, the post-WWI peace treaties, the formation of the League of Nations, the beginning of the end of colonialism, and the sowing of the seeds of fascism and World War II.

And that is just political history.

I would much rather spend time teaching about Surrealism and Cubism in Art, Jazz and Blues in music, the rise of youth culture with the advent of radio and automobiles, discoveries in physics and science, and a whole host of developments taking place in the 1920s, all far more important and more interesting than another battle over boundaries between countries.

Uh, have you been looking at this thread? The Soviets would've used Poland to export communism to the rest of Europe. The fact alone that Poland stood up to Sovietland was incredible. Isn't the Russian civil war and the Russian revolution the same thing? :rolleyes:

There are literally thousands of little “forgotten wars” similar to the Soviet-Poland border dispute referred to here. Among the other conflicts just during the same time period of this minor conflict also not taught in world history survey courses are China’s conquest of Tibet, civil wars in Syria and Morocco against French colonial overlords, uprisings in Nigeria, Iraq, and especially India against the British, a revolution in Mexico, and a genocide against Armenians by Turkey that saw at least 1.5 million people killed. Even the 1918-1919 Influenza Epidemic, which killed more people worldwide than died in World War, gets short shrift in history books.


China's conquest of Tibet, the revolts against the French colonial masters (especially Algeria) and the revolts against the English in India, the Mexican Revolution, and the Armenian genocide are all taught, at least in passing, in most high schools in America. The Influenza Epidemic was particularly well covered in my AP History course in 11th grade. Perhaps they only get brief mention, but that is more mention than this war gets.

Uh, have you been looking at this thread? The Soviets would've used Poland to export communism to the rest of Europe. The fact alone that Poland stood up to Sovietland was incredible. Isn't the Russian civil war and the Russian revolution the same thing? :rolleyes:

Not entirely. The Russian Revolution was the Bolshevik uprising, and the Russian Civil War was the ensuing fighting between the Reds and the Whites.

During the 20 years of independence between the two world wars Poland revoked guarantees protecting Jews from discrimination, passed anti-Semitic laws and discriminatory regulations and restrictive practices, revoked citizenship of all Jewish Poles outside the country, and carried out repeated pogroms against Jews.

All this before the invasion of the Nazis.

As I said before Poles were victims of the Nazis and also some Poles risked their lives to protect Polish Jews during the occupation. However, Poles also aided the Nazis in their persecution of Jews.

I do not have a web site for you, but I recommend Jan Gross' book, Neighbors, in which he tells of the Polish residents of the town of Jedwabne rounding up and slaughtering over 1,000 Jews on July 10, 1941. The book depicts a daylong slaughter, during which Jews were knifed and drowned, their throats slashed, and their babies stomped to death. At the end of the day, the remaining Jews were herded into a barn that was set ablaze.

At Radzilow, some 1,500 were massacred; 1,200 in nearby Wsosz.

When the war ended the few Jewish survivors who came back to their villages, towns or shtetls found that their property had been taken over by Poles. There are very well recorded instances of atrocities committed by Poles against the Jewish survivors including the pogroms carried out by Poles at Cracow and Kielce in 1946.

Look into the history of Poland during the war. It is not a flattering picture.

Look at the history of any European nation. Anti-Semitism is not a uniquely Polish phenomenon. Why do you single out and attack Poland?

China's conquest of Tibet, the revolts against the French colonial masters (especially Algeria) and the revolts against the English in India, the Mexican Revolution, and the Armenian genocide are all taught, at least in passing, in most high schools in America. The Influenza Epidemic was particularly well covered in my AP History course in 11th grade. Perhaps they only get brief mention, but that is more mention than this war gets.

Wellll, I don't know about "most high schools." Perhaps in an AP course and certainly, the Mexican Revolution and the struggle for Indian Independence should be discussed in honors classes, as well. The recent popularity of medical history means the Influenza Epidemic is probably finding its way into newer textbooks.

Sounds like you had a good world history teacher.

Because this thread is about Poland.

You are correct. Anti-Semitism is found throughout Europe and indeed the world. However, although the Germans found many willing accomplices in Eastern Europe for their atrocities against the Jews, nowhere more so than Poland.

But this thread is not about Polish anti-Semitism; it is about a war between Poland and Russia in 1919-1921. Yet you bring up Polish anti-Semitism in WWII, something that took place 20 years after the event we were discussing.

But this thread is not about Polish anti-Semitism; it is about a war between Poland and Russia in 1919-1921. Yet you bring up Polish anti-Semitism in WWII, something that took place 20 years after the event we were discussing.
I second the motion, how did this thread go from importance of the Bolshevik/Polish War to Polish anti-semitism?

My point was that if you are going to teach something about Polish 20th century history that has been overlooked in most survey courses I would say that the complicity of Poles during the holocaust is far more important than a minor border war that went nowhere.

You could have gone a different route and talked about Lech Walsea and Solidarity.

My point was that if you are going to teach something about Polish 20th century history that has been overlooked in most survey courses I would say that the complicity of Poles during the holocaust is far more important than a minor border war that went nowhere.
Or the 1,000,000+ Poles who died in Nazi camps, plus another 1,000,000 who died at Nazi hands outside of the camps.

I mean, hell I type in "Polish Complicity in the Holocaust" on google and I get these as the top three matches.

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/opinion/2961688.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp
http://www.holocaustforgotten.com/lukas.htm
http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~sarmatia/904/243letters.html

Yes, if I were interested only in "happy history" and was worried about hurting people's feeling because they are uncomfortable with true events that rarely get talked about.
You seemed to be completely ignoring it though, and only focusing on the "unhappy history."

And weren't you the one who told us we should study more about how to effect peaceful change like what Solidarity did?

Yes, but the Solidarity movement is taught in history classes. There is a difference between a history course focusing on military history (a many high school classes do) and recognizing that the Holocaust was not some aberration that affected only the German people. Many people (including Austrians, Ukrainians, Russians, and yes, Poles) have gotten off the hook for their role in the Nazi death machine because the atrocities committed by the Germans was so great that it overshadowed lesser atrocities and allowed people to say this was solely a German-thing.

Does it offend you that Poles participated in the killing and oppression of Jews? Or do you deny it?

Why don't you talk about Austrians, Ukrainians, or Russians, then? And don't say because this thread is about the Poles because we've already established that it is about the Polish-Russian war. Seems the Russians should be fair game.

As it stands, it seems like you have a bone to pick with Poland.

Yes, what's with the vehement disgust with Poland?

Yes, what's with the vehement disgust with Poland?

If you read the book I referenced, Neighbors, about the actions of Poles during the war vehement disgust is the only humane response, however...

Why don't you talk about Austrians, Ukrainians, or Russians, then? And don't say because this thread is about the Poles because we've already established that it is about the Polish-Russian war. Seems the Russians should be fair game.

As it stands, it seems like you have a bone to pick with Poland.

I have a bone to pick only in the sense that they have gotten a free pass for their part in the Holocaust. We can talk about the role of the Ukrainians, who were some of the most sadistic guards and allies of the Nazis. We can talk about the greatest killers of all, the Communist Russians, who were responsible for more deaths in the 20th century (62 million) than any other people, including the Nazis.

However, I sense that that is not to your, or Andaluciae's, interest and that is fair enough. Andaluciae started a thread to discuss a border war between Russia and Poland in 1919-1920, which is obviously of interest to Andaluciae, so I withdraw my comments about other aspects of Poland's 20th century history.

I usually get to at least the 1970's.

Oh, the decade right after "The Party" broke us free from the hands of the evil capitalists and invents the airplane? ;) Sorry, our history books don't go that far.
I remember that; they put a chocolate ration on us.

Poland sucks! (rabble, rabble, rabble)

Poland sucks! (rabble, rabble, rabble)\

Poland is cool! Go back to one of your Teletubby threads or something, because I don't think you know what we are talking about. Poles are the worlds bravest people !! They fought numerous wars with Germany, fought the Tartars, Mongols, Russians, Hungarians, Bohemians, Swedes, and they just don't give up! They were split between Russia, Germany, and Austria/Hungary. They soon got independance, and they fought the war with Russia, and won! Betcha didn't know that, huh? They always come back and get you! :mp5: :sniper: Polska jest chłodna! Bieguny polak są śmiałe!

apparently, the (rabble, rabble, rabble) wasn't enough for you to realize the facetious nature of my post. Must I spell it out?

Besides, when the Mongols planned to invade Poland, the country technically didnt exist yet; it was mostly Germanic peoples. Also, the reason why the Mongols failed to invade Poland was because Genghis Khan AND Ogedei Khan, the two bloodthirsty expansionists, died before it could come through. Bet you didn't know that.

The reason why people want Poland is because of it's vast resources, (coal, oil, iron, and fertile soil), something everyone wants. If Poland is so great and resilient, then why were they under communist rule until the breakup of the USSR? Even today, that country has enormous problems (20% unemployment rate). The US's unemp rate during the Great Depression was about 25%. That's bad. The CIA factbook is my source.
CIA (http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/pl.html#Econ)

PS. Teletubby? First of all, all this place has for topics is: I hate Christians/Jews/Religious people, "Why are athiests so dumb," Gays, Discrimination crap. Second, how do teletubbies come in to a Poland discussion?

and today stands out as a success story among transition economies.
And Japan was deemed hopeless, and could never become anything significant again. ha. And the Japs actually were nuked twice on it's two major industrial cities. As well as the loss of enormous amounts of skilled labor, infrastructure, naval power, land, resources...

So, yeah, oddly enough, this happens to be one of my more popular topics...

Maybe if Americans learned a little about the rest of the world we wouldn't be so egocentric. Fortunately, I had some AP classes, because the regular classes skimmed over ancient Mediterranean civilizations then went almost straight to the discovery of the New World. Most Americans couldn't find Poland on a map.

I'm glad I can find most any country on a map...

So, yeah, oddly enough, this happens to be one of my more popular topics...

Well, any historical topic will have me posting away in it, at the very least.

I only have trouble with the african nations on the Ivory coast and some of the -istans.

Most Americans couldn't find Poland on a map.
Sadly, some Americans cant find America on the map... :eek: :(

American only history that's taught in public schools is usually referred to as US history and will have a couple different levels, but that doesn't mean america is bbiased towards itse;f in school. of course it's going to teach about the nation you live in's history. You school should however offer World history classes as well that will start with the messopetamia era. I know for a fact mine do.

I'm also getting queit upset about how many europeans think that americans don't know anything about the rest of the world. I'd nearly go as far and say that alot of americans probably know about the rest of the world better than, well, the rest of the world... Europeans here so many bad things about americans that they are so inclined to believe that americans are nothing but selfish, ignorant morons. Some american will crack jokes at thier own country, which is fine, but europeans seems to take them seriously, or serious enough to believe we're that ignorant and selfish. And i'm not saying all europeans either, just refering to the ones that have bashed america.

Not only do some europeans and other countries bash america but they don't want the spread of our global economy. They hate seeing McDonalds in thier towns simply because it's american. well you know what, i'm sure they'd close it down if it didn't make any business. so apparently there are those that like western food, culture, and styles, and other should not be mad because we're making it easier for them. I wouldn't mind at all if some french, japanese, or chinese food company came over and opened a few resterants.

People the bashing must stop and the understandings must begin...

Oh and Fox, i think the Jews have been much more resilient than the poles in my opinion.

Uh, have you been looking at this thread? The Soviets would've used Poland to export communism to the rest of Europe. The fact alone that Poland stood up to Sovietland was incredible. Isn't the Russian civil war and the Russian revolution the same thing? :rolleyes:

The problem being that there are hundreds of events in history that offer the same thing, had the Ottomans won the Battle of Vienna, Muslim influence in Europe would have continued north, same with Tours (these are just well-known examples, and not entirely accurate). What if Adrianople had never occurred, or the Army of Chalons relieved Metz and crushed the upstart Germans in 1870 instead of being crushed at Sedan. The Polish-Soviet War has the unfortunate situation of being one of these wars, but also squished in between two colossal world events with extensive causes that must be studied, and as this war is not easily directly related to it in anything but what-if, it is easily skipped over.

They hate seeing McDonalds in thier towns simply because it's american.
I believe the reason is more because the food tastes like pig vomit. :)

I believe the reason is more because the food tastes like pig vomit. :)
Lol now see jokes like that are funny but some people blow them out of proportion and say america sucks because things like "McdDonalds food sucks". Anyhoo, they buy it don't they? lol

OK, OK, I admit, I believe McCrappys has the best fast food fries. But I can't remember the last time I've eaten there; years perhaps. I'm an American, and damn proud of it, but I can extrapolate and understand these other countries issues with Amurikunization. My town has lost so many jobs and stores due to Wal-Mart supercenters all over. We have 4, and soon one more to come in our town alone. We've lost everything from hardware stores to strip clubs, those bastards. I read somewhere that Wal-mart employs more people than the Army (or armed forces, I forgot). I believe Toy's R Us is going bankrupt for plain and simple, Wal-Mart sells more toys than them. It destroys OUR culture. The land of the super-sized chili cheeze hotdog with extra lard, a basket of fries, and a Diet, one calorie coke (afterall, that drink would add unnecessary calories :rolleyes: )

Maybe I'm missing something, but what does any of that have to do with the Polish-Russian war of 1919-1921?

oh, I thought this was a different thread. I trashed my post. Now, like the case of 1984, delete all record of it, make it an unpost, please. :)