Dear Gopblin,
As for the clothing issue: you brought it up, in my post I was dispelling it (in case you haven't noticed).
In your previous post you stated that "there is no simple answer". In my previous post I believe I've adressed it. You may want to head back up there and pore over that bit again, unless you have a readily available explanation for how the following things can be confusing in any degree:
- the knowledge where those Polish POWs were in the form of the Ukrainian and Russian POW lists, putting those 16-18 k POWs in specific locations (Ostashkov, Kozelsk, Starobelsk)
- the lack of letters from thousands of those POWs after March 1940, preceded by the March 5th 1940 decision to carry out killings, coinciding to the April/May 1940 time when the killings were carried out
Is there any place for confusion there? Where did the POWs go after they so suddenly fell silent, if they were not executed?
Now, you will have to allow me some time to get through the link you've provided, but off the bat, based on what I'd read up on until now:
- 1930s document letterhead for a decision signed in March 1940? Because in history of the world it never happened that bureaucratic apparati continued to use a surplus of obsolete document forms after new forms had already been introduced, yes.
Now, bringing in "the extermination of 20-80,000 Soviet POWs before" and "felonies such as rape or murder", these juicy morsels are where you did not fail to please.
I presume "the extermination" refers to the fate of Soviet POWs in the wake of the Polish-Bolshevik war of the early 1920s?
Well, then:
- Soviet POWs 1920s, wiki and The abstract from the 2004 inquiry.
So the number is around 20k of Soviet POWs out of a total of 80k-85k, due to diseases (which, arguably, may be seen as a form of extermination if it can be shown it was deliberate and limited only to the POWs; it wasn't limited only to the POWs)
- Polish POWs 1920s, wiki, with around 20k out of ca. 50k dying.
If anything, the treatment was universally bad, and this is obviously appalling, but
Dear XXX:
You say you know the Soviets killed the Polish officers who are buried at Katyn.
But you do not know that. You believe that.
Belief is not the same thing as knowledge.
I've looked into this a good deal. In my view, nobody knows.
Even if these documents turn out to have been forgeries, that would not mean the Soviets didn't do it. It would simply mean that the evidence doesn't prove they did.
Maybe the Soviets did it! After all, either the Soviets killed the Polish officers, or the Nazis did.
Or -- as I am increasingly inclined to think -- the Soviets shot some of the Polish officers, and then later the Nazis shot the rest, for different reasons.
So, maybe the Soviets did shoot them all. But the evidence is not there.
Perhaps this paper was "planted" by the Soviets, to dupe Ms Harriman? Sure -- and perhaps all the similar papers found by the Germans were planted by them, to fool the Polish Red Cross and other observers in 1943.
Or, maybe none of these documents were "planted" -- which would mean that the Soviets had shot some of the officers, and the Germans shot others. But nobody wants to hear that! Certainly not the Polish nationalists and anticommunists, because it would ruin a perfectly good "communist atrocity story."
The anticommunist "Soviets-did-it" school make Katyn out to have been a great crime. And so it was -- no matter who did it, Soviets, Nazis, or both.
So how about the Western Allies? Frankly, their atrocities are greater than those of killing the Polish officers.
The British fire-bombing of Dresden in February 1945 killed at least 25,000 civilian noncombatants!
And this was only one incident! "Overall, Anglo-American bombing of German cities claimed between 305,000 and 600,000 civilian lives." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Dresden_in_World_War_II )
These atrocities are not stressed enough. Why not? See below.
Polish Massacres of Russian POWs 1919-1920
So the "official, scholarly" Russian and Polish positions are far apart.
- 165,000 Red Army POWs in Poland (Russian version) vs 80,000 - 85,000 (Polish).
- In the Russian version, 75,699 Red Army men returned from Polish captivity. By the Polish count, the maximum number that could have returned would be about 62,000.
- In the Polish version, between 16,000 and 20,000 Red Army POWs died in Polish captivity; in the Russian version, about 60,000 died.
But the main point is clear. This has everything to do with the Katyn issue. A good guess (mine, but others suggest it too) is that some of the Polish officers shot by the Soviets -- yes, I think the evidence is that some were -- were implicated in the Polish war crimes against Soviet POWs during 1919-1921.
There is very, very little attempt at objectivity in the study of Soviet history.
1. There is a serious historical question about the Katyn killings, and killings of Polish officers generally. There's good evidence that both the Soviets and, later, the Germans, killed Polish officers, for very different reasons.
This serious -- and, by the way, very interesting -- historical controversy is simply ignored, "denied", in the service of Polish nationalism and anticommunist indoctrination.
2. The Katyn Massacre is a matter of faith for the current right-wing Polish government. It is virtually illegal to question it in Poland, just as it is literally illegal to compare Polish killings of Jews with German killings of Jews. Just as, in Ukraine, it is literally illegal to question the claim that the famine of 1932-33 was "man-made" by "Stalin", despite the fact that there is no evidence -- zero! -- supporting that claim, and a lot of excellent research that thoroughly refutes it.
In short, if you think you know something about the "Katyn Massacre" -- or, for that matter, about Soviet history during the Stalin period -- think again. You don't!
Did the Soviet Union Invade Poland in September 1939?
(The answer: No, it did not.)
Grover Furr
when you do find it, please let us know what those "blanket statements" are.I don't currently have time to refute a lot of those blanket statements
are you trying to imply that these are the necessary prerequisites for a plausible interpretation of history (btw. EVERY work of a historian is already a subjective interpretation, which is simply a product of his/her personal viewpoints and professional limitations)? no one is impartial or neutral, everyone is biased. that out of the way, in future discussion please try to refer to professor furr's arguments instead of his so-called lack of neutrality.from a very impartial and obviously neutral and non-biased Grover Furr
for example?who is quite the sophist and a stickler for semantics where it serves him and happy to sidestep them where it doesn't
what article is that?who quotes a newspaper article claiming one thing, even though the same article says something else two sentences later
and who can't even get the name of the Polish GiE's Minister of Foreign Affairs right, not when he's taking it from Soviet documents, etc.)
As late as January 26, 1939, Polish Foreign Minister Beck was discussing this with Nazi Foreign Minister Joachim von Ribbentrop in Warsaw. Ribbentrop wrote:... 2. I then spoke to M. Beck once more about the policy to be pursued by Poland and Germany towards the Soviet Union and in this connection also spoke about the question of the Greater Ukraine and again proposed Polish-German collaboration in this field.
M. Beck made no secret of the fact that Poland had aspirations directed toward the Soviet Ukraine and a connection with the Black Sea...
(Original in Akten zur deutschen ausw�rtigen Politik... Serie D. Bd. V. S. 139-140. English translation in Documents on German Foreign Policy. 1918-1945. Series D. Vol. V. The document in question is No. 126, pp. 167-168; this quotation on p. 168. Also in Russian in God Krizisa T. 1, Doc. No. 120.)
Polish Foreign Minister Beck was telling Ribbentrop that Poland would like to seize ALL of the Ukraine from the USSR, for that was the only way Poland could have had "a connection with the Black Sea."
well, sound the alarm, this changes everything!No, I didn't refer to J. Beck, but to — as I've already indicated — the Government-in-Exile's Minister of Foreign Affairs at the time Mr Furr referred to, who was referred to as "Zalesski"and who actually was A. Zalewski, as Mr Furr cares so much for exploring Soviet sources, that he can't be bothered to check how a Pole is really named.
call the police. have him indicted for disrespecting every polish person in existence.to check how a Pole is really named.
well, you don't see me laughing, do you?And the propaganda poster was a tounge-in-cheek joke, in case you didn't realise.
couldn't care less.Let me state it clearly here: I am not a fascist, nor a nationalist (but I'd like to think of myself as a patriot). (Nor am I a particularly fervent Catholic for that matter).
you do remember that nazi germany used its "historical claim" to justify the invasions of its neighbours (and beyond)? does the pickle lie here as well?Was there a feeling of entitlement to those lands (which had been a part of the 1st Commonwealth)? Yes. Justified? Well, therein lies the pickle.
irrelevant. on his website he made a persuasive case on this matter while citing primary sources from different archives. i haven't exactly noticed that you conducted a similar effort.seeing as Mr Furr is not a qualified historian, his BA and PhD being in areas of language and literature, I am equally academically qualified when it comes to history
There is a lot of evidence disputing whether the Katyn Massacre was a Soviet or German war crime. I've only found one article from a Socialist point of view claiming that the Germans did it, which is nothing compared to the amount of articles saying otherwise.
What I really want to know is what you guys think?