"The reason why Germany invaded Poland was ..... <<MOD WARNING>>

Got any proof for that?

 

http://www.polskieradio.pl/39/156/Artykul/475341

Do you understand Polish?

 

Unfortunately not.

 

OK. You could try and use google translate.

Basically what its saying is that the number of those killed was substantially lower than the 5,800 figure and that saboteurs were also present and were among those executed by the Polish Army.

 

Well.. this doesn't look good don't you think?











Or do you think those were all 'saboteurs' ?

 

Around 250 Germans were massacred upon the German invasion of Poland but the Germans subsequently murdered up to 3,000 Poles in the city of Bydgoszcz after taking over the city. Similar incidents also took place against Japanese minorities in Russian and Chinese territories at the time, which resulted in retaliatory measures in China. This is how things got escalated and up to 5 million Poles were killed by the end of the war and millions also lost their lives in China.

 

What? Of course any loss of life is terrible

I'm pretty sure that quite a few of them were.

Is there any point to any of this?

 

'Saboteurs' for 'what' ?

What could they 'sabotage' when the Germans came steamrolling into Poland and all was over and done for in a few weeks time?

 

I don't think that you understand what is meant by saboteur. Also it wasn't over for Poland when Germany invaded as they did inflict substantial losses upon the German. It was however hopeless when the USSR invaded.

 

Could you explain what you mean with 'saboteur' then?

And Germany basically conquered all of Europe within 1,5 year, what makes you think they would have any problems with Poland if the Soviets didn't join?

 

An act or acts with intent to injure, interfere with, or obstruct the national defence of a country by wilfully injuring or destroying, or attempting to injure or destroy, any national defence or war materiel, premises, or utilities, to include human and natural resources.

Because Germany lost a considerable amount of men and machines.

 

Danzig (which is a German city) was liberated in a few days only, as that city was the first to conquer. Now why should hundreds or thousands of 'saboteurs' be massacred by the Polish while that city was destined to fall anyway? That makes no sense and it was just brutal slaughter of civilians.
To classify them as 'saboteurs' is just a cheap way to cover up the massive warcrime.

Germany didn't lose a 'considerable amount' at all as they had deployed 1.250.000 men and 'only' lost 14.039 which is 1.12 % of the total.
Soviet Union entered Poland 2 weeks later, when most of the work already had been done by the Germans.

 

What does this have to do with Bromberg?

You're not making any sense. Hundreds of thousands weren't killed by the Poles and why would they do so when they had bigger problems?
Its also absurd to believe that a so many could be killed in such a short amount of

No its not. Being shot at supposed non-combatants is by definition an act of sabotage.

Not all 1.2M soldiers were front-line soldiers. You also negated the number of wounded Germans which was around 30,000 over only a couple of weeks.
Then of course there's the losses suffered by the German airforce with around 300 planes lost.

The USSR had fewer losses because Polish forces were focused on the Germans but because they invaded it meant that there was no hope of resistance.

 

Sorry, mixed up Danzig with Bromberg. Invasion started on 1 September 1939 and the Bromberg massacre was found out on 3 September, which is only 2 days after the invasion. Now how could the Poles find hundreds OR thousands of 'saboteurs' within that short timespan and massacre them? That's impossible and it was just brutal slaughter of German civilians. To classify those as saboteurs is just post-war propaganda in order to cover up the warcrime.

If the Soviets wouldn't have intervened, the Germans would have made short work of the remaining forces, just like they did in the rest of Europe.

 

They didn't find thousands of saboteurs. They found a few hundred plain clothed soldiers and local civilians who were quite happy to take a few potshots at the Polish soldiers.

Not without even greater losses which quite possibly could have made the invasion of France untenable.

 

That's nonsense because the Germans fought according to the rules of the Geneva convention. Even if you look up rule number 2 of the German soldier's 10 Commandments:

2. Combatants will be in uniform or will wear specially introduced and clearly distinguishable badges. Fighting in plain clothes or without such badges is prohibited.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/ww2/soldiercommand.html

I think you are confused with the Soviet Union who didn't sign the Geneva convention and indeed dressed their soldiers in civilian clothes oftenly.

That's nonsense; their losses would have been 2,5 % at max in that case if they went on for another 2 weeks.

Afterwards they slapped the whole British army back to Dunkirk in no-time, surrounded with their backs against the Atlantic.
Hitler was nice enough to let them go back home there as a good gesture, in stead of wiping them out on the spot.

 

No they didn't. They often used plain clothed soldiers and in fact the Brandenburgers were quite well known for doing so

I think that you are confused with the English language as "oftenly" is not a word and just because a country signs an agreement doesn't mean they always adhere to it even if it was was with one of the several Geneva conventions.

Based upon what exactly?

No they didn't considering the British Army wasn't based in France, what you're thinking of is the British expeditionary force which numbered roughly 150,000 men with only a handful of decent tanks.

The idea that Hitler intentionally let the BEF go is debatable at best

 

The Brandenburgers were a small commando-group. Not the hundreds (or even thousands) of German civilians massacred at Bromberg.

"Based upon what?" you say... well, what do you base on that German losses would have been significantly higher? The Polish army was getting slapped all over the place by the German army which moved with lightning speed (Blitzkrieg) and the war would have been over in no-time anyway, when Warsaw had fallen.

And regarding the Dunkirk event... have a read:


HITLER THE MERCIFUL
The REAL Story Of The Dunkirk Boatlift


SEPT 1939 - MAY 1940 / HITLER PLEAS FOR PEACE ARE IGNORED

The German-Polish War has ended quickly. There is nothing that the Allies can do help their Polish puppet. The relatively quiet period between the end of the Polish War until May 1940, is dubbed by a US Senator as "The Phoney War."
During this time, Hitler pleads for the Allies to withdraw their war declarations. Towards France he declares:

"I have always expressed to France my desire to bury forever our ancient enmity and bring together these two nations, both of which have such glorious pasts."

Towards the British, Hitler says:

"I have devoted no less effort to the achievement of Anglo-German understanding, no, more than that, of an Anglo-German friendship. At no time and in no place have I ever acted contrary to British interests..."Why should this war in the West be fought?"

Hitler's pleas for peace are ignored as the Allies amass 600,000 troops in Northern France.

Plans are openly discussed to advance eastward upon Germany through Belgium and Holland, as well as establishing operations in neutral Norway and Denmark, with or without their consent.

MAY 10, 1940 / WINSTON CHURCHILL REPLACES NEVILLE CHAMBERLAIN AS UK PRIME MINISTER

Churchill, and his London Zionist handlers, have been advocating for war with Germany for the past 5 years. His warmongering had made him an outcast in British politics. But now, with the press misrepresenting the facts surrounding the German-Polish War, Churchill is portrayed as some sort of wise prophet.
Hitler knows very well who Churchill is, and who he works for. With Churchill now in power, Hitler now knows for certain that "the Phony War" (Sept 1939 - May 1940) is about to become very real.

MAY 10, 1940 / GERMANY LAUNCHES PRE-EMPTIVE INVASION OF BELGIUM, HOLLAND, LUXEMBURG

Hitler&#8217;s pleas for peace are ignored as. The massive attack against Germany is to come through the countries of Belgium and The Netherlands (Holland), whose governments are under intense Allied pressure to allow safe passage for the planned Allied invasion of Germany. Hitler's hand is forced.

On the same day that Churchill comes to power, and as an act of national self-defense, Germany takes the fight to the Allies before they can bring it to German soil. In a stunning advance westward, the Blitzkrieg quickly overtakes the smaller nations, and pushes the Allied armies into a full retreat towards the beaches of northern France.

The Globo-Zionist press, as well as today&#8217;s history books, portrays the Blitz as &#8220;the conquest of Holland, Belgium, and France.&#8221; But the menacing presence of the 600,000 Allied troops is conveniently ignored.


Allies trapped on the beach! Hitler could easily have taken the entire Allied force prisoner.

MAY - JUNE 1940 / HITLER GRACIOUSLY ALLOWS THE BRITISH TO ESCAPE FROM DUNKIRK

The Allied armies are trapped on the beach at Dunkirk, France. The entire force can be easily captured, but Hitler issues a halt order. As a show of good faith towards his western tormentors, Hitler believes that the British will be more likely to stop fighting if they can escape with their dignity intact.

A massive boat lift involving British fishermen ferries the troops back across the English Channel. The western press maliciously spins Hitler&#8217;s gracious act as a &#8220;miraculous escape right under Hitler&#8217;s nose&#8221;, while the Zionist owned alcoholic Winston Churchill vows to keep fighting, scaring the British population with tales of imminent German invasion.


Ignoring the advice of his Generals, Hitler allows the Dunkirk Boatlift.


After Dunkirk, Hitler continues to pleads for peace as Churchill frightens his people.


General von Blumentritt

QUOTE TO REMEMBER

"He (Hitler) then astonished us by speaking with admiration of the British Empire, of the necessity for its existence, and of the civilization that Britain had brought into the world. ....He compared the British Empire with the Catholic Church saying they were both essential elements of stability in the world. He said that all he wanted from Britain was that she should acknowledge Germany's position on the Continent. The return of Germany's colonies would be desirable but not essential, and he would even offer to support Britain with troops if she should be involved in difficulties anywhere." - German General von Blumentritt

http://abundanthope.net/pages/Polit...-The-REAL-Story-Of-The-Dunkirk-Boatlift.shtml

 

Yes they were which is why they were a division sized formation.
Again there weren't thousands killed in Bromberg

That's not an answer. I said what did you base that opinion on?

Wow another article written by an anonymous author and hosted by a dubious website and is full of conjecture and unsupported assertions.
Its worthless.

 

Based upon the total loss of 1,12 % of Germans during the entire conflict. In the first 2 weeks the 'best' of the Polish forces were already crushed so it would have been a sweep up afterwards anyway; the Soviets entered the theatre when most of the work was already done.

Have you even read the article or do you just sweep it aside like that? All evidence, pictures and sources are in there regarding the Dunkirk event.

 

I did read the article and its rubbish.
If I simply swept it aside then why would I have listed my reasons?

 

Could you point out which part you exactly think is rubbish?

 

Well I think the whole thing is rubbish but I'll provide you with an analysis.

For a start the author is anonymous which is important because if the author has an identity then the article can be attributed to him and it also allows for the author to be contacted as well as researched in order to ascertain his credentials.

The first quote from Hitler can be attributed to his Reichstag address in the October after the war with Poland in which he states paradoxically that "At no time and in no place have I ever acted contrary to British interests" and this is despite the fact that both the UK and France established a treaty of guarantee to Poland.

An unsubstantiated claim.

Churchill became PM by sheer coincidence

Again its unsubstantiated

Its unlikely that 600,000 troops would have been menacing and considering at that time there would have been only one real route into Germany it would not be considered particularly threatening.
Also it fails to link which press sources its referring to.

This passage fails to state why Hitler gave the halt order.

So at best this is supposition

 

War is serious stuff! Hitler, knowing about Churchill, should have taken the British prisoner. He could have saved the German cities and its population from the worst nightmares and horrible deaths. One doesn't show mercy to one's enemy, especially not, if he didn't beg for it and promised to withdraw from the war. Hitler was not a trained and experienced general. Like a fool he gave his victory away at that moment! I hope it dawned on him later on, when the bombs rained down on Berlin, what a stupid fool he had been. Frau Fortuna had shown him her face and favored him, but after that blunder she turned her back on him and let him get the full blow of defeat.

This incident serves as a very good lesson for any fighter... fight until victory is yours!

 

The author is not anonymous; it is Mike King from www.tomatobubble.com who has written several books on multiple subjects.

Here are his credentials:

M. S. King is a private investigative journalist and researcher based in the New York City area. A 1987 graduate of Rutgers University, King's subsequent 30 year career in Marketing & Advertising has equipped him with a unique perspective when it comes to understanding how "public opinion" is indeed scientifically manufactured.

Madison Ave marketing acumen combines with 'City Boy' instincts to make M.S. King one of the most tenacious detectors of "things that don&#8217;t add up" in the world today. Says King of his admitted quirks, irreverent disdain for "conventional wisdom", and uncanny ability to ferret out and weave together important data points that others miss: "Had Sherlock Holmes been an actual historical personage, I would have been his reincarnation."

King&#8217;s other historical works, (see Amazon author page for M S King) include:

The Bad War: The REAL Story of World War II &#61623;
The War Against Putin: What the Government-Media Complex Isn&#8217;t Telling You About Russia &#61623;
Planet Rothschild: The Forbidden History of the New World Order &#61623;
Napoleon vs the Old & New World Orders &#61623;
The REAL Roosevelts: An Omitted History &#61623;
The British Mad Dog: Debunking the Myth of Winston Churchill

King&#8217;s other interests include: the animal kingdom, philosophy, chess, cooking, literature and history (with emphasis on events of the late 19th through the 20th centuries).

Well, treaty or no treaty, it was German territory (Danzig-corridor) which was stolen from them after WW I. After the Versailles dictate (which was not a peace treaty), Germans in Westprussia suddenly became Poles over night, they were forbidden to speak German, were constantly harassed, dispossessed, forbidden to hold any office and so on.

http://www.wintersonnenwende.com/scriptorium/english/archives/nothanks/wwr00.html

They were still building up their army and the Germans beat it to them in stead of waiting for them to be invaded.

Why else did you think he gave the halt order?