Speculative What-if fight: Poland v. Soviet Union 1937

Discussions on alternate history, including events up to 20 years before today. Hosted by Terry Duncan.
User avatar
wm
Member
Posts: 6209
Joined: 29 Dec 2006 20:11
Location: Poland

Re: Speculative What-if fight: Poland v. Soviet Union 1937

Post by wm » 14 Nov 2020 10:17

The plan was to create a Ukrainian state, an ally of Poland against Russia. After the battle of Warsaw, the Poles regained Kiev so it was doable.

But during the peace talks at Riga, people who were against such ideas prevailed and handed over the territories to the Soviets.
They believed that, in the long term, such a state would be a threat to Poland too.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 11582
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Speculative What-if fight: Poland v. Soviet Union 1937

Post by ljadw » 15 Nov 2020 08:57

And they were wrong to believe this : why should the Ukrainians want to occupy territories populated by Poles ?
The Battle of Warsaw was in August 1920 ;the armistice in October 1920 . Do you say that between August and October the Polish army advanced again from Warsaw to Kiev ????
And if so : why did they give up Kiev ?

User avatar
wm
Member
Posts: 6209
Joined: 29 Dec 2006 20:11
Location: Poland

Re: Speculative What-if fight: Poland v. Soviet Union 1937

Post by wm » 15 Nov 2020 12:47

The final border was about 100+ kilometers from Kiev and the frontline was probably closer in October.
I've read that at that time a unit entered Kiev but was ordered to withdraw immediately.

It wasn't about the land.
Before the battle of Warsaw the goals were reasonable borders for Poland and a state for the Ukrainians (with the capital in Kiev).
After the battle, the goal was reasonable borders for Poland and nothing else.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 11582
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Speculative What-if fight: Poland v. Soviet Union 1937

Post by ljadw » 19 Nov 2020 16:26

Poland had still after the Battle of Warsaw,the possibility to create a state for the Ukrainians .

James A Pratt III
Member
Posts: 751
Joined: 30 Apr 2006 00:08
Location: Texas

Re: Speculative What-if fight: Poland v. Soviet Union 1937

Post by James A Pratt III » 27 Nov 2020 22:14

back to the hypothetical war of 1937 Black sea Naval operations:
Soviet submarines sank 1 Bulgarian merchant ship (Bulgarians upset!) and their mines damaged a Rumanian merchant ship. In return they lost 2 submarines do to mines and one by depth charge attack after being spotted by an aircraft while trying to attack a axis convoy. The Rumanians ran two convoys this year from Constanza to Istanbul and back escorted by most of their navy. The above Soviet submarine was sunk while trying to attack it. The soviets sent a force of 2 cruiserrs and 2 destroyers to intercept the second convoy heading back from Istanbul but the force was sighted by aircraft and aborted the mission. The Soviet navy did shell Constanza with there only battleship, cruisers and destoryers which did some damage. In return a cruiser was hit be a shore battery. The Soviet navy did on 3 occations have cruisers, destroyers and other ships provide naval gunfire support for the Red Army. Late this year both German and Italian seaplane squadrons arrived and started flying operations over the Black Sea. One of them managed to damage a Soviet merchant ship with a near miss form a bomb.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 11582
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Speculative What-if fight: Poland v. Soviet Union 1937

Post by ljadw » 28 Nov 2020 11:30

And the Convention of Montreux ?

James A Pratt III
Member
Posts: 751
Joined: 30 Apr 2006 00:08
Location: Texas

Re: Speculative What-if fight: Poland v. Soviet Union 1937

Post by James A Pratt III » 28 Nov 2020 22:54

1937 war the home front:
USSR food ect is in short supply for most of the people. An estimated 500,000 to 1 million die of starvation ect during this year. The people by rumor mill know that casualties are heavy. Many people call it Stalin's war or the second German war they do not reguard it as their war. Meanwhile the country is in total confusion do to the purges and the war. People are sent to the Gulag or shot for little or in some cases no reason.

The Axis many people blame including a few Poles blame the Polish leadership for this war. Heavy casualties, defeats and loss of land hurt moral. Reports of Soviet atrocities in occupied territory shock people. Food ect is rationed but still enough to live on in most Axis countries. Many Italians are unhappy that L'Duce got them into a war which will not benefit them at all and they will have a "mutilated peace' as in the Great War.

lahoda
Member
Posts: 62
Joined: 29 May 2020 14:31
Location: Hradec Králové, Czech Republic

Re: Speculative What-if fight: Poland v. Soviet Union 1937

Post by lahoda » 29 Nov 2020 23:02

wm wrote:
05 Nov 2020 19:50
Czechoslovakia didn't merely annex the Sudentenland but parts of Hungary, Ukraine, Poland, and even Slovakia.
Huh? So called "Sudetenland" had been part of the Bohemian Kingdom for 10 centuries. How can you annex your own territory? How did slovaks annex part of Slovakia from Slovakia? You must be holding it wrong!
wm wrote:
05 Nov 2020 19:50
Actually, the Czechs were a major Eastern European predator, and their antics made any meaningful alliance between Eastern European countries impossible.
Whom did they ate? The dispute of the Těšín area in 1919 was result of problematic moves on both Czechoslovakian and Polish side, but clearly Poles escalated the situation with the one sided move - (announced elections).
The relation of two states remained problematic, and both Beneš and Beck can be blamed for this, and both countries paid a heavy price for this short-sighted policy of their leaders.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 11582
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Speculative What-if fight: Poland v. Soviet Union 1937

Post by ljadw » 30 Nov 2020 12:21

lahoda wrote:
29 Nov 2020 23:02
wm wrote:
05 Nov 2020 19:50
Czechoslovakia didn't merely annex the Sudentenland but parts of Hungary, Ukraine, Poland, and even Slovakia.
Huh? So called "Sudetenland" had been part of the Bohemian Kingdom for 10 centuries. How can you annex your own territory? How did slovaks annex part of Slovakia from Slovakia? You must be holding it wrong!
wm wrote:
05 Nov 2020 19:50
Actually, the Czechs were a major Eastern European predator, and their antics made any meaningful alliance between Eastern European countries impossible.
Whom did they ate? The dispute of the Těšín area in 1919 was result of problematic moves on both Czechoslovakian and Polish side, but clearly Poles escalated the situation with the one sided move - (announced elections).
The relation of two states remained problematic, and both Beneš and Beck can be blamed for this, and both countries paid a heavy price for this short-sighted policy of their leaders.
The Bohemian Kingdom did not exist in 1919 .What happened is that the Czechs forced ,using violence, the inhabitants of Sudetenland,to give up their aspirations for an Anschluss with Germany and to remain, as second rank people, in the new state of Czechoslovakia,which did not exist before 1919 .
The Bohemian Kingdom had been for several centuries ,a part of he Austrian Empire . That did not give Hitler the right to annex de facto the Bohemian Kingdom in March 1939 .
Hitler did in 1939 what the Czechs and the Poles had done 20 years before .
Ulster had been a part of Ireland for several centuries ,but that does not give the IRA the right to annex Ulster .

ljadw
Member
Posts: 11582
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Speculative What-if fight: Poland v. Soviet Union 1937

Post by ljadw » 30 Nov 2020 12:38

lahoda wrote:
29 Nov 2020 23:02
wm wrote:
05 Nov 2020 19:50
Czechoslovakia didn't merely annex the Sudentenland but parts of Hungary, Ukraine, Poland, and even Slovakia.
Huh? So called "Sudetenland" had been part of the Bohemian Kingdom for 10 centuries. How can you annex your own territory? How did slovaks annex part of Slovakia from Slovakia? You must be holding it wrong!

Carpathian Ruthenia was a part of Hungary and was annexed by the Czechs .

Peter89
Member
Posts: 987
Joined: 28 Aug 2018 05:52
Location: Spain

Re: Speculative What-if fight: Poland v. Soviet Union 1937

Post by Peter89 » 30 Nov 2020 13:25

lahoda wrote:
29 Nov 2020 23:02
wm wrote:
05 Nov 2020 19:50
Czechoslovakia didn't merely annex the Sudentenland but parts of Hungary, Ukraine, Poland, and even Slovakia.
Huh? So called "Sudetenland" had been part of the Bohemian Kingdom for 10 centuries. How can you annex your own territory? How did slovaks annex part of Slovakia from Slovakia? You must be holding it wrong!
wm wrote:
05 Nov 2020 19:50
Actually, the Czechs were a major Eastern European predator, and their antics made any meaningful alliance between Eastern European countries impossible.
Whom did they ate? The dispute of the Těšín area in 1919 was result of problematic moves on both Czechoslovakian and Polish side, but clearly Poles escalated the situation with the one sided move - (announced elections).
The relation of two states remained problematic, and both Beneš and Beck can be blamed for this, and both countries paid a heavy price for this short-sighted policy of their leaders.
The 10 centuries of the Bohemian Kingdom is a fiction, much like the 1000 year old Kingdom of Hungary. The Kingdom of Bohemia was founded in 1198, but after 1526 it existed as a part of the Habsburg Empire. So it was a medieval kingdom for 328 years, mostly under foreign influence and that's about it. Also, the Kingdom of Hungary did only exist between 1000 and 1526, but the Hungarian lineage of kings died out in 1301.

In reality, from 1526 it was one country that was neither called Bohemia, or Austria, or Hungary, or Moravia, or Slovakia: it was called the Habsburg Empire, and the administrative borders inside it were meaningless in regards of national claims.
“And while I am talking to you, mothers and fathers, I give you one more assurance. I have said this before, but I shall say it again, and again and again. Your boys are not going to be sent into any foreign wars." - FDR, October 1940

lahoda
Member
Posts: 62
Joined: 29 May 2020 14:31
Location: Hradec Králové, Czech Republic

Re: Speculative What-if fight: Poland v. Soviet Union 1937

Post by lahoda » 30 Nov 2020 14:53

Peter89 wrote:
30 Nov 2020 13:25
The 10 centuries of the Bohemian Kingdom is a fiction, much like the 1000 year old Kingdom of Hungary. The Kingdom of Bohemia was founded in 1198, but after 1526 it existed as a part of the Habsburg Empire. So it was a medieval kingdom for 328 years, mostly under foreign influence and that's about it. Also, the Kingdom of Hungary did only exist between 1000 and 1526, but the Hungarian lineage of kings died out in 1301.

In reality, from 1526 it was one country that was neither called Bohemia, or Austria, or Hungary, or Moravia, or Slovakia: it was called the Habsburg Empire, and the administrative borders inside it were meaningless in regards of national claims.
No it is not. Bohemian Kingdom existed even in 1918. Yes, it was part of the Habsburg Empire, but its integrity and traditional institutions were never questioned by Habsburgs. Franz Joseph II. was never crowned for the King of Bohemia, which was a political mistake which could be one of the main reasons why A-H empire ceased to exists. If Archduke Ferdinand was not assasinated, he'd correct this, federalise the Empire with Bohemia one of its states and the Habsburg Empire would probably still exist nowdays. It was unfathomable that part of that "administrative area" would be given to a foreign country. Sudetend German claims were made out of thin air by Hitler, there was no historical reason for them, and they were as absurd as to cede Florida to Cuba or London to Bangladesh now.

Peter89
Member
Posts: 987
Joined: 28 Aug 2018 05:52
Location: Spain

Re: Speculative What-if fight: Poland v. Soviet Union 1937

Post by Peter89 » 30 Nov 2020 18:31

lahoda wrote:
30 Nov 2020 14:53
Peter89 wrote:
30 Nov 2020 13:25
The 10 centuries of the Bohemian Kingdom is a fiction, much like the 1000 year old Kingdom of Hungary. The Kingdom of Bohemia was founded in 1198, but after 1526 it existed as a part of the Habsburg Empire. So it was a medieval kingdom for 328 years, mostly under foreign influence and that's about it. Also, the Kingdom of Hungary did only exist between 1000 and 1526, but the Hungarian lineage of kings died out in 1301.

In reality, from 1526 it was one country that was neither called Bohemia, or Austria, or Hungary, or Moravia, or Slovakia: it was called the Habsburg Empire, and the administrative borders inside it were meaningless in regards of national claims.
No it is not. Bohemian Kingdom existed even in 1918.
lahoda wrote:
30 Nov 2020 14:53
Yes, it was part of the Habsburg Empire,
You know, a lot of nations in Europe nurture such ideas. There's only one problem with that: it is not true. In fact, the kingdoms of the Balkans were the first nation states in Eastern/Southeastern Europe; and they fared terribly. Serbia, Romania, Greece and Bulgaria all were well behind the development of the A-H nations, they were constantly fighting each other, and there was no hope in sight for them to catch up with the West. Nor has been ever since.

The Habsburg Empire was a patchwork of feudal fiefdoms and conquests, including Bohemia, Hungary, Croatia and Transsylvania. But that does not mean that countries like Transsylvania was "always there", just because they enjoyed some form of authority and autonomy within the Empire.

This misreading of history is very common in Europe, though. For example, the Catalans think that their kingdom that existed back in the medieval ages, because some form of Catalan "state", a Principality existed even in the medieval ages - that happened to have no rights of a modern national state to govern itself. The chance to create the nation state of Czechia came in 1993, just as to create the nation state of Hungary came in 1920.

Half of the book I'm writing is about these kind of superstitions.
lahoda wrote:
30 Nov 2020 14:53
Franz Joseph II. was never crowned for the King of Bohemia, which was a political mistake which could be one of the main reasons why A-H empire ceased to exists. If Archduke Ferdinand was not assasinated, he'd correct this, federalise the Empire with Bohemia one of its states and the Habsburg Empire would probably still exist nowdays.
I'd like to think so, but I fear it's just wishful thinking from my part. It's a scenario where reason and goodwill prevails, and short sighted nationalism fails. The Hungarian decision makers of the day were well too stupid and too powerful to let it happen.
lahoda wrote:
30 Nov 2020 14:53
It was unfathomable that part of that "administrative area" would be given to a foreign country. Sudetend German claims were made out of thin air by Hitler, there was no historical reason for them, and they were as absurd as to cede Florida to Cuba or London to Bangladesh now.
In this instance, you are clearly wrong. For example, the neighbouring Silesia was also attached to Germany.
“And while I am talking to you, mothers and fathers, I give you one more assurance. I have said this before, but I shall say it again, and again and again. Your boys are not going to be sent into any foreign wars." - FDR, October 1940

lahoda
Member
Posts: 62
Joined: 29 May 2020 14:31
Location: Hradec Králové, Czech Republic

Re: Speculative What-if fight: Poland v. Soviet Union 1937

Post by lahoda » 01 Dec 2020 00:12

Peter89 wrote:
30 Nov 2020 18:31
You know, a lot of nations in Europe nurture such ideas. There's only one problem with that: it is not true. In fact, the kingdoms of the Balkans were the first nation states in Eastern/Southeastern Europe; and they fared terribly. Serbia, Romania, Greece and Bulgaria all were well behind the development of the A-H nations, they were constantly fighting each other, and there was no hope in sight for them to catch up with the West. Nor has been ever since.
To paraphrase you: there is only one proble with your statement: it is not true. Like it or not, the Kingdom of Bohemia existed all the way to 1918. The crown was real, the territory was there, the institutions were here. Kingdom separated from the Habsburgs in 1619 and was independent state, only to lose war with better organised armies. Yet the Kingdom was never dissolved, there were many Bohemian Kings from the Habsburg dynasty.
Provide the proof that this happened, that any Habsburg emperor voided the existence of the Kingdom of Bohemia. You can't as this only happened in your altered reality. As I said, many Habsburgs were crowned Bohemian Kings.
When Holy Roman Empire was dissolved in 1806, the Kingdom of Bohemia was recognised by the whole Europe. It was still fully functional state which was part of the Empire. You could argue that this status changed somewhat after the Austro-Hungarian Compromise of 1867, forced by dire situation of yet another lost war against Prussia (had Habsburgs won this one, there was never state as Germany as we know nowadays, just saying), but this is far from the picture you are trying to paint, it was just one generation (one decision of single short-sighted emperor, who paid high price for that).

Not sure why you mention fates of other states formed after the collapse of the A-H empire, even if they were behind economically, it doesn't change a thing.
Peter89 wrote:
30 Nov 2020 18:31
In this instance, you are clearly wrong. For example, the neighbouring Silesia was also attached to Germany.
What are you talking about? This is total fabrication. Silesia was gradually detached from Habsburg Empire when they lost 2 wars against Prussia, even before Germany was formed. This is what sometimes happen if you lose a war. There were too many ethnic Germans in this area so reattaching this territory back wouldn't fly in the era influenced by the Wilson-driven policy of self-determination on ethnic principle. This policy allowed Czech (and Slovak) politicians to establish a state which they thought was more beneficial to them, so they were opportunistic. Had Spain lost the Great war as an ally of Germany, Catalunia could be independent state since 1918.
If the idea of territorial continuity had preference over the Wilson's principle, and A-H would still collapsed, there would be a Czech state established in the historical Kingdom of Bohemia borders.

Peter89
Member
Posts: 987
Joined: 28 Aug 2018 05:52
Location: Spain

Re: Speculative What-if fight: Poland v. Soviet Union 1937

Post by Peter89 » 01 Dec 2020 07:46

lahoda wrote:
01 Dec 2020 00:12

To paraphrase you: there is only one proble with your statement: it is not true. Like it or not, the Kingdom of Bohemia existed all the way to 1918. The crown was real, the territory was there, the institutions were here.
The crown had to go to the Habsburgs, its existence was symbolic. The Habsburgs didn't rule over a series of independent lands: they ruled over them all at once, hereditary, from Vienna.

We can argue forever whether Czechia, Hungary, Transsylvania, Croatia, etc. existed for 10+ centuries or not, pointing out lost rebellions and the limited use of local traditions. I do not argue that some symbolic representation of these feudal states did not remain; my argument is that the Kingdom of Czechia and Hungary ceased to exist as an independent entity in 1526. Thus fabricating the idea of a thousand year history of these states are false.

It's not something I like or do not like: it was simply so.
lahoda wrote:
01 Dec 2020 00:12
Kingdom separated from the Habsburgs in 1619 and was independent state, only to lose war with better organised armies.
It usually happens with rebels. Then it came back to the flock.
lahoda wrote:
01 Dec 2020 00:12
Yet the Kingdom was never dissolved, there were many Bohemian Kings from the Habsburg dynasty.
Are you joking? This is like saying: Ukraine had a lot of great leaders from Moscow: Stalin, Hruschev... No. Ukraine existed as an administrative entity, but it wasn't a country.

So it happens that the Kaiser in Vienna had a lot of titles, including the King of Bohemia. It wasn't that the Bohemians could decide otherwise, because then "the better organized armies" would come.
lahoda wrote:
01 Dec 2020 00:12
Provide the proof that this happened, that any Habsburg emperor voided the existence of the Kingdom of Bohemia. You can't as this only happened in your altered reality.
It only happened in your altered reality where you gave me ideas I never said. Let me tell what I think, how about that?
lahoda wrote:
01 Dec 2020 00:12
As I said, many Habsburgs were crowned Bohemian Kings.
And if they weren't, they still ruled Bohemia. How do you think that was possible?
lahoda wrote:
01 Dec 2020 00:12
When Holy Roman Empire was dissolved in 1806, the Kingdom of Bohemia was recognised by the whole Europe. It was still fully functional state which was part of the Empire.
What do you mean it was recognized? It was part of the Habsburg Empire before and after that.

A fully functional state?
lahoda wrote:
01 Dec 2020 00:12
You could argue that this status changed somewhat after the Austro-Hungarian Compromise of 1867, forced by dire situation of yet another lost war against Prussia (had Habsburgs won this one, there was never state as Germany as we know nowadays, just saying), but this is far from the picture you are trying to paint, it was just one generation (one decision of single short-sighted emperor, who paid high price for that).
This status didn't change a bit in 1867. Joseph II was also not crowned in Bohemia (or in Hungary); the Habsburgs ruled these lands with or without the rather symbolic coronations.
lahoda wrote:
01 Dec 2020 00:12
Not sure why you mention fates of other states formed after the collapse of the A-H empire, even if they were behind economically, it doesn't change a thing.
I mention them because they were actually states with actual kings.
lahoda wrote:
01 Dec 2020 00:12
Peter89 wrote:
30 Nov 2020 18:31
In this instance, you are clearly wrong. For example, the neighbouring Silesia was also attached to Germany.
What are you talking about? This is total fabrication. Silesia was gradually detached from Habsburg Empire when they lost 2 wars against Prussia, even before Germany was formed. This is what sometimes happen if you lose a war.
In this instance, Prussia equalled Germany, but obviously you know what I meant.

My point was that the territory of the Kingdom of Bohemia could have been attached to Prussia (and thus later Germany) too. It wasn't an independent state.
“And while I am talking to you, mothers and fathers, I give you one more assurance. I have said this before, but I shall say it again, and again and again. Your boys are not going to be sent into any foreign wars." - FDR, October 1940

Return to “What if”