De Gaulle and French betrayal of Poland in Semptember 1939

Discussions on all aspects of Poland during the Second Polish Republic and the Second World War. Hosted by Piotr Kapuscinski.
ljadw
Member
Posts: 12877
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: De Gaulle and French betrayal of Poland in Semptember 1939

Post by ljadw » 16 Jan 2022 11:31

Arthur Sulzberger Jr :'The work of Duranty should have been recognized for what it was by his editors and his Pulitzer judges seven decades ago .
Karl Meyer (member of the editorial board of the NYT ) said on 24 June 1990 (was it a coincidence that communism was than collapsing ?) that Duranty's articles were'' some of the worst reporting to appear in this newspaper.''
And what said comrade Duranty himself on 23 August 1933 ?
He said : '' Any report of a famine in Russia is today an exaggeration or malignant reporting propaganda .''
Thus for the NYT ( not only Duranty ) : to say that there was a famine in Russia was malignant propaganda .
At the same time, and the NYT knew it, there was a relief committee in Vienna headed by cardinal Innitzer, the head of the protestant church in Austria and the chief rabbi of Vienna .
Conclusion : the NYT was nothing more than an English translation of the Pravda and Izvestia .

ljadw
Member
Posts: 12877
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: De Gaulle and French betrayal of Poland in Semptember 1939

Post by ljadw » 16 Jan 2022 11:40

gebhk wrote:
16 Jan 2022 09:46
Seeing a lot of evidence for the proposition that NYT was reporting the Hlodomor while all we have in favour of the opposite is 'blah'. Just sayin....
Sulzberger and Meyer would disagree with you .And Sulzberger was the boss of the NYT .
Besides,comrade Duranty defended also the Moscow Show Trials .
Why did the editors of the NYT not recognize that Duranty lied ? Because they agreed with Duranty and were thus also liars .
Why did Sulzberger and Meyer kowtow?

ljadw
Member
Posts: 12877
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: De Gaulle and French betrayal of Poland in Semptember 1939

Post by ljadw » 16 Jan 2022 11:47

The Polish military attaché in Moscow (Jan Kowalevski ) informed the Polish government about the famine, but still the NYT continued to deny that there was a famine .
Source : Non Soviet perspectives on the Great Famine .

User avatar
wm
Member
Posts: 7002
Joined: 29 Dec 2006 20:11
Location: Poland

Re: De Gaulle and French betrayal of Poland in Semptember 1939

Post by wm » 16 Jan 2022 11:58

The actual (not creatively falsified) Duranty's "exaggeration or malignant" article.
Screen Shot 2022-01-16 at 11.40.47.png
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
Gorque
Member
Posts: 1369
Joined: 11 Feb 2009 18:20
Location: Clocktown

Re: De Gaulle and French betrayal of Poland in Semptember 1939

Post by Gorque » 16 Jan 2022 13:12

ljadw wrote:
15 Jan 2022 19:05
Gorque wrote:
15 Jan 2022 15:06
ljadw wrote:
15 Jan 2022 07:46
Gorque wrote:
15 Jan 2022 03:21
"BTW: I posted the NY Times article from 1926 that you referred to earlier; kindly show us the Communist/Marxist/Socialist/Leftist/(have I forgotten one?) tilt in the article."

So...I'm still waiting. Where is your rebuttal?
I am waiting to see the proof that I said that the article from 1926 was Communist/Marxist/Socialist/Leftist .
I have used this article as a proof that the NYT operated as a tabloid .

Well here you go again.
ljadw wrote:
14 Jan 2022 09:28
About the NYT : would the present Polish PM give an interview to the Guardian or the Independent, two left wing anti Poland newspapers ?
Why did Rydz give an interview to a pro communist US journalist from a pro communist US tabloid ( the NYT )?
The NYT was pro communist ,as it did hide intentionally the news about the famine in the USSR (the famine was not limited to Ukraine ) and the news was generally known : my father knew it from one of his teachers .
The NYT was nothing more than a tabloid :
examples
In October 1926 it claimed, without proofs,that Pilsudski was plotting to become king of Poland ..
In September 1941 (US were still neutral ) it claimed that Germany had lost in the Polish campaign 90000 dead and 200000 wounded (Polish propaganda figures ) although every one knows that only German figures can be used for German KIA and WIA and Polish figures for Polish KIA and WIA , etc .
About Rydz : after the defeat he blamed Pilsudski and was forbidden by Sikorski (head of the Polish government in exile ) to return to Poland to command the Army Craiova.

From post # 392 of this thread
I am pleased that you agree with what I said : I said that the article from October 1926 was on the level of a tabloid,I did not say that this article proved the communist sympathies from the NYT .
The pro communist sympathies from the NYT are proved by the articles from Duranty who intentionally did hide the fact that there was a famine in Russia .
That it was also a tabloid is proved by the Article of October 1926 .
Two different things in two different articles (series of articles ) .
Be more careful in the future .

Play that game then, even though it was part and parcel of the same thought.

What part of the article proves it is a tabloid?

User avatar
wm
Member
Posts: 7002
Joined: 29 Dec 2006 20:11
Location: Poland

Re: De Gaulle and French betrayal of Poland in Semptember 1939

Post by wm » 16 Jan 2022 13:47

ljadw wrote:In September 1941 (US were still neutral ) it claimed that Germany had lost in the Polish campaign 90000 dead and 200000 wounded (Polish propaganda figures ) although every one knows that only German figures can be used for German KIA and WIA and Polish figures for Polish KIA and WIA , etc .
Screen Shot 2022-01-16 at 13.43.02.png
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
Gorque
Member
Posts: 1369
Joined: 11 Feb 2009 18:20
Location: Clocktown

Re: De Gaulle and French betrayal of Poland in Semptember 1939

Post by Gorque » 16 Jan 2022 13:48

ljadw wrote:
15 Jan 2022 19:46
Gorque wrote:
15 Jan 2022 15:14
ljadw wrote:
15 Jan 2022 09:52
Gorque wrote:
13 Jan 2022 21:31
ljadw wrote:
13 Jan 2022 07:30
Is it to troll to say that the positions from Churchill and De Gaulle before the war,made what they said,totally irrelevant ?
De Gaulle was a discredited colonel of the French Army (you know how many colonels there were in France in 1939 ? )and I see that you have no notion of the opinions of the political parties about Churchill :
for the Tories he was a traitor and an intriguer:they had not forgotten what he had done between 1929 and 1931
for Labour he was only a disguised fascist ( he had supported Mussolini ) and had ordered the police to shoot on strikers
for the Liberals he was an old fashioned racist imperialist
for the intellectuals he was a warmonger
the public opinion had not forgotten his role in the abdication crisis.
Considering Churchill's past posts held and his current posting as a long-term MP, calling his opinion "irrelevant" borders upon ignorance. As far as De Gaulle is concerned, he was a forward thinking staff officer in the 30's who was also promoting, much like Guderian, the use of tanks and mechanization for the French Army. Once again, to render his opinions within the defense establishment "irrelevant," borders on ignorance.
Is it to troll to say that Mary Heaton Vorse was an ultra left American journalist whose writings about the situation in Europe were determined by her political opinions ?
Yes it is. What does her political leanings have to do she quoted Rydzs Smygly?? She was INTERVIEWING Rydzs Smygly and quoted what he SAID. Think about this. Did the New York Times retract her story because she misquoted Rydzs Smygly? The only person whose judgement is clouded by their political beliefs and preconceived notions is you.
Is it to troll to say that Vansittart was fired at the demand of Eden ?
And what was the opinion of Eden about his POSS ?
Eden said : "he is not balanced and in such a continual state of nerves that he will end up making would-be aggressors think the more of us as a potential victim. '' (source is Rhodes James )
There you go again Ludo, moving the goal posts again.

You stated "he did not represent HMG and was fired by Eden in 1938 and what he said were only assumptions,without any proof"

For your information, after his dismissal, Vansitarrt was given a newly created position of "Chief Diplomatic Adviser to His Majesty's Government" in which he served until 1941. Did you conveniently forget the bolded first part of your statement???
About Vansittart: on 9 October 1937,Chamberlain wrote in his letter to his sister Hilda that Vansittart was a man whose '' instincts were all against my policy ''
The source is John Charmley :Chamberlain and the Lost Peace P 34 and Note 11 on P 216.
The obvious conclusion is that after he was fired, Vansittart did not represent the views of the British Government and that his newly created position represented nothing .Unless you think that the British PM would use as his representant someone whose instincts were all against the policy of the PM.
There is even no proof that when Eden became again Foreign Secretary, he listened to/asked the opinions of Vansittart .
A nice quote, but how does it disprove the fact that Vansitartt and Drax were entrusted not only with negotiating with the Soviets in the summer of 1939, but also that he held the position of "Chief Diplomatic Adviser to His Majesty's Government"?
1 Vansittart and Drax were not going to Moscow to negotiate with the Soviets,as HMG knew very well that the Soviets could not and would not help .Not to prevent a war.Not to help Poland if there was a war .They could not do it even if they wanted and they would not want to do it even if they could .There were no negotiations between B+ F and the Soviets .
It was all keeping up appearances .
They went to Moscow ,wasting their time, only for political domestic reasons ,which were that Lloyd George ( who hated Chamberlain ) and Churchill demanded in the Commons that the government should send a mission to Moscow to have Russia (= the Red Army ) on its side when war broke out .If there was a possibility that this could happen, Halifax would go to Moscow . But he knew that it was only a wast of time.
2 The title from Vansittart does not mean that he had any political influence :the title was only hollow words .
Chamberlain knew very well what the opinion was of Vansittart .See his letter to his sister and it was out of the question that the Chief Diplomatic Adviser to his Majesty's Government would play a role .No one took any notion of Vansittart .
Other point : if the opposite had occurred = 1 September attack by the Soviets,17 September intervention by Hitler to prevent the Soviets from taking Danzig and West Prussia,would the situation have been different ?
NO ,of course: Drax, Vansittart and Doumenc would go to Berlin . Poland would refuse any German help and Hitler would ask what would be his reward if he intervened .
And the wokes who blamed Stalin and Chamberlain,would now blame Hitler and Chamberlain .
Already in 1938,Churchill was talking ,bombastly as usual,about the Great Alliance (B+ F and the USSR )
and Chamberlain wrote to his sister: ''the Plan of the Grand Alliance,as Winston calls it,is a very attractive idea,till you examine its practicability.From that moment its attraction vanishes .''
Source : Churchill The Greatest Briton unmasked (Nigel Knight ) P 80 Note 15 .
And, was the situation of Poland better in 1939 ? Of course not .
There was nothing Britain and France could do to prevent Hitler from attacking Poland .And there was nothing they could do to prevent Hitler from defeating Poland .
In re Churchill The Greatest Briton unmasked"

"I think it was Carlyle who wrote that “No book that will not improve by repeated readings deserves to be read at all.” That pretty much sums up Nigel Knight’s new book on Churchill. If you want to read a book on Churchill that is unreservedly negative on almost all aspects of his career, pick up Clive Ponting’s biography instead. Or even David Irving’s. Really. You’ll thank me for it.

Two-thirds of Knight’s book is devoted to World War II, which the Allies won despite Churchill’s best efforts to give the game away. Chapter 7’s title, “Dunkirk: Churchill’s Defeat,” lets you know where Knight is coming from. The last paragraph in the book tells you where he ends up:

t was Hitler who made Churchill a historical figure. If it had not been for Hitler, Churchill … would be largely forgotten today. It is because of Churchill’s role in World War II…that we remember Churchill, above all else, for Hitler’s defeat. Hitler, however, is remembered for himself.

No, I’m not making this up. That’s the last sentence in the book. What does it mean? You tell me. I can think of several explanations.

First, maybe Nigel just isn’t that good a writer. I almost didn’t make it past the first page after reading this sentence: “In 1895 Churchill endured the deaths of both his father and his childhood nurse, to whom he had been very attached as his American mother, Jennie, had ignored him.”

Of course, Jennie hadn’t ignored him and Churchill certainly wasn’t “very attached” to his father. Perhaps Knight only meant Churchill was attached to his nurse “Woomany,” and not his father as well? The sentence doesn’t say that but I gave him the benefit of the doubt and read on.

A second explanation is that he just doesn’t know that much about Hitler or the Nazis—a flaw which tends to put a Churchill biographer at a disadvantage. I confess that I didn’t make it past Chapter 3, “Disarmament: Weakening Britain’s Defence in the 1920s” before I started skimming. Hey, what’s good enough for Carlyle is good enough for me.

Knight’s thesis is that when Churchill was at the Exchequer in Baldwin’s first government from 1924 to 1929, “Churchill’s desire for disarmament in the 1920s weakened national defences just at the time when the threat from the active Nazi movement in Germany was becoming apparent.”

Give me a break. Apparent to whom? Hitler was in jail during 1924 when Churchill became Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Nazi Party was banned in Germany as a result of its failed putsch in Munich the year before. Hitler began to rebuild the party in 1925 and was so miserably unsuccessful at it over the next four years that the party received only 2.6% of the vote in the 1928 Reichstag elections good for a paltry twelve seats. By the spring of 1929, the Conservatives and Churchill were out of power. The “threat from the active Nazi movement in Germany” didn’t become apparent to anyone until 14 September 1930 when, thanks to the worldwide depression, the Nazis went from 2.6% and twelve seats to 18.3% and 107 seats, making them the second largest party in Germany."



Yup, another *ahem* authoritive source from ljadw!

User avatar
Gorque
Member
Posts: 1369
Joined: 11 Feb 2009 18:20
Location: Clocktown

Re: De Gaulle and French betrayal of Poland in Semptember 1939

Post by Gorque » 16 Jan 2022 13:56

ljadw wrote:
15 Jan 2022 19:50
Gorque wrote:
15 Jan 2022 15:17
ljadw wrote:
15 Jan 2022 10:09
And, from Spartacus-Educational (Title :Robert Vansittart )
''In January 1938,Vansittart was ''kicked upstairs''assuming the high-sounding,but politically meaningless,title of chief diplomatic adviser to the government .''
It might be meaningless, but he was still in the employ of H.M. government nor does it explain away his being entrusted with negotiating with the Soviets in the summer of 1939.
There would be no negotiations with the Soviets, only blah blah as every one knew that the Soviets could and would do nothing to help Poland .
Well that's a very convincing argument. You've won me over.

Unfortunately, according to Drax, he and Vansitartt were on a bona-fide mission to get the Soviets onboard.

User avatar
wm
Member
Posts: 7002
Joined: 29 Dec 2006 20:11
Location: Poland

Re: De Gaulle and French betrayal of Poland in Semptember 1939

Post by wm » 16 Jan 2022 14:47

The "Polish NYT" (Ilustrowany Kurier Codzienny) about the to-become-king-of-Poland hysteria.
It says the original source was Warsaw dailies, and then the rumor was reprinted by French, German, British leading newspapers including "Daily Mail" and "The Times."
IKC 300.png
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
Gorque
Member
Posts: 1369
Joined: 11 Feb 2009 18:20
Location: Clocktown

Re: De Gaulle and French betrayal of Poland in Semptember 1939

Post by Gorque » 16 Jan 2022 15:12

ljadw wrote:
15 Jan 2022 19:46
1 Vansittart and Drax were not going to Moscow to negotiate with the Soviets,as HMG knew very well that the Soviets could not and would not help .Not to prevent a war.Not to help Poland if there was a war .They could not do it even if they wanted and they would not want to do it even if they could .There were no negotiations between B+ F and the Soviets .
It was all keeping up appearances .
They went to Moscow ,wasting their time, only for political domestic reasons ,which were that Lloyd George ( who hated Chamberlain ) and Churchill demanded in the Commons that the government should send a mission to Moscow to have Russia (= the Red Army ) on its side when war broke out .If there was a possibility that this could happen, Halifax would go to Moscow . But he knew that it was only a wast of time.
Regarding Drax going to Moscow:
Mission 1.PNG
Mission 2.PNG
Mission 3.PNG
Source: 1939: The Alliance That Never Was and the Coming of World War II
By Michael Jabara Carley
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
Gorque
Member
Posts: 1369
Joined: 11 Feb 2009 18:20
Location: Clocktown

Re: De Gaulle and French betrayal of Poland in Semptember 1939

Post by Gorque » 16 Jan 2022 15:53

ljadw wrote:
15 Jan 2022 19:46
2 The title from Vansittart does not mean that he had any political influence :the title was only hollow words .
Chamberlain knew very well what the opinion was of Vansittart .See his letter to his sister and it was out of the question that the Chief Diplomatic Adviser to his Majesty's Government would play a role .No one took any notion of Vansittart .
And yet he was still in the employ of the British government, receiving diplomatic reports and giving handing out advice; i.e. political influence.

gebhk
Member
Posts: 2012
Joined: 25 Feb 2013 20:23

Re: De Gaulle and French betrayal of Poland in Semptember 1939

Post by gebhk » 16 Jan 2022 17:03

Sulzberger and Meyer would disagree with you .And Sulzberger was the boss of the NYT .
I didn't realise that Sulzberger and Meyer are avid followers of AHF! :thumbsup: If so I am eager to hear them disagree. Albeit can't see how they could, given the evidence is right before us. A bunch of actual cuttings vs a bunch of blah.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 12877
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: De Gaulle and French betrayal of Poland in Semptember 1939

Post by ljadw » 17 Jan 2022 14:38

Gorque wrote:
16 Jan 2022 13:56
ljadw wrote:
15 Jan 2022 19:50
Gorque wrote:
15 Jan 2022 15:17
ljadw wrote:
15 Jan 2022 10:09
And, from Spartacus-Educational (Title :Robert Vansittart )
''In January 1938,Vansittart was ''kicked upstairs''assuming the high-sounding,but politically meaningless,title of chief diplomatic adviser to the government .''
It might be meaningless, but he was still in the employ of H.M. government nor does it explain away his being entrusted with negotiating with the Soviets in the summer of 1939.
There would be no negotiations with the Soviets, only blah blah as every one knew that the Soviets could and would do nothing to help Poland .
Well that's a very convincing argument. You've won me over.

Unfortunately, according to Drax, he and Vansitartt were on a bona-fide mission to get the Soviets onboard.
According to Drax :lol:
The PM did not want to have the Soviets on board in case of war,neither did the Poles .Thus :the mission was only propaganda.
Drax was an admiral ,without any competence of land war .
Vansittart had been fired ,was labelled as unstable by Eden and as hostile to HMG's policy .
If Chamberlain wanted to negotiate with the Soviets, he would send Halifax/Cadogan and Gort/Ironside .
Besides :WHY would Chamberlain want to negotiate with the Soviets ? Poland refused,rightly, to negotiate with the Soviets .
And Chamberlain knew very well what the Soviets would demand in exchange for their intervention .

ljadw
Member
Posts: 12877
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: De Gaulle and French betrayal of Poland in Semptember 1939

Post by ljadw » 17 Jan 2022 14:43

Gorque wrote:
16 Jan 2022 15:53
ljadw wrote:
15 Jan 2022 19:46
2 The title from Vansittart does not mean that he had any political influence :the title was only hollow words .
Chamberlain knew very well what the opinion was of Vansittart .See his letter to his sister and it was out of the question that the Chief Diplomatic Adviser to his Majesty's Government would play a role .No one took any notion of Vansittart .
And yet he was still in the employ of the British government, receiving diplomatic reports and giving handing out advice; i.e. political influence.
You have examples of Vansittart giving advice and of the government listening to his advice ? For the periods 1938-1939 and 1939-1941 .
Vansittart was hostile to appeasement ( reason : he hated all what was German, something which made him totally unfit for his post ),but appeasement continued til 3 September 1039.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 12877
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: De Gaulle and French betrayal of Poland in Semptember 1939

Post by ljadw » 17 Jan 2022 14:50

gebhk wrote:
16 Jan 2022 17:03
Sulzberger and Meyer would disagree with you .And Sulzberger was the boss of the NYT .
I didn't realise that Sulzberger and Meyer are avid followers of AHF! :thumbsup: If so I am eager to hear them disagree. Albeit can't see how they could, given the evidence is right before us. A bunch of actual cuttings vs a bunch of blah.
Meyer : His articles were some of the worst reporting to appear in this newspaper .
Sulzberger :His work should have been recognized for what it was by his editors and by the Pulitzer judges .
Muggeridge : Duranty was the greatest liar I knew .
And , why did all those liberals to take away Duranty's Pulitzer price ?
And Duranty was not the only in the NYT to deny and defend the communist atrocities,for ideological reasons .

Return to “Poland 1919-1945”