I guess I'll entertain your bitterness and resentments for the time being...
Poland has not existed as an independant state for that long (even through history, when compared to other countries), and has often been under the influence of others.
Which they did not deserve. Polish history is the most neglected and probably the most often distorted amongst Europe's histories.
The Poles have a
long history of facing off with tyrants going back to the Battle at Cedynia before they were even "Poland." They had defended Europe against Turks and Tatars, against Cossack raids and Muscovite barbarism, for some 250 years.
They managed to preserve their state throughout the 17th century, despite King Jan and the hussars playing a major part in the defense of Vienna against the Ottoman's (Against King Louis' policies that preserved his throne from the Sultan.) Louis would have gladly allowed Vienna to fall in order to advance his own aims. In point of fact, Louis used the distraction to his own advantage and invaded the Kurpfalz to wreak a little further havoc amongst the Hapsburg allies. His hope was that he would be the last real power in Europe and he sold the continent out to reach this goal. Ultimately, by the end of the battle, Vienna was saved and the myth of Ottoman invincibility, already weakened, had been destroyed. The Ottoman Empire never again posed so serious a threat to the West. Poles even played a significant role in the
American Revolution.
In the mid-seventeenth century, a Swedish invasion ("The Deluge") and Cossack's Chmielnicki Uprising which ravaged the country marked the end of the golden age. Numerous wars against Russia and their role in Vienna weakened Poland. While being attacked on all sides in the mid 18th century (Tatars, Turks, Ukrainians and Swedes), they were left to defend themselves for their troubles. Poland's thanks for it's great part in saving European Christianity often enough times was dismemberment at the end of the century by Austria, Russia, and Prussia. By 1790(?), their country was partitioned and Poland was wiped off the map. Despite rebellions within the former Poland, Poles continued to fight for freedom wherever such wars were waged.
The 19th century saw Napolean involved in a quest expand and his mission brought him into conflict with the same east European powers that had beleaguered Poland. Naturally, Poles joined the fray placing their hopes on a Frenchman. Much of the "arrogance" of modern Polish patriotism derives from this period, including the conviction that Polish independence is a necessary element of a just and legitimate European order. Their fighting slogan under Napolean? - "
For your freedom and ours." Throughout the 19th century, Poland fought against the Russians for their independance in numerous hopeless uprisings and rebellions and involved themselves in any conflict that involved Russia.
By the end of WWI in the 20th century, the disintegration of the four empires (the Austro-Hungarian, German, Ottoman and Russian) saw Poland gain it's long fought for independance. Then, of course, came Germany's rampage to get revenge for its past embarassments a couple decades later. And at the end of this Second World War, Poland was surrendered to the very nation it had been fighting against for independance for centuries. Against all other possibilities, the allied powers chose to imprison Poland
behind a Soviet iron curtain of oppression and communism. Still the Poles struggled and protested throughout the Cold War.
And in the 21st century, despite it's long fought history for independance and in defense of others and almost an entire century of oppression, they continued their tradition and joined the American/NATO forces in Afghanistan in March 2002, and in August 2003, they joined America and the British in Iraq. They remain in both to this day. Exonerating arguments that have kept other nations out of Sudan and Iraq have not been a tool for them in regards to Iraq. And if any one actually does act on the UN's permission to enter Sudan after four years of rape and slaughter, the Poles will be there beside them.
It use to be Greece and Italy for being years behind in their implementation of EU laws, but Poland beat them with thier arrogance.
I like Poland's arrogance. Their arrogance mirrors that of America, Britian, and Australia. They are the second largest territory in Europe. With the combinations of such things like resilliance, bravery, and boldness to do the right thing, they have great potential as an ally of America and Britian. Perhaps what really drives this snobbish attitude from some Europeans towards America, Britian, and Poland is that our histories have incorporated a fight for freedom across the world and yours have been doing the opposite until it is necessary for your own preservation.
The best thing for the EU is Poland, just like it was the best thing for Europe in history. I wouldn't mind Poland perched on my border. They are dependable. And given how they have been stabbed in the back enough times by fellow European states, I completely understand their hesitance to trust the EU and their
Borg like demands to assimilate.
Poland also not exactly working to stem the tide of organised crime spreading from Poland especially. This is pissng off quite a few.
Don't know much about this. But, they are trying to repair almost fifty years of oppression where organized crime thrived - while doing its part on the international stage. They could simply lick their wounds and remain within their borders like other countries did for a long time after Berlin fell. None of the other countries that emerged from the Soviet break down has emerged so strong. And Germany, which was not fully surrendered to the Soviets, still remains cautious about doing anything, despite it's military prohibitions running out long ago.
Americas long history of fighting for other peoples freedoms... someone needs a freaking history lesson.
I guess it's time for Pete's default desperations of imperfections to strip away the overwhleming mission of freedom from America upon the world. Wow...the same old typed exaggerated I've seen you type before.....
1) So when America kept the Philiphines as a colony for decades, it was to "free" them?
2) What about all the islands in the Pacific the US freed from the Japanese.. they independant yet?
3) What about Puerto Rico.. the 51st state yet?
4) If you were fighting for peoples freedom, then why did you support South Vietnam?
5) Or Tiawan before democracy?
6) Or South Korea before democracy was put in place?
7) Or all the countries where there is no democracy, and yet the US supports these dictatorships?
1) America freed the Phillipines from the Spanish and we bought it. (It was the colonial period and America did venture out a bit to taste the European flavor of the day.) Eventually, history saw the Phillipine-American War. In 1916, the United States granted the Philippines self-government and promised eventual independence, which came in 1946 after America had to free it from the Japanese.
2) Yes. Which ones don't want an American guardian? Last I checked, the relationships are quite well and each island nation controls its own destiny. These islands are colonized. They are not oppressed and they do not define your needs to unfairly bash.
3) What about it? Puerto Rico doesn't want to be a state nor do they need to be. They have the luxury of having America's protection and support without having to pay the taxes.
4) Why would we not? Were we supposed to support the North? Seems unfair considering that they had China and the Soviets on their side already.
5) Oh, I see what you are doing. You are trying to equate freedom with democracy. You are looking for any area where people need America's help as an argument that supports your willful stubborness about America's role in this world. Of course, after Taiwan gained their democracy, it has been America that has restrained China's watchful eye, hasn't it?
6) Again with the marriage of freedom to democracy. Our role in Korea was to save it from communist oppression. Due to our usual situation of carrying most of the burden, only the South was saved. And today, they are more than greatful as they continue to celebrate our base there.
7) Cold War first. America can't be your superman and your savior at the same time. There's something about Europe's selfish preservation and the world ideology that sort of took first priority. We'll try to be more perfect in the future for you.
Is your angle here to desperately declare these countries as "occupied" because American boots are on the ground and we have embassies all over the world? We don't own any of these countries. They weren't conquered in order to expand our nation's territory. Our embassies in Europe don't mean we own Europe, so why is the argument used to support double standard criticisms when needed? I suppose the entire world owns New York due to its many foreign embassies..right? We have fifty stars and have no wishes to add to them. Our roles have always been to preserve the free world and all the free trades and diplomacies that go with it. Your country is welcome to share the burdon at any time. Of course, this means you get the unfair criticisms and hypocricies that would be spewed onto you also.
