Outrage in Lwow
mba...@my-dejanews.com
Today,as stated in polish-ukrainian agreement,a new tablet was placed
in the polish cementer in Lwow.But Ukrainians breaked the agreement,by
placing tablet with a text different from one that was agreed upon.
The insulting words wrote:
"Nieznanym polskim wojakom poleglym w wojnie polsko-ukrainskiej"
Which means "To the unknown polish "soldiers" (wojak is a rather
pejorative term here)who died in the polish-ukrainian war"
This is against an agreement signed by our goverments,and is highly
insulting to brave polish soldiers and citizens of Lwow who died
defending that city from Ukrainians.I wish to know how Ukrainians are
going to maitain normal relations with other nations,if they can't keep
their word.
It seems that Ukrainians are still afraid of truth contained in the
words "polish defenders of Lwow"...
Michael hwar...@polbox.com
--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
---Share what you know. Learn what you don't.---
spea...@netcom.ca
>
> Today,as stated in polish-ukrainian agreement,a new tablet was placed
> in the polish cementer in Lwow.But Ukrainians breaked the agreement,by
> placing tablet with a text different from one that was agreed upon.
> The insulting words wrote:
> "Nieznanym polskim wojakom poleglym w wojnie polsko-ukrainskiej"
What is so insulting in the above statement, unless the
names of those soldiers are known...?
It is a fact that they died in the course of the war between
Poland and Ukraine. Do you wish to dispute that?
>
> Which means "To the unknown polish "soldiers" (wojak is a rather
> pejorative term here)who died in the polish-ukrainian war"
In the Ukrainian language, the four nouns that are most
commonly used to denote a soldier are: voyak, voyin, soldat
and zhovnir, with the latter two perhaps being derivatives of
the corresponding Russian and Polish nouns respectively.
Do you see something improper in the use of the proper Ukrainian
term...?
>
> This is against an agreement signed by our goverments,and is highly
> insulting to brave polish soldiers and citizens of Lwow who died
> defending that city from Ukrainians.I wish to know how Ukrainians are
> going to maitain normal relations with other nations,if they can't keep
> their word.
Was Lwiv then a city-state...? If not, then how can you ration-
alize the defense of a city on Ukrainian territory from...
Ukrainians?
> It seems that Ukrainians are still afraid of truth contained in the
> words "polish defenders of Lwow"...
Not really. They only attempted to be accurate.
If "Polish defenders of Lwow" were used, then perhaps a wrong
impression would be created, that of acknowledging the rectitude
of the cause for which those soldiers died eight decades ago...
Although those fallen Polish soldiers must have believed in what
they were doing there at the time, they had made an incorrect
assumption that the ancient Ukrainian city of Lwiv rightfully
belonged to Poland...
GHC
WaRR
mba...@my-dejanews.com wrote in message <7hvi1d$rgg$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>
>
>
>Today,as stated in polish-ukrainian agreement,a new tablet was placed
>in the polish cementer in Lwow.But Ukrainians breaked the agreement,by
>placing tablet with a text different from one that was agreed upon.
>The insulting words wrote:
>"Nieznanym polskim wojakom poleglym w wojnie polsko-ukrainskiej"
>
>pejorative term here)who died in the polish-ukrainian war"
>
>insulting to brave polish soldiers and citizens of Lwow who died
>defending that city from Ukrainians.I wish to know how Ukrainians are
>going to maitain normal relations with other nations,if they can't keep
>their word.
>
>words "polish defenders of Lwow"...
>
>
>
Most of these soldiers were brave scouts and students from
various schools in Lwow. They defended the city agains the
overwhelming forces of ukrainian aggressors. Lwow used to
be one of the most beautiful cities in Poland and rivaled Krakow.
Lwow had by far the most nicest population which called
themselves "Lwowiacy". They were well known througout whole
Rzeczpospolita. The most beautiful churches, universities, monuments,
government buldings, palaces, residences and castles were
build by Poles and later destroyed by ukrainians. After Lwow
was ripped away from Rzeczpospolita, it totally lost its splendor
and importance. Today under ukrainians this once beautiful city
is dying and desintegrating.
WaRR
Yanko
beautiful Ukrainian city of Lviv as a tourist? If the "nicest
population" did not try to prevent restoration of Ukrainian rule in a
Ukrainian city, I doubt there would be any reason to place tablets like
the one discussed.
Yanko
In article <nrM03.2840$8p2....@cynws01.we.mediaone.net>,
--
"Everything should be made as simple as possible,
but not simpler".
A. Einstein
mba...@my-dejanews.com
spea...@netcom.ca wrote:
> mba...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> >
> > Today,as stated in polish-ukrainian agreement,a new tablet was
placed
> > in the polish cementer in Lwow.But Ukrainians breaked the
agreement,by
> > placing tablet with a text different from one that was agreed upon.
> > The insulting words wrote:
> > "Nieznanym polskim wojakom poleglym w wojnie polsko-ukrainskiej"
>
> names of those soldiers are known...?
as far as I know their name are known.
The fact that honorless Ukrainians breaked the agreement is also
insulting.
> It is a fact that they died in the course of the war between
> Poland and Ukraine. Do you wish to dispute that?
No
> >
> > Which means "To the unknown polish "soldiers" (wojak is a rather
> > pejorative term here)who died in the polish-ukrainian war"
>
> In the Ukrainian language, the four nouns that are most
> commonly used to denote a soldier are: voyak, voyin, soldat
> and zhovnir, with the latter two perhaps being derivatives of
> the corresponding Russian and Polish nouns respectively.
It was in the part of tablet written in polish language.As I said
"wojak" is insulting when used to describe young civilian voluteers.
> Do you see something improper in the use of the proper
Ukrainian
> term...?
Yes,when you write in polish.
> >
> > This is against an agreement signed by our goverments,and is highly
> > insulting to brave polish soldiers and citizens of Lwow who died
> > defending that city from Ukrainians.I wish to know how Ukrainians
are
> > going to maitain normal relations with other nations,if they can't
keep
> > their word.
>
> Was Lwiv then a city-state...? If not, then how can you ration-
> alize the defense of a city on Ukrainian territory from...
> Ukrainians?
Ukrainian? The only problem is that there were very few Ukrainians
there.Ukrainian invaders was stopped not by regular units,but civilian
citizens of that city.
> > It seems that Ukrainians are still afraid of truth contained in the
> > words "polish defenders of Lwow"...
>
> Not really. They only attempted to be accurate.
Well,they're not.
> If "Polish defenders of Lwow" were used, then perhaps a wrong
> impression would be created, that of acknowledging the rectitude
> of the cause for which those soldiers died eight decades ago...
It gives the proper impression-the majority of citizens of that city
did't wanted Ukrainians there.
> Although those fallen Polish soldiers must have believed in
what
> they were doing there at the time, they had made an incorrect
> assumption that the ancient Ukrainian city of Lwiv rightfully
> belonged to Poland...
The first time when Lwow was an ukrainian city was in 1945.Although
many hundreds of years ago there was an ukrainian village there.But it
was the polish rule that maked a city from Lwow.
mba...@my-dejanews.com
Yanko <ya...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
> What bothers you, buddy? Does anyone prevent you from visiting the
> beautiful Ukrainian city of Lviv as a tourist? If the "nicest
> population" did not try to prevent restoration of Ukrainian rule in a
> Ukrainian city, I doubt there would be any reason to place tablets
like
> the one discussed.
>
> Yanko
bothers me that in 1945 Soviets took one of greatest cities of Poland
from us.And it bothers me when Ukrainians claim is as "their city".And
the fact that it was populated by Poles for centuries does't bother
them.And as far as I know,(due to relation to my friend who visited
Lwow year or two ago) Lwow is really in the state of decoy under
ukrainian Lwow.
And if ukrainian invaders would not try to take one of our cities from
us,than there would be no need for such tablets.
> In article <nrM03.2840$8p2....@cynws01.we.mediaone.net>,
> "WaRR" <Wa...@OjczYznA.OrG> wrote:
> >
> > mba...@my-dejanews.com wrote in message
> <7hvi1d$rgg$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >Today,as stated in polish-ukrainian agreement,a new tablet was
placed
> > >in the polish cementer in Lwow.But Ukrainians breaked the
> agreement,by
> > >placing tablet with a text different from one that was agreed upon.
> > >The insulting words wrote:
> > >"Nieznanym polskim wojakom poleglym w wojnie polsko-ukrainskiej"
> > >
> > >Which means "To the unknown polish "soldiers" (wojak is a rather
> > >pejorative term here)who died in the polish-ukrainian war"
> > >
> > >This is against an agreement signed by our goverments,and is highly
> > >insulting to brave polish soldiers and citizens of Lwow who died
> > >defending that city from Ukrainians.I wish to know how Ukrainians
are
> > >going to maitain normal relations with other nations,if they can't
> keep
> > >their word.
> > >
> > >It seems that Ukrainians are still afraid of truth contained in the
> > >words "polish defenders of Lwow"...
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >Michael hwar...@polbox.com
> >
> > Most of these soldiers were brave scouts and students from
> > various schools in Lwow. They defended the city agains the
> > overwhelming forces of ukrainian aggressors. Lwow used to
> > be one of the most beautiful cities in Poland and rivaled Krakow.
> >
> > Lwow had by far the most nicest population which called
> > themselves "Lwowiacy". They were well known througout whole
> > Rzeczpospolita. The most beautiful churches, universities,
monuments,
> > government buldings, palaces, residences and castles were
> > build by Poles and later destroyed by ukrainians. After Lwow
> > was ripped away from Rzeczpospolita, it totally lost its splendor
> > and importance. Today under ukrainians this once beautiful city
> > is dying and desintegrating.
> >
> > WaRR
> >
> >
>
> --
> "Everything should be made as simple as possible,
> but not simpler".
>
> A. Einstein
>
Yanko
mba...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> In article <7i09jd$bcl$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> I don't know what exactly bothers Warr,but I know what bothers me.It
> bothers me that in 1945 Soviets took one of greatest cities of Poland
> from us.And it bothers me when Ukrainians claim is as "their city".And
> the fact that it was populated by Poles for centuries does't bother
> them.And as far as I know,(due to relation to my friend who visited
> Lwow year or two ago) Lwow is really in the state of decoy under
> ukrainian Lwow.
>
> And if ukrainian invaders would not try to take one of our cities from
> us,than there would be no need for such tablets.
>
Well, I can understand that you have strong emotons about this all. But
you also might remember that the city of Lviv was founded by a Ukrainian
prince. And that Ukrainians lived there for centuries until at some
point the Polish invaders explicitely banned Ukrainians from the city.
And taking into consideration that the beautiful palaces and churches
referred to earlier were built essentially for the money ripped by
Polish nobility from Ukrainian peasants, I think it is rather partial
restoration of justice than invasion. Or do you also believe that the
liberation war headed by Bohdan Khmelnytsky was an invasion by
Ukrainians of Polish lands/cities?
Sicerely,
Yanko
M. L.
crap were built so.. it seems that only Ukrainians have this "oh we were
there before" problem... you won't mind if we come and make our own state
out of parts of Poland, occupied Poland and parts of SLovakia. After all we
were there before(before 5th-6th century), weren't we? hehe
Yanko
The blacks moved south and created Croatia while the whites stayed and
became part of the Ukrainian nation.
So, why do you want to come back? The climate is warmer at the Adriatic,
isn't it? ;-)
Yanko
In article <374403B7...@beer.com>,
--
"Everything should be made as simple as possible,
but not simpler".
A. Einstein
M. L.
Yanko wrote:
> So, why do you want to come back? The climate is warmer at the Adriatic,
> isn't it? ;-)
Climate is niceer. Actualyl Croats have no problem but Albanians, for past
50 or so years, had been empathizing that Serbs should move back. Anyway...
How;d you feel if we all came back and demanded parts of Poland, Ukraine and
Slovakia to create our own nation, after all we were there before?
Eh, Janko?
Slawomir Popiel
<spea...@netcom.ca> wrote in message news:374380...@netcom.ca...
| mba...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
| >
| > Today,as stated in polish-ukrainian agreement,a new tablet was placed
| > in the polish cementer in Lwow.But Ukrainians breaked the agreement,by
| > placing tablet with a text different from one that was agreed upon.
| > The insulting words wrote:
| > "Nieznanym polskim wojakom poleglym w wojnie polsko-ukrainskiej"
|
|
| names of those soldiers are known...?
|
| Poland and Ukraine. Do you wish to dispute that?
Mr. Spearman
A term "wojak" has joking, ridiculing or derrogatory meaning in today's
Polish, depending on intention and context and is not equal to "zolnierz".
Therefore if the phrase was written in Polish it could not have been taken
otherwise and there is nothing to dispute, unless the description was in
Ukrainian.
It happens that "word-for-word" translation from one language to the other
frequently does not work very well. If this is the case, it prooves
disregard and disrespect. Otherwise is tasteless. No need to dispute that,
either.
--
Pozdrawiam,
Slawomir Popiel
New Jersey
http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/7847/
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Troy/7404/
http://members.tripod.com/kingpopiel/
Yanko
happened in Europe after Hungarians settled in Pannonia. Anyway, you
weren't there before. As I said, you were there together with us.
Besides, you are slightly missing the point. As I said, Lviv was founded
by Ukrainians and later occupied by Poland. It's not like there were
some nomadic tribes and then came the civilized Poles and founded a city
on that land. It's not Olvia or Hersones, it's Lviv.
Sincerely,
Yanko
Mike Davidchik
>
> Well, I can understand that you have strong emotons about this all. But
> you also might remember that the city of Lviv was founded by a Ukrainian
> prince And that Ukrainians lived there for centuries until at some
> point the Polish invaders explicitely banned Ukrainians from the city.
> And taking into consideration that the beautiful palaces and churches
> referred to earlier were built essentially for the money ripped by
> Polish nobility from Ukrainian peasants, I think it is rather partial
> restoration of justice than invasion.
I won't get into the silly who was in Lvov first argument. But, I doubt
that the Soviet takeover of Lvov did anything for the Ukrainians. As far
as partial resoration of justice, this is also very far fetched. Nothing
was taken by the Soviets which was given back to Ukrainian peasants. The
Soviet Government of Ukraine surely did more damage to Ukrainians than the
Polish nobility ever did. For centuries, many Ukrainians switched their
loyalties back and forth between the Poles and Russians. I doubt that a
pro-Russian Ukrainian was any greater patriot than a pro-Polish Ukrainian
in previous centuries.
Or do you also believe that the
> liberation war headed by Bohdan Khmelnytsky was an invasion by
> Ukrainians of Polish lands/cities?
In some cases, it was an invasion. Khemlnytsky killed a lot of Ukrainians
and Belarussians too. If you think that Khemlnytsky was a great Ukrainian
patriot, you don't know about his selling out Ukraine to the Russian
Tsar. He liberated on behalf of the Russians, not the Ukrainians. Lvov
was taken over by the Soviets, not the Ukrainians. It was ruined by the
Commies
not by the Poles, Austrians, or Ukrainians. The primitive and tribalistic
nationalism in this thread does not belong in this century. Much of it is
a product of pro- or anti-Tsarist propaganda drilled into the heads of
generations.
Mike
RPP
>What bothers you, buddy? Does anyone prevent you from visiting the
>beautiful Ukrainian city of Lviv as a tourist? If the "nicest
>population" did not try to prevent restoration of Ukrainian rule in a
>Ukrainian city, I doubt there would be any reason to place tablets like
>the one discussed.
>
>Yanko
Restoration of Ukrainian rule??????? There never was a Ukrainian rule.
Before Lwow was in Poland, there was no such thing as Ukraine. There
was a Rus Halicka, or Rus Czerwona (Red Rus), but no Ukraine. After
the incorporation of Lwow into Poland by Kazimierz III Wielki, the
village flourished, and over the centuries became a great city, full
of churches, received a University, all under the care of Polish
Crown. The city and the region were also Polish in the majority, with
a smaller non-Polish, or Ukrainian minority, as well as others like
Jews.
That is the history of the city.
RPP
>In article <7i0qa0$n0s$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> mba...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>> In article <7i09jd$bcl$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
>
>> I don't know what exactly bothers Warr,but I know what bothers me.It
>> bothers me that in 1945 Soviets took one of greatest cities of Poland
>> from us.And it bothers me when Ukrainians claim is as "their city".And
>> the fact that it was populated by Poles for centuries does't bother
>> them.And as far as I know,(due to relation to my friend who visited
>> Lwow year or two ago) Lwow is really in the state of decoy under
>> ukrainian Lwow.
>>
>> And if ukrainian invaders would not try to take one of our cities from
>> us,than there would be no need for such tablets.
>>
>
>Well, I can understand that you have strong emotons about this all. But
>you also might remember that the city of Lviv was founded by a Ukrainian
>prince. And that Ukrainians lived there for centuries until at some
>point the Polish invaders explicitely banned Ukrainians from the city.
>And taking into consideration that the beautiful palaces and churches
>referred to earlier were built essentially for the money ripped by
>Polish nobility from Ukrainian peasants, I think it is rather partial
>restoration of justice than invasion. Or do you also believe that the
>liberation war headed by Bohdan Khmelnytsky was an invasion by
>Ukrainians of Polish lands/cities?
>
Thats exactly what it was. Thank God for one of the gratest heros of
the time, Jarema Wisniowiecki, a great and noble man, military genius
who was able to put a halt to the advancing armies. And yes, it was an
invasion. The Kozaks had with them the Tatars and later the Khan,
without whom they were nothing as a force. A Kozak uprising without
foreign help would have been crushed in the first weeks. When you
bring in foreign allies against Rzeczpospolita, thats an invasion.
RPP
>
>
>Yanko wrote:
>
>> So, why do you want to come back? The climate is warmer at the Adriatic,
>> isn't it? ;-)
>
>Climate is niceer. Actualyl Croats have no problem but Albanians, for past
>50 or so years, had been empathizing that Serbs should move back. Anyway...
>How;d you feel if we all came back and demanded parts of Poland, Ukraine and
>Slovakia to create our own nation, after all we were there before?
>Eh, Janko?
>
>
You werent here "before" you were here during the same time. Before
any nations existed there were tribes, such as Polanie, Mazowszanie,
Wislanie, Slezanie, etc. You were just one of the many tribes on part
of the territory.
The real quest should be to reclaim Slav lands from the Germans.
Berlin is on Slav lands.
Jerzy Pankiewicz
: Do you see something improper in the use of the proper Ukrainian
: term...?
:
You don't use Polish terms in Ukrainian texts
nor Ukrainian terms in Polish texts.
Yanko
davi...@oro.net (Mike Davidchik) wrote:
> I won't get into the silly who was in Lvov first argument. But, I
doubt
> that the Soviet takeover of Lvov did anything for the Ukrainians.
Well, that was one occupation in place of another one. The point is that
now Lviv is back in Ukraine, and under no occupation any more, as it
should be. It is about as much Polish as it is Russian, even if it was
under the Polish occupation longer than under the Russian one.
> As far
> as partial resoration of justice, this is also very far fetched.
Nothing
> was taken by the Soviets which was given back to Ukrainian peasants.
See my comment above.
>The
> Soviet Government of Ukraine surely did more damage to Ukrainians than
the
> Polish nobility ever did. For centuries, many Ukrainians switched
their
> loyalties back and forth between the Poles and Russians. I doubt that
a
> pro-Russian Ukrainian was any greater patriot than a pro-Polish
Ukrainian
> in previous centuries.
Could not agree more with you. The only Ukrainian patriots are
pro-Ukrainian Ukrainians.
>
> Or do you also believe that the
> > liberation war headed by Bohdan Khmelnytsky was an invasion by
> > Ukrainians of Polish lands/cities?
>
> In some cases, it was an invasion.
???
>Khemlnytsky killed a lot of Ukrainians
> and Belarussians too.
You mean, those pro-Polish ones? Well, it was a war, and he killed the
enemies.
> If you think that Khemlnytsky was a great Ukrainian
> patriot,
I do not know what the exact balance was between his patriotism and his
personal ambitions. Besides, this balance apparently was not stable.
What I do know is that Khmelnitsky was THE one who revived the Ukrainian
statehood. And the absence of such statehood was, IMHO, THE main reason
of all the sufferings my nation has gone thru.
> you don't know about his selling out Ukraine to the Russian
> Tsar.
Well, I definitely do not now about any such facts, do you?
> He liberated on behalf of the Russians, not the Ukrainians.
Bullshit. Russians had nothing to do with the liberation war.
> Lvov
> was taken over by the Soviets, not the Ukrainians.
It was taken over by Ukrainians somewhat earlier. Have you heared about
the Western-Ukrainian Popular Republic and its reunificaton with the
rest of Ukraine before bolsheviks took the latter over?
>It was ruined by the
> Commies
> not by the Poles, Austrians, or Ukrainians.
Exactly.
>The primitive and tribalistic
> nationalism in this thread does not belong in this century.
Really? If anything belongs to this century, it is exactly the primitive
natonalism (not that I support it). Do you happen to remember some of
the "bigger events" that happened in this century? Do you happen to know
what is goning on in the Balkans right now?
>Much of it is
> a product of pro- or anti-Tsarist propaganda drilled into the heads
of
> generations.
Well, I do not know what generations you are talking about, but it is
probably not my generation. Besides, some people tend to think
themselves rather than believe ANYBODY's propaganda.
>
> Mike
Yanko
le...@mail.netinc.ca wrote:
> >restoration of justice than invasion. Or do you also believe that the
> >liberation war headed by Bohdan Khmelnytsky was an invasion by
> >Ukrainians of Polish lands/cities?
> >
>
> Thats exactly what it was. Thank God for one of the gratest heros of
> the time, Jarema Wisniowiecki,
Oh, yes, that guy is very famous for his "heroism".
> a great and noble man, military genius
> who was able to put a halt to the advancing armies.
Oh, did he? I happen to remember from history, that the Ukrainian soil
was totally liberated from occupants, the Polish army totally destroyed,
and the Polish king died. Unfortunately, some stupid loyalty of
Khmelnitsky towards Rzheczpospolita prevented him from taking over
Warszawa. Instead, he waited until the new king was elected, possibly
because that guy happened to be Khmelnitsky's relative. It was a VERY
big mistake, that allowed Rzheczpospolita to recruit a new army and a
bloody war started again, the end of which was sad.
> And yes, it was an
> invasion.
Oh, yes, those Ukrainians dared to invade Ukraine! Awful!
> The Kozaks had with them the Tatars and later the Khan,
True. This is called politics.
> without whom they were nothing as a force.
> A Kozak uprising without
> foreign help would have been crushed in the first weeks.
Oh, you probably want to believe in this bullshit, but that's your
problem.
>When you
> bring in foreign allies against Rzeczpospolita, thats an invasion.
>
Heh, when you bring in foreign allies to free your country from a
foreign invasion, that's liberation with the help of allies. I wish
Tatars were good allies, but that is a different topic.
Yanko
le...@mail.netinc.ca wrote:
> Restoration of Ukrainian rule??????? There never was a Ukrainian rule.
Who, dou you think, lived in the city before Kazimierz "incorporated"
it?
> Before Lwow was in Poland, there was no such thing as Ukraine.
>There
> was a Rus Halicka, or Rus Czerwona (Red Rus), but no Ukraine.
Well, what do you think Rus was? That Ukraine had a different name does
not mean it was not Ukraine.
> After
> the incorporation of Lwow into Poland by Kazimierz III Wielki, the
> village flourished, and over the centuries became a great city, full
> of churches, received a University, all under the care of Polish
> Crown.
Well, I beleive the city would do at least as well without the "care of
Polish Crown".
> The city and the region were also Polish in the majority,
> with
> a smaller non-Polish, or Ukrainian minority, as well as others like
> Jews.
Of course. After Ukrainians were driven out.
>
> That is the history of the city.
>
May I ask what book you took this history from?
M. L.
RPP wrote:
> The real quest should be to reclaim Slav lands from the Germans.
> Berlin is on Slav lands.
If we could reclaim our land from barbarian turks why not from Germans? No matter
how bad Germans are they're 1000 as civilized as turks.
M. L.
RPP wrote:
> On Thu, 20 May 1999 10:24:42 -0400, "M. L." <li...@beer.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >Yanko wrote:
> >
> >> So, why do you want to come back? The climate is warmer at the Adriatic,
> >> isn't it? ;-)
> >
> >Climate is niceer. Actualyl Croats have no problem but Albanians, for past
> >50 or so years, had been empathizing that Serbs should move back. Anyway...
> >How;d you feel if we all came back and demanded parts of Poland, Ukraine and
> >Slovakia to create our own nation, after all we were there before?
> >Eh, Janko?
> >
> >
> You werent here "before" you were here during the same time. Before
> any nations existed there were tribes, such as Polanie, Mazowszanie,
> Wislanie, Slezanie, etc. You were just one of the many tribes on part
> of the territory.
WHat I went is that we LIVED there before(not before everyone else) so according
to some people's logic we have every right to some land over there. No, I don't
think we do... I had enough of crap like htat. Remember 1991-1995...
rafal
I would like to tell you one thing... I am polish guy
from Katowice in his twenties , living currently in U.S.A.
If you really care (and other polish patriots) about bright
future of Poland- you need to forget past , to be able go forward.
Simply: FORGET IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Only a country can succeed if focus
on future , not in the past... I even don't wanna go to Poland and turn
TV on 'cause people like yourself... that were born many , many , many
years ago and are living in unreal world...Sir!!!!!!!WAKE UP!!!!
It's almost 2000... 21st century is knocking to the door...if you
really care, think about your kids, grandchildren... they want to live
in prosperous, rich, safe Poland. LET'S TALK ABOUT ECONOMY, COMPUTERS,
AND SO ON...thing that really matter... I don't wanna be ugly and rude
with with you but who give a **** about EAST --- look at the WEST, at
countries that succeeded... STOP finally to talk about polish-Jewish
relations or how many(if any) crosses to put in Auschwitz...stop
talking about hanging up communists, stop talking about Lwow and polish
- Ukrainian relationship!!! Lets talk about next millennium and where
we
wanna be...WAKE UP POLAND!!!! I CAN'T STOP WORRY ABOUT YOU! I hope
that new, fresh ,young people that don't know the past from first hand
will have more influence on Poland's future.To those who fought for
Poland in the past- don't take wrong: YOU DID GOOD JOB!!! but now
it's time NA ZMIANE WARTY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Good luck to everyone and
GOD BLESS!!!
Rafal from Florida
RPP
>In article <37443e8a...@news.kwom.com>,
> le...@mail.netinc.ca wrote:
>
>> Restoration of Ukrainian rule??????? There never was a Ukrainian rule.
>Who, dou you think, lived in the city before Kazimierz "incorporated"
>it?
>
>> Before Lwow was in Poland, there was no such thing as Ukraine.
>>There
>> was a Rus Halicka, or Rus Czerwona (Red Rus), but no Ukraine.
>Well, what do you think Rus was? That Ukraine had a different name does
>not mean it was not Ukraine.
>
Listen, go read some history and get a clue. There was no natuional
concept of a Ukraine at the time. Just like in the 8th century on
Polish lands there was no national idea of a POland. There were many
tribes. Same with what you call Ukraine. There was never a Ukrainian
rule of these lands prior to Kazimierz.
>> After
>> the incorporation of Lwow into Poland by Kazimierz III Wielki, the
>> village flourished, and over the centuries became a great city, full
>> of churches, received a University, all under the care of Polish
>> Crown.
>Well, I beleive the city would do at least as well without the "care of
>Polish Crown".
>
Under the rule of Kozak peasants? You must be joking.
RPP
>In article <37443fcf...@news.kwom.com>,
> le...@mail.netinc.ca wrote:
>
>> >restoration of justice than invasion. Or do you also believe that the
>> >liberation war headed by Bohdan Khmelnytsky was an invasion by
>> >Ukrainians of Polish lands/cities?
>> >
>>
>> Thats exactly what it was. Thank God for one of the gratest heros of
>> the time, Jarema Wisniowiecki,
>Oh, yes, that guy is very famous for his "heroism".
>
>> a great and noble man, military genius
>> who was able to put a halt to the advancing armies.
>Oh, did he? I happen to remember from history, that the Ukrainian soil
>was totally liberated from occupants, the Polish army totally destroyed,
>and the Polish king died. Unfortunately, some stupid loyalty of
>Khmelnitsky towards Rzheczpospolita prevented him from taking over
>Warszawa. Instead, he waited until the new king was elected, possibly
>because that guy happened to be Khmelnitsky's relative. It was a VERY
>big mistake, that allowed Rzheczpospolita to recruit a new army and a
>bloody war started again, the end of which was sad.
Then oyou rememver wrong. The Polish army was not destroyed. A small
portion of it was, but there was always another army.
Wisniowiecki held off the entire army of Chmiel and the Khan at
Zbaraz, and later was the commander of the cavalry at Beresteczko. The
only problem in the whole war was the fact that Wisniowiecki was not
appointed commander at Zolte Wody, the whole thing would have ended
there and then.
>
>> And yes, it was an
>> invasion.
>Oh, yes, those Ukrainians dared to invade Ukraine! Awful!
>
>> The Kozaks had with them the Tatars and later the Khan,
>True. This is called politics.
Its called an invasion, since the woth of the kozak fighters was
proven to be low. The real threat was the khan. Look at Beresteczko
for example, the kozaks were actually a liability in terms of fighting
ability.
>
>> without whom they were nothing as a force.
>> A Kozak uprising without
>> foreign help would have been crushed in the first weeks.
>Oh, you probably want to believe in this bullshit, but that's your
>problem.
>
>>When you
>> bring in foreign allies against Rzeczpospolita, thats an invasion.
>>
>Heh, when you bring in foreign allies to free your country from a
>foreign invasion, that's liberation with the help of allies. I wish
>Tatars were good allies, but that is a different topic.
The Tatatrs gave you some glory. Without them, the uprising would have
ended like evry other before and after, in a crushing defeat of the
kozaks, who were of low quality on the battle field.
>
>Sincerely,
>Yanko
>--
>"Everything should be made as simple as possible,
>but not simpler".
>
>A. Einstein
>
>
RPP
>In article <37443fcf...@news.kwom.com>,
> le...@mail.netinc.ca wrote:
>
>> >restoration of justice than invasion. Or do you also believe that the
>> >liberation war headed by Bohdan Khmelnytsky was an invasion by
>> >Ukrainians of Polish lands/cities?
>> >
>>
>> Thats exactly what it was. Thank God for one of the gratest heros of
>> the time, Jarema Wisniowiecki,
>Oh, yes, that guy is very famous for his "heroism".
HE was a stern and hard man, but a hero of the war. He dealt with the
uprisers as they were meant to be dealt with, criminals. Hence, he was
one of the large reasons why the uprising was defeated. If only he was
made commander from the star, at Zolte Wody, the war would have been
ended at the first battle.
RPP
>In article <davidchik-200...@y53.oro.net>,
> davi...@oro.net (Mike Davidchik) wrote:
>
>> I won't get into the silly who was in Lvov first argument. But, I
>doubt
>> that the Soviet takeover of Lvov did anything for the Ukrainians.
>Well, that was one occupation in place of another one. The point is that
>now Lviv is back in Ukraine, and under no occupation any more, as it
>should be. It is about as much Polish as it is Russian, even if it was
>under the Polish occupation longer than under the Russian one.
>
You are right, thanks to Stalin's social engineering. Prior to Stalin,
Lwow was one of the most Polish cities.
>
>> you don't know about his selling out Ukraine to the Russian
>> Tsar.
>Well, I definitely do not now about any such facts, do you?
>
You mean you dont know what happened? Well Chmiel ran to Russia after
the Khan, who recognized the futility of fighting with Poland,
abandoned Chmiel. Well Chmiel knew that the probablility of the Kozaks
being able to win more than 2 battles in a row was non existant to he
went to the Tsar. What ended up happening was the divisin of Ukraine,
Kiev going to Russia everything west of Ukraine to Poland. No
Ukrainian statehood, until Pilsudski tried to win it for you in 1919,
but your distrust made that impossible.
>> He liberated on behalf of the Russians, not the Ukrainians.
>Bullshit. Russians had nothing to do with the liberation war.
>
They did after.
Wojciech Beltkiewicz
: mba...@my-dejanews.com wrote in message <7hvi1d$rgg$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
: >
: >
: >
: >Today,as stated in polish-ukrainian agreement,a new tablet was placed
: >in the polish cementer in Lwow.But Ukrainians breaked the agreement,by
: >placing tablet with a text different from one that was agreed upon.
: >The insulting words wrote:
: >"Nieznanym polskim wojakom poleglym w wojnie polsko-ukrainskiej"
: >
: >Which means "To the unknown polish "soldiers" (wojak is a rather
: >pejorative term here)who died in the polish-ukrainian war"
: >
: >This is against an agreement signed by our goverments,and is highly
: >insulting to brave polish soldiers and citizens of Lwow who died
: >defending that city from Ukrainians.I wish to know how Ukrainians are
: >going to maitain normal relations with other nations,if they can't keep
: >their word.
: >
: >It seems that Ukrainians are still afraid of truth contained in the
: >words "polish defenders of Lwow"...
: >
: >
: >
: >Michael hwar...@polbox.com
: Most of these soldiers were brave scouts and students from
: various schools in Lwow. They defended the city agains the
: overwhelming forces of ukrainian aggressors. Lwow used to
: be one of the most beautiful cities in Poland and rivaled Krakow.
: Lwow had by far the most nicest population which called
: themselves "Lwowiacy". They were well known througout whole
: Rzeczpospolita. The most beautiful churches, universities, monuments,
: government buldings, palaces, residences and castles were
: build by Poles and later destroyed by ukrainians. After Lwow
: was ripped away from Rzeczpospolita, it totally lost its splendor
: and importance. Today under ukrainians this once beautiful city
: is dying and desintegrating.
: WaRR
This is all nationalistic drivel. I bet the Germans are saying the same
thing about Wroclaw, and how their brave soldiers defended the city even
after Berlin fell, and how the Poles are letting this great city fall
into decay now that the borders have been moved.
The Poles should start to focus on their own problems rather than look
for scapegoats among the Ukrainians, Jews, or anyone else. Grow up,
we're fast approaching the 21st century!
-me
Yanko
le...@mail.netinc.ca wrote:
> Then oyou rememver wrong. The Polish army was not destroyed. A small
> portion of it was, but there was always another army.
>
I doubt this. Can you give a reference?
> Wisniowiecki held off the entire army of Chmiel and the Khan at
> Zbaraz,
What do you mean by "held off"? Zborov and Zbarazh were taken after a
siege, as far as I remember.
> and later was the commander of the cavalry at Beresteczko.
Well, Berestechko was a result of Tatar treason, as far as I remember.
> The
> only problem in the whole war was the fact that Wisniowiecki was not
> appointed commander at Zolte Wody, the whole thing would have ended
> there and then.
As if that was the only battle lost by the Poles.
> Its called an invasion, since the woth of the kozak fighters was
> proven to be low. The real threat was the khan. Look at Beresteczko
> for example,
Why don't you look at Zhovti Vody, for example?
> the kozaks were actually a liability in terms of fighting
> ability.
Oh really? Remember how Sahajdachny(Konasheych) with his kozaks saved
Poland in 1622 when the regular Polish army was defeated by the Turks?
> The Tatatrs gave you some glory. Without them, the uprising would have
> ended like evry other before and after, in a crushing defeat of the
> kozaks, who were of low quality on the battle field.
Well, as I said, you might want to believe in that, but that is your
problem. Besides, history does not tolerate "would".
Yanko
le...@mail.netinc.ca wrote:
> Listen, go read some history and get a clue. There was no natuional
> concept of a Ukraine at the time.
There was no strong state to keep the Polish invaders away (which was
successfully done for some two centuries by the Halych princes). But
that does not mean there was no national concept.
> Just like in the 8th century on
> Polish lands there was no national idea of a POland.
Same true about national idea of Ukraine, in 8th century. But in 9th
century Kyiv Rus was created, from which point the national idea was
pretty clear.
> There were many
> tribes.
There were no particular tribes by that time
> Same with what you call Ukraine. There was never a Ukrainian
> rule of these lands prior to Kazimierz.
there was Halych-Volyn' Principality on these lands, remember?
> >Well, I beleive the city would do at least as well without the "care
of
> >Polish Crown".
> >
>
> Under the rule of Kozak peasants? You must be joking.
Where have you seen peasants living in a city?
Just a hint: where was Warszawa when Kyiv was the biggest city in Europe
and the daughter of Yaroslav the Wise became the queen of France?
Don't you think that the "peasants" who built Kyiv woul also be able to
build Lviv? Anyway, all your article smells with chauvinism. May be you
also believe in "cultural superiority" of the "noble Poles" over all
those "peasant Ukrainians"? C'mon, tell me you do, so I won't bother to
talk to you any more.
Yanko
RPP
>In article <37456f9...@news.kwom.com>,
> le...@mail.netinc.ca wrote:
>
>> Then oyou rememver wrong. The Polish army was not destroyed. A small
>> portion of it was, but there was always another army.
>>
>I doubt this. Can you give a reference?
>
>> Wisniowiecki held off the entire army of Chmiel and the Khan at
>> Zbaraz,
>What do you mean by "held off"? Zborov and Zbarazh were taken after a
>siege, as far as I remember.
>
Taken after an incredibly long siege. From 10 July to 22 August, thats
6 weeks, a 150 thouand Kozak and Tatar army was held off. Wisniowiecki
defeated the army, and later held off for 6 weeks. Inly hunger forced
the outcome.
>> and later was the commander of the cavalry at Beresteczko.
>Well, Berestechko was a result of Tatar treason, as far as I remember.
The Tatrs left after the army was routed. The artylery and cavalry
defeated the Tatars. Islam Girej, the Tatar commander, had no choice
but to retreat, and took Chmielnicki with them. The Kozaks tried to
dig in at the river Plaszowka, but were surrounded on the 7th of
August.
>
>> The
>> only problem in the whole war was the fact that Wisniowiecki was not
>> appointed commander at Zolte Wody, the whole thing would have ended
>> there and then.
>As if that was the only battle lost by the Poles.
It wasnt, but had it been won, it would have decided a lot about the
tatar involvement. Without them, Kozaks were doomed.
>
>> Its called an invasion, since the woth of the kozak fighters was
>> proven to be low. The real threat was the khan. Look at Beresteczko
>> for example,
>Why don't you look at Zhovti Vody, for example?
At Zolte Wody, the sizes of the 2 armies were extremely one sided.
Basically you had a several thousand sr\trong Polish force aganist the
entire Chmielnicki/Tuhaj Bej lead force. It still took severeal days
to decide.
>
>> The Tatatrs gave you some glory. Without them, the uprising would have
>> ended like evry other before and after, in a crushing defeat of the
>> kozaks, who were of low quality on the battle field.
>Well, as I said, you might want to believe in that, but that is your
>problem. Besides, history does not tolerate "would".
>
It doesnt, and the Kozaks were put down.
>Sincerely,
RPP
>> Under the rule of Kozak peasants? You must be joking.
>Where have you seen peasants living in a city?
>Just a hint: where was Warszawa when Kyiv was the biggest city in Europe
>and the daughter of Yaroslav the Wise became the queen of France?
Kiev was not a kozak city. I do not negate Kiev either. Yes it was a
rich, large city, that rivaled any in Europe. But its era of strangth
lasted very short. Boleslaw I was able to easily defteat Kiev forces
and take the city, and Kazimierz was able to incorporate it into
Poland.
Mike Davidchik
But in 9th
> century Kyiv Rus was created, from which point the national idea was
> pretty clear.
Not really....The Kievy Rus was primarily a confederation of city-states
united through inter-marriage of the aristocracy. There was no
nation-state in the modern sense. At various times, other Rus were just
as important, particularly when Kiev was overrun by the Tartars. Ethnic
Rus became part of both the Polish and Russian nobility. Some of the
kings of Poland and Grand Princes of Lithuania had ethnic Rus ancestry.
The period of grandeur for the Kievy Rus lasted no longer than that of the
Grand Duchy of Lithuania or Commonwealth of Poland and Lithuania. In
fact, Lithuania ruled much of Ukraine
as well as Poland after the Mongols. The Rus were not just Ukrainian, but also
Belarussian, and to a small degree, Great Russian. They became ethnic
groups in several countries.
>
> > There were many
> > tribes.
> There were no particular tribes by that time
Yes, there were many Slavic tribes which became known as Rus and were not
necessarily allied to any particular state.
>
> > Same with what you call Ukraine. There was never a Ukrainian
> > rule of these lands prior to Kazimierz.
> there was Halych-Volyn' Principality on these lands, remember?
Casimir had Rus blood. Many Rus were polonized. Most of the nobility was
intermarried among Poland, Lithuania, Russia, and other countries. The
Tsars turned many ethnic Rus in modern day Belarus or Ukraine into
peasants.
>
> > >Well, I beleive the city would do at least as well without the "care
> of
> > >Polish Crown".
During much of this period, cities had home-rule and only paid tribute to
kingdoms. It is possible, I don't recall, that Lvov had Madgeburg Rule.
> > >
> >
> > Under the rule of Kozak peasants? You must be joking.
> Where have you seen peasants living in a city?
> Just a hint: where was Warszawa when Kyiv was the biggest city in Europe
> and the daughter of Yaroslav the Wise became the queen of France?
Kiev was mostly a city under the control of Mongols, Poles, or Russians.
It was never really under the Ukrainians between the 12th Century and Fall
of Communism. At least Lvov was under the Austrians for awhile.
> Don't you think that the "peasants" who built Kyiv woul also be able to
> build Lviv?
We are talking about different groups here. The ethnicity of the two
cities was different. I might add that most of the Ukrainians in Lvov were
Catholics and most in Kiev were Orthodox. The people in Lvov were not
Cossacks. Cossacks often hired out to the highest bidder. Many Cossacks
allied with the Polish Crown even after Khemelnytsky because they didn't
like the Russians either. After they got rid of the Polish Army (which by
the way, was man for man, one of the best in Europe, and had many
non-Poles in it), they got the Moscovite Tsarists who used murder and
terror to control the Ukes. Poland was fighting on too many fronts and the
Russians finally whipped the Mongols and looked toward an Empire at
Poland's expense. It is too bad that Pilsudski, an ethnic Lithuanian Rus,
could not get the Ukes on his side. They had been indoctrinated by the
Russian Orthodox Church in Moscow for a century or two by that time.
Anyway, all your article smells with chauvinism. May be you
> also believe in "cultural superiority" of the "noble Poles" over all
> those "peasant Ukrainians"? C'mon, tell me you do, so I won't bother to
> talk to you any more.
This is the kind of nonsense you used to hear in ethnic neighborhoods in
the U.S. At the time, some Ukrainians and Belarussians were calling
themselves Russians which made it more silly. Poland needs to swallow its
pride and Ukraine needs to get rid of the Russian influences and look
westward. Poland has always wanted to be part of Europe, the Ukrainians
(except those expatriates in the West) still are not sure.
Mike
Yanko
le...@mail.netinc.ca wrote:
> On Fri, 21 May 1999 20:05:15 GMT, Yanko <ya...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
>
> >Where have you seen peasants living in a city?
> >Just a hint: where was Warszawa when Kyiv was the biggest city in
Europe
> >and the daughter of Yaroslav the Wise became the queen of France?
>
> Yes it was a
> rich, large city, that rivaled any in Europe. But its era of strangth
> lasted very short. Boleslaw I was able to easily defteat Kiev forces
> and take the city, and Kazimierz was able to incorporate it into
> Poland.
Surprise! Kyiv is back! ;-)
Yanko
davi...@oro.net (Mike Davidchik) wrote:
> In article <7i4e9q$b33$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Yanko
<ya...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
>
> We are talking about different groups here. The ethnicity of the two
> cities was different. I might add that most of the Ukrainians in Lvov
were
> Catholics and most in Kiev were Orthodox.
divided for a very long time. Does this mean that there was no German
ethnicity?
> The people in Lvov were not
> Cossacks.
True. Cozaks lived in the steppe predominatly.
>Cossacks often hired out to the highest bidder. Many Cossacks
> allied with the Polish Crown even after Khemelnytsky because they >
>didn't
> like the Russians either.
After Khmelnitsky, there was a period known as "Ruin", when different
factions struggled for power, and pulled in different allies, even the
Turks. This was the primary reason that Khmelnitsky's victories were
wasted.
> After they got rid of the Polish Army (which by
> the way, was man for man, one of the best in Europe, and had many
> non-Poles in it), they got the Moscovite Tsarists who used murder and
> terror to control the Ukes.
See the above.
> Poland was fighting on too many fronts and the
> Russians finally whipped the Mongols and looked toward an Empire at
> Poland's expense. It is too bad that Pilsudski, an ethnic Lithuanian
Rus,
> could not get the Ukes on his side.
Yes, too bad he chose to fight against Ukrainians instead.
> They had been indoctrinated by the
> Russian Orthodox Church in Moscow for a century or two by that time.
>
> Anyway, all your article smells with chauvinism. May be you
> > also believe in "cultural superiority" of the "noble Poles" over all
> > those "peasant Ukrainians"? C'mon, tell me you do, so I won't bother
to
> > talk to you any more.
>
> This is the kind of nonsense you used to hear in ethnic neighborhoods
in
> the U.S. At the time, some Ukrainians and Belarussians were calling
> themselves Russians which made it more silly. Poland needs to swallow
its
> pride and Ukraine needs to get rid of the Russian influences and look
> westward.
Could not agree more.
> Poland has always wanted to be part of Europe, the Ukrainians
> (except those expatriates in the West) still are not sure.
Yup, looks like that's true. Hopefully this fall our nation finally
gets a president it deserves. That would be a good start.
Yanko
> Mike
Yanko
le...@mail.netinc.ca wrote:
[...]
> >Well, as I said, you might want to believe in that, but that is your
> >problem. Besides, history does not tolerate "would".
> >
> It doesnt, and the Kozaks were put down.
>
No, they were not. They consolidated the Ukrainian nation, they gave it
the kind of myth necessary for renaissance of national
self-consciousness after centuries of oppression. Without kozaks
there would be no Mazepa, no Hrushevsky, no Bandera. That is why they
won in the historical prospective.
Sincerely,
Yanko
RPP
>In article <3745c120...@news.kwom.com>,
> le...@mail.netinc.ca wrote:
>> On Fri, 21 May 1999 20:05:15 GMT, Yanko <ya...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> Under the rule of Kozak peasants? You must be joking.
>> >Where have you seen peasants living in a city?
>> >Just a hint: where was Warszawa when Kyiv was the biggest city in
>Europe
>> >and the daughter of Yaroslav the Wise became the queen of France?
>>
>> Kiev was not a kozak city. I do not negate Kiev either.
>Lviv was not a kozak city, either. It was and is a Ukrainian city.
>
>> Yes it was a
>> rich, large city, that rivaled any in Europe. But its era of strangth
>> lasted very short. Boleslaw I was able to easily defteat Kiev forces
>> and take the city, and Kazimierz was able to incorporate it into
>> Poland.
>Surprise! Kyiv is back! ;-)
>
Back as what? A state in deep economic trouble?
RPP
>> Poland was fighting on too many fronts and the
>> Russians finally whipped the Mongols and looked toward an Empire at
>> Poland's expense. It is too bad that Pilsudski, an ethnic Lithuanian
>Rus,
>> could not get the Ukes on his side.
>Yes, too bad he chose to fight against Ukrainians instead.
>
He only fought ukrainians when they turned on him. He was going to
give Ukraine independence, but your mistrust ruined the effort. So he
did what he did.
RPP
>In article <3745bc6a...@news.kwom.com>,
> le...@mail.netinc.ca wrote:
>
>[...]
>> >Well, as I said, you might want to believe in that, but that is your
>> >problem. Besides, history does not tolerate "would".
>> >
>> It doesnt, and the Kozaks were put down.
>>
>No, they were not. They consolidated the Ukrainian nation, they gave it
>the kind of myth necessary for renaissance of national
>self-consciousness after centuries of oppression. Without kozaks
>there would be no Mazepa, no Hrushevsky, no Bandera. That is why they
>won in the historical prospective.
>
>Sincerely,
>Yanko
>
Yes, through their crushing defeat they won in a mythooogical way, in
that their national identity began to form. In a real sense though,
they were subjugated by Russia. Instead of fighting Poland, they could
have helped, and would have been far better off in the long run.
Yanko
Yanko
le...@mail.netinc.ca wrote:
> >Surprise! Kyiv is back! ;-)
> >
>
> Back as what? A state in deep economic trouble?
>
Well, let's wait until the dinosaurs die. When
the younger generation comes to the top, we'll
see who is in what trouble. So, good luck, and
see you in ten years ;-)
bab...@my-dejanews.com
mba...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
...cut...
> >
> > In the Ukrainian language, the four nouns that are most
> > commonly used to denote a soldier are: voyak, voyin, soldat
> > and zhovnir, with the latter two perhaps being derivatives of
> > the corresponding Russian and Polish nouns respectively.
> It was in the part of tablet written in polish language.As I said
> "wojak" is insulting when used to describe young civilian voluteers.
And "Lwow" is an insult to Ukrainians when not written in Polish. Yet
you wrote it on the title of this message, a title not written in
Polish, even after I explained to you with proof the proper spelling of
Lviv in English. So you are as bad as those Ukrainian tablet-builders.
Thus, your complaints are evidence of your hypocracy.
> > Do you see something improper in the use of the proper
> > Ukrainian term...?
> Yes,when you write in polish.
See my point above:
...cut...
> The first time when Lwow was an ukrainian city was in 1945.Although
> many hundreds of years ago there was an ukrainian village there.But it
> was the polish rule that maked a city from Lwow.
When Lviv was captured by Poland during Poland's invasion of Ukraine it
had a population of approximately 4,000. Let's put this into
perspective. At the same time (14th century) the largest cities of
Western Europe, such as London and Paris, had approximately 40,000
people; Lviv was 1/10th their size. In modern terms, that would make
Lviv a city of 400,000 or so people (1/10 the size of modern London).
Moreover, Polish improvements upon Lviv are irrelevent to the issue of
that city's theft. For example, if someone steals my sh*tty car,
installs a brand new stereo player with a 5 disc-changer, gives it a
shiny new paint jobs, new rims, adds a sunroof, rebuilds the engine,
etc. etc. it is still my stolen car, and I am entitled to getting it
back no matter how many improvements have been made and for how long the
thieves have enjoyed it.
Babai
bab...@my-dejanews.com
"WaRR" <Wa...@OjczYznA.OrG> wrote:
>
> mba...@my-dejanews.com wrote in message
<7hvi1d$rgg$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> various schools in Lwow.
Misguided and ignorant fools who died in vain for a wrong cause.
> They defended the city agains the
> overwhelming forces of ukrainian aggressors.
Very funny. With French support/leadership against a people
simultaneously fighting the Russians.
> Lwow used to be one of the most beautiful cities in Poland and rivaled
> Krakow.
Krakow was once one of the most beautiful of Austrian cities...
> Lwow had by far the most nicest population which called
> themselves "Lwowiacy". They were well known througout whole
> Rzeczpospolita. The most beautiful churches, universities, monuments,
> government buldings, palaces, residences and castles were
> build by Poles and later destroyed by ukrainians.
What happened to the old Ukrainian church in Peremyshl?
Moreover, please see my comments re: auto theft (in another post) for an
appropriate analogy of the Polish beautification of Lviv.
Babai
> After Lwow
> was ripped away from Rzeczpospolita, it totally lost its splendor
> and importance. Today under ukrainians this once beautiful city
> is dying and desintegrating.
>
> WaRR
>
>
bab...@my-dejanews.com
davi...@oro.net (Mike Davidchik) wrote:
> In article <7i0ts0$pag$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Yanko
<ya...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
>
> I won't get into the silly who was in Lvov first argument.
It's Lviv in English, FYI.
Babai
But, I
doubt
> that the Soviet takeover of Lvov did anything for the Ukrainians. As
far
> as partial resoration of justice, this is also very far fetched.
Nothing
> was taken by the Soviets which was given back to Ukrainian peasants.
The
> Soviet Government of Ukraine surely did more damage to Ukrainians than
the
> Polish nobility ever did. For centuries, many Ukrainians switched
their
> loyalties back and forth between the Poles and Russians. I doubt that
a
> pro-Russian Ukrainian was any greater patriot than a pro-Polish
Ukrainian
> in previous centuries.
>
> Or do you also believe that the
> > liberation war headed by Bohdan Khmelnytsky was an invasion by
> > Ukrainians of Polish lands/cities?
>
> In some cases, it was an invasion. Khemlnytsky killed a lot of
Ukrainians
> and Belarussians too. If you think that Khemlnytsky was a great
Ukrainian
> patriot, you don't know about his selling out Ukraine to the Russian
> Tsar. He liberated on behalf of the Russians, not the Ukrainians.
Lvov
> was taken over by the Soviets, not the Ukrainians. It was ruined by
the
> Commies
> not by the Poles, Austrians, or Ukrainians. The primitive and
tribalistic
> nationalism in this thread does not belong in this century. Much of
it is
> a product of pro- or anti-Tsarist propaganda drilled into the heads
of
> generations.
>
> Mike
bab...@my-dejanews.com
>
> Thats exactly what it was. Thank God for one of the gratest heros of
> the time, Jarema Wisniowiecki, a great and noble man, military genius
> who was able to put a halt to the advancing armies. And yes, it was an
> invasion. The Kozaks had with them the Tatars and later the Khan,
You have neglected to point out that the Poles employed almost as many
German mercenaries (20,000) as the Kozaks used Tatars (30,000). Perhaps
it was a German "invasion" as well?
> without whom they were nothing as a force. A Kozak uprising without
> foreign help would have been crushed in the first weeks. When you
> bring in foreign allies against Rzeczpospolita, thats an invasion.
Ahh...so then Sobieski's defence of Vienna was also an "invasion", as
were the French support of Poland (Haller) during 1918-1919. You are as
absurd as you are uncultured.
Babai
bab...@my-dejanews.com
le...@mail.netinc.ca wrote:
> On Fri, 21 May 1999 12:15:55 GMT, Yanko <ya...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
>
> >> the time, Jarema Wisniowiecki,
> >Oh, yes, that guy is very famous for his "heroism".
>
> HE was a stern and hard man, but a hero of the war. He dealt with the
> uprisers as they were meant to be dealt with, criminals.
Yes, crucifying women and burning children of peasants alive was quite
"heroic".
BTW Yarema was a traitor to his Faith (Orthodoxy) and to his Nation
(Ukrainian). You Poles can have such a garbage, if you are so proud of
him.
Babai
> Hence, he was one of the large reasons why the uprising was defeated.
> If only he was
> made commander from the star, at Zolte Wody, the war would have been
> ended at the first battle.
>
bab...@my-dejanews.com
le...@mail.netinc.ca wrote:
> On Fri, 21 May 1999 20:05:15 GMT, Yanko <ya...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
>
> Kiev was not a kozak city. I do not negate Kiev either. Yes it was a
> rich, large city, that rivaled any in Europe. But its era of strangth
> lasted very short. Boleslaw I was able to easily defteat Kiev forces
> and take the city,
This is funny. It was done at the request of one of the Rus' princes
with his help. Boleslaw thus played a role similar to that of various
Turkic tribes used by various Rus' princes in their battles against each
other.
Babai
> and Kazimierz was able to incorporate it into
> Poland.
>
>
bab...@my-dejanews.com
>
> >What bothers you, buddy? Does anyone prevent you from visiting the
> >beautiful Ukrainian city of Lviv as a tourist? If the "nicest
> >population" did not try to prevent restoration of Ukrainian rule in a
> >Ukrainian city, I doubt there would be any reason to place tablets
like
> >the one discussed.
> >
> >Yanko
>
> Restoration of Ukrainian rule??????? There never was a Ukrainian rule.
> was a Rus Halicka, or Rus Czerwona (Red Rus), but no Ukraine.
Why do you assume that Rus' was not Ukraine? Did Ukrainians come from
Mars to Galicia then, sometime after Polish rule was established?
Perhaps those Ukrainians referring to themselves as Rusyny as late as
the early 20th century were somehow deluded?
> After the incorporation of Lwow
----
Perhaps you should learn some English?
> into Poland by Kazimierz III Wielki, the
> village flourished,
It had flourished prior to the invasion...
> and over the centuries became a great city, full
> of churches, received a University, all under the care of Polish
> Crown.
So? Irrelevent to the issue of theft. If you steal my old and rusted
car, add a new stereo system, rebuilt the engine, do major body work
(new paint job, etc.), put in new head lights, etc. etc. that car is
still stolen; it still does not belong to you, no matter how many
improvements you have made or for how long you controlled it.
>The city and the region were also Polish in the majority, with
> a smaller non-Polish, or Ukrainian minority, as well as others like
> Jews.
Last Austrian census: app. 50% Polish, 25% Ukrainian, 25% other
(primarily Jewish and Austrian-German)
Babai
> That is the history of the city.
bab...@my-dejanews.com
le...@mail.netinc.ca wrote:
> >
>
> Listen, go read some history and get a clue.
You are one to talk, your ignorance and lack of culture are displayed
here rather prominantly...
> There was no natuional
> concept of a Ukraine at the time. Just like in the 8th century on
> Polish lands there was no national idea of a POland. There were many
> tribes. Same with what you call Ukraine. There was never a Ukrainian
> rule of these lands prior to Kazimierz.
The era of tribes ended in Ukraine at about the same time as it did in
Poland. Moreover, Ukraine was culturally far more adnvanced than Poland
during the time of Rus', because it was essentially a satelite
culturally of Byzantium while Poland was oriented more toward barbarian
Western Europe (it was forced to adopt Roman Catholicism in order to
forestall German crusaders). Many Rus' kings spoke several languages,
were fluent in Greek and Latin, etc. etc. Nearly a million people in
Rus', or 13 percent of the population, lived in cities and towns - a
much higher proportion than in Western Europe. Moreover, women were
allowed to engage in business and trade and to own property - several
representatives of woman merchants took part in negotiations with
Byzantium. I could go on, but the point is clear: prior to Casimir's
time Ukraine was far more advanced than Poland, or most of the rest of
Europe.
...cut...
> >Well, I beleive the city would do at least as well without the "care
of
> >Polish Crown".
> >
>
> Under the rule of Kozak peasants? You must be joking.
>
Ahh, the famous Polish racism and misguided elitism. There is a
wonderful description of your Polish "gentlemen" in Dostoyevsky's "The
Brothers Karamazov". You are quite unique, I have *never* prior to this
newgroup encountered any Poles who were indecent. You have successfully
shamed and embarassed your nation, and I feel sorry for your decent
countrymen, the majority of Poland's wonderful population. Now to the
point:
The Ukrainian supporters of Khmelnitsky ranged across all social strata,
they were not just peasants (although to a rare Polish racist such as
yourself Ukrainians must all be a bunch or "dirty", "uneducated"
peasants, right?) Khmelnitsky as well as most of his officials were
minor noblemen. Several of Khmelnitsky's successers, such as Ivan
Vyhovsky, Pavlo Teteria, and Ivan Mazepa were from the gentry. In fact,
although Polish invaders and Polonized traitors such as Wisnowiecki
(whose grandfather I believe was a Kozak hetman) were driven out, the
native nobility supported the Kozaks, and the families of Skoropadsky,
Mazepa, Apostol, Horlenko, etc. acquired huge estates. My own ancestor,
descended according to family tradition from the Galician Romanovychi,
rode alongside Khmelnitsky's army (he stayed in Galicia after the war
however). Of course, the peasants also rebelled against the Poles.
Unlike Polish society, built on exploitation of the peasants, Ukrainian
society had a measure of democracy, and the peasants were also an
important element. But to consider Khmelnitsky's army a horde of dark
peasants is as ignorant as it is racistic. Thanks for showing us all
what kind of person you really are.
Of course, the Orthodox Church also supported the rebellion (the
Patriarch of Jerusalem visited Kyiv at this time and proclaimed
Khmelnitsky a modern Moses)...
Babai
RPP
>In article <7i0pnp$mlf$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> mba...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>...cut...
>
>> >
>> > In the Ukrainian language, the four nouns that are most
>> > commonly used to denote a soldier are: voyak, voyin, soldat
>> > and zhovnir, with the latter two perhaps being derivatives of
>> > the corresponding Russian and Polish nouns respectively.
>
>> It was in the part of tablet written in polish language.As I said
>> "wojak" is insulting when used to describe young civilian voluteers.
>
>And "Lwow" is an insult to Ukrainians when not written in Polish. Yet
>you wrote it on the title of this message, a title not written in
>Polish, even after I explained to you with proof the proper spelling of
>Lviv in English. So you are as bad as those Ukrainian tablet-builders.
>Thus, your complaints are evidence of your hypocracy.
>
Why should we write Liviv? Many consider it still a POlish city. I
will continue to write Lwow, in English or Polish.
>
>
>> The first time when Lwow was an ukrainian city was in 1945.Although
>> many hundreds of years ago there was an ukrainian village there.But it
>> was the polish rule that maked a city from Lwow.
>
>When Lviv was captured by Poland during Poland's invasion of Ukraine it
>had a population of approximately 4,000. Let's put this into
>perspective. At the same time (14th century) the largest cities of
>Western Europe, such as London and Paris, had approximately 40,000
>people; Lviv was 1/10th their size. In modern terms, that would make
>Lviv a city of 400,000 or so people (1/10 the size of modern London).
>
>Moreover, Polish improvements upon Lviv are irrelevent to the issue of
>that city's theft. For example, if someone steals my sh*tty car,
>installs a brand new stereo player with a 5 disc-changer, gives it a
>shiny new paint jobs, new rims, adds a sunroof, rebuilds the engine,
>etc. etc. it is still my stolen car, and I am entitled to getting it
>back no matter how many improvements have been made and for how long the
>thieves have enjoyed it.
>
>Babai
First of all, it was never stole. Ther as no Ukraine to "steal" it
from. Ukraine as a concept only began to form in the 17th century.
Hence Ukraine stole it from Poland.
bab...@my-dejanews.com
"Slawomir Popiel" <mpo...@tellurian.net> wrote:
>
...cut...
> Mr. Spearman
> A term "wojak" has joking, ridiculing or derrogatory meaning in
> today's Polish, depending on intention and context and is not equal to
> "zolnierz". Therefore if the phrase was written in Polish it could not
> have been taken otherwise and there is nothing to dispute, unless the
> description was in Ukrainian.
> It happens that "word-for-word" translation from one language to the
> other frequently does not work very well. If this is the case, it
> prooves disregard and disrespect. Otherwise is tasteless.
------------------------
You mean, like when these hypocrites write, in English, "Lwow" instead
of Lviv when at the same time they complain about others' inappropriate
use of words that may be offensive?
Seriously, however, if indeed Ukraine violated an agreement with Poland
that is quite unfortunate and, hopefully, the situation will be
rectified. Although I do question the necessity of raising a plaque
for these colonists and their collaborators. How would you, as a Pole,
feel if in order to have good relations with Germany or NATO an
agreement had to be made putting up plaques honoring German defenders
of Wroclaw or Danzig (many of these lands, like Lviv, were colonised by
the Germans [teutonic knights] centuries ago)? And then, once it was
done, the Germans were insolent enough to complain about some of the
wording not being to their liking?
So, I think that both sides are somewhat guilty of tastelessness
here...
Babai
>No need to dispute that, either.
>
> --
>
> Pozdrawiam,
> Slawomir Popiel
> New Jersey
>
> http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/7847/
> http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Troy/7404/
> http://members.tripod.com/kingpopiel/
RPP
>
>The era of tribes ended in Ukraine at about the same time as it did in
>Poland. Moreover, Ukraine was culturally far more adnvanced than Poland
>during the time of Rus', because it was essentially a satelite
>culturally of Byzantium while Poland was oriented more toward barbarian
>Western Europe (it was forced to adopt Roman Catholicism in order to
>forestall German crusaders).
Wrong. Poland was not forced to ccept christianity by anyone. It was a
voluntary step taken by Mieszko I, who realized that only Christianity
allowed for a type of system that would move POland into the Western
sphere. It worked brilliantly, as Boleslaw I's wars with Germany
showed, when he defeated the Emrpror's armies, was able to take land
previously under the HRE's rule. And was able to trounce Kiev.
> Many Rus' kings spoke several languages,
>were fluent in Greek and Latin, etc. etc. Nearly a million people in
>Rus', or 13 percent of the population, lived in cities and towns - a
>much higher proportion than in Western Europe. Moreover, women were
>allowed to engage in business and trade and to own property - several
>representatives of woman merchants took part in negotiations with
>Byzantium. I could go on, but the point is clear: prior to Casimir's
>time Ukraine was far more advanced than Poland, or most of the rest of
>Europe.
>
REally? Why then was Boleslaw able to trounce Kiev with very little
trouble and to loot the city, and secure an ally on its throne?
>> >
>>
>> Under the rule of Kozak peasants? You must be joking.
>>
>
>Ahh, the famous Polish racism and misguided elitism. There is a
>wonderful description of your Polish "gentlemen" in Dostoyevsky's "The
>Brothers Karamazov".
Taking Dostojewski's worda about Poland as fact is like taking
Hitler's wods about Jews as fact. There goes your whole argument.
> You are quite unique, I have *never* prior to this
>newgroup encountered any Poles who were indecent. You have successfully
>shamed and embarassed your nation, and I feel sorry for your decent
>countrymen, the majority of Poland's wonderful population. Now to the
>point:
>
>The Ukrainian supporters of Khmelnitsky ranged across all social strata,
>they were not just peasants (although to a rare Polish racist such as
>yourself Ukrainians must all be a bunch or "dirty", "uneducated"
>peasants, right?) Khmelnitsky as well as most of his officials were
>minor noblemen. Several of Khmelnitsky's successers, such as Ivan
>Vyhovsky, Pavlo Teteria, and Ivan Mazepa were from the gentry. In fact,
>although Polish invaders and Polonized traitors such as Wisnowiecki
Wisniowiecki was a great man, and great hero. Far greater han your
Chmiel, who was a man angry because he lost a woman. Its funny how you
call Poles invaders. Invaders invade oither countries, and Poles didn
invade Poland. Thats sheer lunacy.
>(whose grandfather I believe was a Kozak hetman) were driven out, the
>native nobility supported the Kozaks, and the families of Skoropadsky,
>Mazepa, Apostol, Horlenko, etc. acquired huge estates.
You mean stole estates that rightlly belonged to others.
> My own ancestor,
>descended according to family tradition from the Galician Romanovychi,
>rode alongside Khmelnitsky's army (he stayed in Galicia after the war
>however).
You have nothing to be proud of. Riding along a man blind by jealousy
and Tatars (who were the primary figting force of the uprisers) as
they burnt villages and killed anyone, Ukrainian or not who got in
their way. It was great men like Wisniowiecki that put down this blood
thirsty horde.
> Of course, the peasants also rebelled against the Poles.
And many were killed by your Chmiel.
>Unlike Polish society, built on exploitation of the peasants, Ukrainian
>society had a measure of democracy, and the peasants were also an
>important element. But to consider Khmelnitsky's army a horde of dark
>peasants is as ignorant as it is racistic. Thanks for showing us all
>what kind of person you really are.
>
No, its the truth.
>Of course, the Orthodox Church also supported the rebellion (the
>Patriarch of Jerusalem visited Kyiv at this time and proclaimed
>Khmelnitsky a modern Moses)...
Oh well, what the Muscovite, err I mean Orthodox church suports must
be good. Afterall its supported the Tsarist politics in Ukraine that
cut the knees from under Ukraine's development as a nation.
>
>Babai
bab...@my-dejanews.com
> >Western Europe (it was forced to adopt Roman Catholicism in order to
> >forestall German crusaders).
>
> Wrong. Poland was not forced to ccept christianity by anyone. It was a
> voluntary step taken by Mieszko I, who realized that only Christianity
> allowed for a type of system that would move POland into the Western
> sphere.
Poland chose Western Christianity even though it was culturally *far*
behind Eastern Christianity because he did not want to fight Western
Crusaders.
> It worked brilliantly, as Boleslaw I's wars with Germany
> showed, when he defeated the Emrpror's armies, was able to take land
> previously under the HRE's rule. And was able to trounce Kiev.
I am not familiar with the first part, but your laughable comment on the
heroic Polish "trouncing" of Kyiv makes me suspicious.
> > Many Rus' kings spoke several languages,
> >were fluent in Greek and Latin, etc. etc. Nearly a million people in
> >Rus', or 13 percent of the population, lived in cities and towns - a
> >much higher proportion than in Western Europe. Moreover, women were
> >allowed to engage in business and trade and to own property - several
> >representatives of woman merchants took part in negotiations with
> >Byzantium. I could go on, but the point is clear: prior to Casimir's
> >time Ukraine was far more advanced than Poland, or most of the rest
> >of Europe.
> >
>
> REally? Why then was Boleslaw able to trounce Kiev with very little
> trouble and to loot the city, and secure an ally on its throne?
Hahaha....The Rus' princes were in the habit of fighting each other for
the Kyivan throne, and often used foreign troops for this purpose.
Boleslaw was merely playing the role of Pecheneg (Turkic tribesmen)
who were also often used as auxilary soldiers. Boleslaw's sponsors were
soon expelled anyways.
Moreover, the Crusaders looted Constantinople. I hope you think that
that does not show cultural superiority as well?
> >>
> >> Under the rule of Kozak peasants? You must be joking.
> >>
> >
> >Ahh, the famous Polish racism and misguided elitism. There is a
> >wonderful description of your Polish "gentlemen" in Dostoyevsky's
> > "The Brothers Karamazov".
>
> Taking Dostojewski's worda about Poland as fact is like taking
> Hitler's wods about Jews as fact.
kind of like taking the words of a Polish racist and
apologist for imperialism such as yourself as fact : -) ...
> There goes your whole argument.
the feeling is mutual...
> >The Ukrainian supporters of Khmelnitsky ranged across all social
> >strata, they were not just peasants (although to a rare Polish racist
> > such as yourself Ukrainians must all be a bunch or "dirty",
> >"uneducated" peasants, right?) Khmelnitsky as well as most of his
> > officials were minor noblemen. Several of Khmelnitsky's successers,
> > such as Ivan Vyhovsky, Pavlo Teteria, and Ivan Mazepa were from the
> > gentry. In fact, although Polish invaders and Polonized traitors
> > such as Wisnowiecki
>
> Wisniowiecki was a great man, and great hero.
Yup. Like Judas was for some Jews. Both W. and Judas ultimately
failed.
> Far greater han your
> Chmiel, who was a man angry because he lost a woman. Its funny how you
> call Poles invaders. Invaders invade oither countries, and Poles didn
> invade Poland. Thats sheer lunacy.
Suure, Ukraine = Poland. Then Russians and Germans never invaded Russia
and Germany either (according to your logic Poland should be iether
"General-Government Germany or part of the Russian crown).
...cut...
>
> You have nothing to be proud of. Riding along a man blind by jealousy
> and Tatars (who were the primary figting force of the uprisers)
You forgot to note that the number of tatars fighting along side
Khmelnitsky was comparable to the number of Germans fighting for the
Poles. (30,000 to 20,000). The cossacks had more trouble with the
German mercenaries than with the Poles. Remember Pyliavtsi, where
80,000 Poles were defeated?
> as
> they burnt villages and killed anyone, Ukrainian or not who got in
> their way. It was great men like Wisniowiecki that put down this blood
> thirsty horde.
W. lost to Krononos, then ran like a dog with his tail between his legs
(burning alive peasant children for "revenge"), and hid behind the
safety of a fortress, afraid to come out before eventually surrendering.
BTW, did this traitor ever return to his estate?
...cut...
>
> >Of course, the Orthodox Church also supported the rebellion (the
> >Patriarch of Jerusalem visited Kyiv at this time and proclaimed
> >Khmelnitsky a modern Moses)...
>
> Oh well, what the Muscovite, err I mean Orthodox church suports must
> be good.
You once again demonstrate your ignorance. The Orthodox leader of
Ukraine urged Khmelnitsky *not* to sign the Pereyaslav agreement.
> Afterall its supported the Tsarist politics in Ukraine that
> cut the knees from under Ukraine's development as a nation.
The above was after the events of the 17th century.
Babai
bab...@my-dejanews.com
le...@mail.netinc.ca wrote:
> Why should we write Liviv?
Umm, because Lviv is the official, gramatically correct English name
for the city? And this conversation is in English.
> Many consider it still a POlish city. I
> will continue to write Lwow, in English or Polish.
well, it is your choice to write as an illiterate.
> >
> >
> >> The first time when Lwow was an ukrainian city was in 1945.Although
> >> many hundreds of years ago there was an ukrainian village there.But
it
> >> was the polish rule that maked a city from Lwow.
> >
> >When Lviv was captured by Poland during Poland's invasion of Ukraine
it
> >had a population of approximately 4,000. Let's put this into
> >perspective. At the same time (14th century) the largest cities of
> >Western Europe, such as London and Paris, had approximately 40,000
> >people; Lviv was 1/10th their size. In modern terms, that would make
> >Lviv a city of 400,000 or so people (1/10 the size of modern London).
> >
> >Moreover, Polish improvements upon Lviv are irrelevent to the issue
of
> >that city's theft. For example, if someone steals my sh*tty car,
> >installs a brand new stereo player with a 5 disc-changer, gives it a
> >shiny new paint jobs, new rims, adds a sunroof, rebuilds the engine,
> >etc. etc. it is still my stolen car, and I am entitled to getting it
> >back no matter how many improvements have been made and for how long
the
> >thieves have enjoyed it.
> >
> >Babai
>
> First of all, it was never stole. Ther as no Ukraine to "steal" it
> from. Ukraine as a concept only began to form in the 17th century.
> Hence Ukraine stole it from Poland.
This is quite laughable. You seem to have a childlike love of
names: Rus doesn't sound like Ukraine, so therefore there was no
Ukraine, right? "Those Rusyny ("Ruthenians") must have been different
from UKrainians because their names don't, um, sound the same."
What then was Rus'? Moreover, because Germany "as a concept" also did
not exist until the 17th century, I suppoose that Bavaria, Prussia, etc.
etc. could have been conquered by anyone, and that their liberation by
the German would also have been an "invasion"?
For that matter, you must consider Geribaldi the ultimate thief then?
Slawomir Popiel
<bab...@my-dejanews.com> wrote in message
news:7i9s56$q01$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
| In article <fhX03.16751$5e2.3...@news2.giganews.com>,
| "Slawomir Popiel" <mpo...@tellurian.net> wrote:
| >
| ...cut...
|
|
| > Mr. Spearman
| > A term "wojak" has joking, ridiculing or derrogatory meaning in
| > today's Polish, depending on intention and context and is not equal to
| > "zolnierz". Therefore if the phrase was written in Polish it could not
| > have been taken otherwise and there is nothing to dispute, unless the
| > description was in Ukrainian.
|
| > It happens that "word-for-word" translation from one language to the
| > other frequently does not work very well. If this is the case, it
| > prooves disregard and disrespect. Otherwise is tasteless.
| ------------------------
|
| You mean, like when these hypocrites write, in English, "Lwow" instead
| of Lviv when at the same time they complain about others' inappropriate
| use of words that may be offensive?
What about you, Mr. Babai writing below "Danzig"? If you see a straw is
somebody's eye, see a splinter in yours. Personally I don't care whether you
call it Danzig or Gdansk, but you could give some credit to anybody else
that use of Lwow instead of Lviv is not necessarily intended offense (at
least in some cases). Many people are simply unaware about those subtleties.
However, different expectations apply to the representatives of the
goverments, don't you think?
| Seriously, however, if indeed Ukraine violated an agreement with Poland
| that is quite unfortunate and, hopefully, the situation will be
| rectified. Although I do question the necessity of raising a plaque
| for these colonists and their collaborators. How would you, as a Pole,
| feel if in order to have good relations with Germany or NATO an
| agreement had to be made putting up plaques honoring German defenders
| of Wroclaw or Danzig (many of these lands, like Lviv, were colonised by
| the Germans [teutonic knights] centuries ago)? And then, once it was
| done, the Germans were insolent enough to complain about some of the
| wording not being to their liking?
Personal matters aside, be assured that if it came to such an agreement, I
would not be glad if my government put a plaque saying for example: "To all
dead Krauts". It would be tasteless as well.
M. L.
RPP wrote:
> Oh well, what the Muscovite, err I mean Orthodox church
arg.. Be careful about Pravoslavna crkva!
NO matter what Russians say they aren't leaders or anything of the church...
AFAIA concerned patriarch Pavle is head of my church..
well..
pozdrav
> suports must
> be good. Afterall its supported the Tsarist politics in Ukraine that
> cut the knees from under Ukraine's development as a nation.
>
> >
> >Babai
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
> >---Share what you know. Learn what you don't.---
--
"Nobody, either now or in the future, has the right to beat you!" - Slobodan
Milosevic, First Secretary of the Communist Party of the Socialist Republic
of Serbia
Jerzy Pawlowski
wrote:
> Krakow was once one of the most beautiful of Austrian cities...
Thank you.
> What happened to the old Ukrainian church in Peremyshl?
This reminds me, we have an old saying in Polish:
Before you say anything, Peremyshl.
P.S. Czy ta baba to chlop, czy baba?
--
"Imbéciles réveillez vous!"
Jerzy Pawlowski (j...@panix.com)
RPP
>In article <nrM03.2840$8p2....@cynws01.we.mediaone.net>,
> "WaRR" <Wa...@OjczYznA.OrG> wrote:
>>
>> mba...@my-dejanews.com wrote in message
><7hvi1d$rgg$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> Most of these soldiers were brave scouts and students from
>> various schools in Lwow.
>
>Misguided and ignorant fools who died in vain for a wrong cause.
Defending Polish territory was a wrong cause?
>
>> They defended the city agains the
>> overwhelming forces of ukrainian aggressors.
>
>Very funny. With French support/leadership against a people
>simultaneously fighting the Russians.
>
What a fool. French leadership?
>> Lwow used to be one of the most beautiful cities in Poland and rivaled
>> Krakow.
>
>Krakow was once one of the most beautiful of Austrian cities...
>
For barely 100 years. Lwow was Polish for many centuries.
RPP
>In article <37443e8a...@news.kwom.com>,
> le...@mail.netinc.ca wrote:
>> On Thu, 20 May 1999 06:20:30 GMT, Yanko <ya...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
>>
>> >What bothers you, buddy? Does anyone prevent you from visiting the
>> >beautiful Ukrainian city of Lviv as a tourist? If the "nicest
>> >population" did not try to prevent restoration of Ukrainian rule in a
>> >Ukrainian city, I doubt there would be any reason to place tablets
>like
>> >the one discussed.
>> >
>> >Yanko
>>
>> Restoration of Ukrainian rule??????? There never was a Ukrainian rule.
>> Before Lwow was in Poland, there was no such thing as Ukraine. There
>> was a Rus Halicka, or Rus Czerwona (Red Rus), but no Ukraine.
>
>Why do you assume that Rus' was not Ukraine? Did Ukrainians come from
>Mars to Galicia then, sometime after Polish rule was established?
>Perhaps those Ukrainians referring to themselves as Rusyny as late as
>the early 20th century were somehow deluded?
Because they were different things. They were a seperate enityt from
the rest of Rus. There simply was no such thing as a Ukrainian at that
time. To equate the two is to be desperate.
>
>Last Austrian census: app. 50% Polish, 25% Ukrainian, 25% other
>(primarily Jewish and Austrian-German)
>
Twice as many Poles as Ukrainians. That proves my point.
RPP
>In article <37486eca...@news.kwom.com>,
> le...@mail.netinc.ca wrote:
>> On Sun, 23 May 1999 21:17:06 GMT, bab...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>>
>> >
>
>> >Western Europe (it was forced to adopt Roman Catholicism in order to
>> >forestall German crusaders).
>>
>> Wrong. Poland was not forced to ccept christianity by anyone. It was a
>> voluntary step taken by Mieszko I, who realized that only Christianity
>> allowed for a type of system that would move POland into the Western
>> sphere.
>
>Poland chose Western Christianity even though it was culturally *far*
>behind Eastern Christianity because he did not want to fight Western
>Crusaders.
>
Poland always was Western oriented. Poland chose the West because it
offered more than the East could in the long run.
>> It worked brilliantly, as Boleslaw I's wars with Germany
>> showed, when he defeated the Emrpror's armies, was able to take land
>> previously under the HRE's rule. And was able to trounce Kiev.
>
>I am not familiar with the first part, but your laughable comment on the
>heroic Polish "trouncing" of Kyiv makes me suspicious.
>
REad about Boleslaw's campaign against Kiev. As for the first part,
Poland was able to expend Westward into the HR Empire, and defeat
Germany in multiple wars.
>> > Many Rus' kings spoke several languages,
>> >were fluent in Greek and Latin, etc. etc. Nearly a million people in
>> >Rus', or 13 percent of the population, lived in cities and towns - a
>> >much higher proportion than in Western Europe. Moreover, women were
>> >allowed to engage in business and trade and to own property - several
>> >representatives of woman merchants took part in negotiations with
>> >Byzantium. I could go on, but the point is clear: prior to Casimir's
>> >time Ukraine was far more advanced than Poland, or most of the rest
>> >of Europe.
>> >
>>
>> REally? Why then was Boleslaw able to trounce Kiev with very little
>> trouble and to loot the city, and secure an ally on its throne?
>
>Hahaha....The Rus' princes were in the habit of fighting each other for
>the Kyivan throne, and often used foreign troops for this purpose.
>Boleslaw was merely playing the role of Pecheneg (Turkic tribesmen)
>who were also often used as auxilary soldiers. Boleslaw's sponsors were
>soon expelled anyways.
Maybe so, but Boleslaw had little trouble with Kiev, and made off with
a lot of treasure. Kiev was no match for him, afterall he defeated the
Holy Roman Empire many times, and expanded Poland Westward into the
HRE.
>
>> >The Ukrainian supporters of Khmelnitsky ranged across all social
>> >strata, they were not just peasants (although to a rare Polish racist
>> > such as yourself Ukrainians must all be a bunch or "dirty",
>> >"uneducated" peasants, right?) Khmelnitsky as well as most of his
>> > officials were minor noblemen. Several of Khmelnitsky's successers,
>> > such as Ivan Vyhovsky, Pavlo Teteria, and Ivan Mazepa were from the
>> > gentry. In fact, although Polish invaders and Polonized traitors
>> > such as Wisnowiecki
>>
>> Wisniowiecki was a great man, and great hero.
>
>Yup. Like Judas was for some Jews. Both W. and Judas ultimately
>failed.
Wisnioweicki died after Beresteczko, but his cavalry trounced the
Tatars and Kozaks at that famous battle. As for him being a Judas, he
defended his motherland, and so he was not a Judas. You compare a
horde of criminals to Jesus Christ?
>
>> Far greater han your
>> Chmiel, who was a man angry because he lost a woman. Its funny how you
>> call Poles invaders. Invaders invade oither countries, and Poles didn
>> invade Poland. Thats sheer lunacy.
>
>Suure, Ukraine = Poland. Then Russians and Germans never invaded Russia
>and Germany either (according to your logic Poland should be iether
>"General-Government Germany or part of the Russian crown).
>
>...cut...
Wrong, Germany and Russia invaded Poland. Poland invaded no one.
POland did not take Ukraine by sword, Poland took over the official
responsibility for Ukraine in 1569 at the Union of Lublin from the
Lithuanians. However the lands had been polonised centuries before.
>
>
>>
>> You have nothing to be proud of. Riding along a man blind by jealousy
>> and Tatars (who were the primary figting force of the uprisers)
>
>You forgot to note that the number of tatars fighting along side
>Khmelnitsky was comparable to the number of Germans fighting for the
>Poles. (30,000 to 20,000). The cossacks had more trouble with the
>German mercenaries than with the Poles. Remember Pyliavtsi, where
>80,000 Poles were defeated?
Wow, at ;east stick to historical accuracy. The battle of Pilawce,
20-23 September, 1648 30,000 strong army of the Crown. Where do you
get your falsified 80 thousand? Poland never had an 80 thousand man
army during these times. Sheer fantasy and lies. POland was almost
always heavily outnumbered by the Tatars and Kozaks whose ranks often
swelled opver 150 thousand. For example at Zbaraz, a 150 thousand
strong Chmilel/Khan army was held back by a small army of Jeremi
Wisniowiecki who first defeated you on the battle field and then held
you off for 6 weeks. The army which came in help was only 15 thousand
strong. Is lieing the only way you can argue?
>
>> as
>> they burnt villages and killed anyone, Ukrainian or not who got in
>> their way. It was great men like Wisniowiecki that put down this blood
>> thirsty horde.
>
>W. lost to Krononos, then ran like a dog with his tail between his legs
>(burning alive peasant children for "revenge"), and hid behind the
>safety of a fortress, afraid to come out before eventually surrendering.
>BTW, did this traitor ever return to his estate?
>
>...cut...
Wisnoweicki lost? He defeated you on the battle ground. and held out
at Zbaraz since he was easily outnumbered more than 7 to 1. He later
went on to trounce you at Beresteczko. HE was a hero and noble
soldier. Chmiel was a criminal dog.
>
>>
>> >Of course, the Orthodox Church also supported the rebellion (the
>> >Patriarch of Jerusalem visited Kyiv at this time and proclaimed
>> >Khmelnitsky a modern Moses)...
>>
>> Oh well, what the Muscovite, err I mean Orthodox church suports must
>> be good.
>
>You once again demonstrate your ignorance. The Orthodox leader of
>Ukraine urged Khmelnitsky *not* to sign the Pereyaslav agreement.
>
>> Afterall its supported the Tsarist politics in Ukraine that
>> cut the knees from under Ukraine's development as a nation.
>
>The above was after the events of the 17th century.
>
>Babai
All thanks to the Muscovite, I mean Orhodox church.
RPP
>(burning alive peasant children for "revenge"), and hid behind the
>safety of a fortress, afraid to come out before eventually surrendering.
>BTW, did this traitor ever return to his estate?
>
As I said, he died after Beresteczko. His son however became King of
the Commonwealth, hence king of Ukraine as well.
RPP
>In article <37443fcf...@news.kwom.com>,
> le...@mail.netinc.ca wrote:
>
>>
>> Thats exactly what it was. Thank God for one of the gratest heros of
>> the time, Jarema Wisniowiecki, a great and noble man, military genius
>> who was able to put a halt to the advancing armies. And yes, it was an
>> invasion. The Kozaks had with them the Tatars and later the Khan,
>
>You have neglected to point out that the Poles employed almost as many
>German mercenaries (20,000) as the Kozaks used Tatars (30,000). Perhaps
>it was a German "invasion" as well?
>
The number of foreign mercenaries you provide is an absolute
fabrication just like your fabricated 80 thousand at Pilawce, where
only 30 thousand Polish troops took part in the battle. Do you feel
the need to overglorify your history or are you simply uninformed?
>
>> without whom they were nothing as a force. A Kozak uprising without
>> foreign help would have been crushed in the first weeks. When you
>> bring in foreign allies against Rzeczpospolita, thats an invasion.
>
>Ahh...so then Sobieski's defence of Vienna was also an "invasion", as
>were the French support of Poland (Haller) during 1918-1919. You are as
>absurd as you are uncultured.
>
Sobieski's defense of Vienna happened at an invitation of an existiong
state. Poland did not invite the Tatars into Poland. Thet tatars came
at a request of a band of insurgents, not the King of POland.
RPP
>In article <37443fcf...@news.kwom.com>,
> le...@mail.netinc.ca wrote:
>
>>
>> Thats exactly what it was. Thank God for one of the gratest heros of
>> the time, Jarema Wisniowiecki, a great and noble man, military genius
>> who was able to put a halt to the advancing armies. And yes, it was an
>> invasion. The Kozaks had with them the Tatars and later the Khan,
>
>You have neglected to point out that the Poles employed almost as many
>German mercenaries (20,000) as the Kozaks used Tatars (30,000). Perhaps
>it was a German "invasion" as well?
>
Yeah, just like ther were 80,000 Polish troops at Pilawce. Do you
always exaggerate by a factor of 2.67?????
>
>> without whom they were nothing as a force. A Kozak uprising without
>> foreign help would have been crushed in the first weeks. When you
>> bring in foreign allies against Rzeczpospolita, thats an invasion.
>
>Ahh...so then Sobieski's defence of Vienna was also an "invasion", as
>were the French support of Poland (Haller) during 1918-1919. You are as
>absurd as you are uncultured.
>
Do you not see the huge difference? At Vienna and then during the
POlish Soviet war, you had nations dealing with nations. In Chmiel's
case you had a band of insurgents bringing in a foreign force. Chmiel
was not a head of state, he was a bandit as was his horde.
WaRR
Yanko wrote in message <7i86e6$ntt$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>In article <3746e47...@news.kwom.com>,
> le...@mail.netinc.ca wrote:
>
>> >Surprise! Kyiv is back! ;-)
>> >
>>
>> Back as what? A state in deep economic trouble?
>>
>Well, let's wait until the dinosaurs die. When
>the younger generation comes to the top, we'll
>see who is in what trouble. So, good luck, and
>see you in ten years ;-)
>
>--
>"Everything should be made as simple as possible,
>but not simpler".
>
>A. Einstein
Heh, thats exactly what ukrainians said 10 years ago, now
they only have 30% of what they had then. In 10 years from
now ukraine will be worse off than mozambique.
WaRR
Jerzy Pankiewicz
: of Wroclaw or Danzig (many of these lands, like Lviv, were colonised by
: the Germans [teutonic knights] centuries ago)? And then, once it was
: done, the Germans were insolent enough to complain about some of the
: wording not being to their liking?
The problem with Gdansk and Wroclaw wasn't that
they were colonised, but that Germans invided Poland
in 1939 and murdered or helped to die about 5.5 million
of Polish citizens. If you cannot realize the difference
between the Gestapo and teenagers in 1918 - you have
problem.
Jerzy Pankiewicz
bab...@my-dejanews.com
>
> What about you, Mr. Babai writing below "Danzig"? If you see a straw
> is somebody's eye, see a splinter in yours.
Good that you caught that. It was done deliberately, to show you how
Ukrainians feel when Lviv is spelled Lwow. The Gdansk-Danzig situation
is analogous: in both cases invaders made a city out of captured land.
A minor difference is that, in the case of the teutonic knights, some
poor-thinking Polish prince actually invited the knights to come in,
while in the case of the Poles in Galicia it was an outright invasion.
I've even heard bitter complaints, similar to Lech's, from elderly
Germans about how the beautiful city of Danzig was made ugly by "filthy
Pollacks". Lech is a mirror image of those racists.
> Personally I don't care
> whether you call it Danzig or Gdansk, but you could give some credit
> to anybody else that use of Lwow instead of Lviv is not necessarily
> intended offense (atleast in some cases).
Given Lech's other writings re: Ukrainians, one can only conclude that
he uses Lwow as a deliberate insult, and is not merely ignorant.
Babai
Many people are simply unaware about those
subtleties.
> However, different expectations apply to the representatives of the
> goverments, don't you think?
>
> | Seriously, however, if indeed Ukraine violated an agreement with
Poland
> | that is quite unfortunate and, hopefully, the situation will be
> | rectified. Although I do question the necessity of raising a plaque
> | for these colonists and their collaborators. How would you, as a
Pole,
> | feel if in order to have good relations with Germany or NATO an
> | agreement had to be made putting up plaques honoring German
defenders
> | of Wroclaw or Danzig (many of these lands, like Lviv, were colonised
by
> | the Germans [teutonic knights] centuries ago)? And then, once it
was
> | done, the Germans were insolent enough to complain about some of the
> | wording not being to their liking?
>
> Personal matters aside, be assured that if it came to such an
agreement, I
> would not be glad if my government put a plaque saying for example:
"To all
> dead Krauts". It would be tasteless as well.
>
> --
>
> Pozdrawiam,
> Slawomir Popiel
> New Jersey
>
> http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/7847/
> http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Troy/7404/
> http://members.tripod.com/kingpopiel/
>
>
bab...@my-dejanews.com
panki...@sun1000.pwr.wroc.pl (Jerzy Pankiewicz) wrote:
> In soc.culture.ukrainian bab...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
>
> The problem with Gdansk and Wroclaw wasn't that
> they were colonised, but that Germans invided Poland
> in 1939 and murdered or helped to die about 5.5 million
> of Polish citizens. If you cannot realize the difference
> between the Gestapo and teenagers in 1918 - you have
> problem.
You must be unfamiliar with the behavior of Poland towards Ukrainians in
the 1920's and 1930's. Closing down Ukrainian schools, shutting down
the university, setting up a small concentration camp, etc. As for the
Gestapo vs. Polish teenagers - many German soldiers were also in their
teens (especially towards the end of the war), and teens for example
took part in Mao's "cultural revolution" atrocities. So the age doesn't
justify their wrong actions.
Babai
>
> Jerzy Pankiewicz
bab...@my-dejanews.com
le...@mail.netinc.ca wrote:
> On Sun, 23 May 1999 20:28:00 GMT, bab...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
> >In article <37443fcf...@news.kwom.com>,
> > le...@mail.netinc.ca wrote:
> >
> >>
> >German mercenaries (20,000) as the Kozaks used Tatars (30,000).
Perhaps
> >it was a German "invasion" as well?
> >
>
> Yeah, just like ther were 80,000 Polish troops at Pilawce. Do you
> always exaggerate by a factor of 2.67?????
Ummm...my sources were from American or Canadian universities such as
University of Toronto or Harvard, the former published a book claiming
80,000 defeated Poles at "Pilawce". These are Western sources subject
to professional peer review and criticism. I suspect your Polish
children's fables were written by 19th century Poles trying to justify
their claim of Galicia. They, like yourself, failed utterly.
> >
> >> without whom they were nothing as a force. A Kozak uprising without
> >> foreign help would have been crushed in the first weeks. When you
> >> bring in foreign allies against Rzeczpospolita, thats an invasion.
> >
> >Ahh...so then Sobieski's defence of Vienna was also an "invasion", as
> >were the French support of Poland (Haller) during 1918-1919. You are
as
> >absurd as you are uncultured.
> >
>
> Do you not see the huge difference? At Vienna and then during the
> POlish Soviet war, you had nations dealing with nations.
No, no, no...according to your twisted logic the Polish-Soviet war
involved "rebels" (Pilsudski was a rebel against Russian occupation)
bringing foreign troops (Haller and other Frenchmen) into "Russia".
Babai
> In Chmiel's
> case you had a band of insurgents bringing in a foreign force. Chmiel
> was not a head of state, he was a bandit as was his horde.
>
bab...@my-dejanews.com
>
> The number of foreign mercenaries you provide is an absolute
> fabrication just like your fabricated 80 thousand at Pilawce,
Ah, so professor Paul Magosci of the University of Toronto is a
fabricator. I have read similar figures in things published by Harvard
(which has a Ukrainian Institute), and other American-Canadian sources.
I recall reading similar things in Encyclopedias as well. In fact, one
author claiming 80,000 also contributed to Encarta '98.
Do you think that there is a vast pro-Ukrainian conspiracy in American
academia (if so, this is another example of your "Russian-ness")
These sources are subject to peer review and professional criticism.
What are *your* sources Lech? Some 19th century Polish children's books
written by Galician Poles to justify their claims on Galicia?
> where
> only 30 thousand Polish troops took part in the battle. Do you feel
> the need to overglorify your history or are you simply uninformed?
Yes, Harvard tries to overglorify Ukrainian history...it is quite
obvious that that is *your* problem...
Babai
> >
> >> without whom they were nothing as a force. A Kozak uprising without
> >> foreign help would have been crushed in the first weeks. When you
> >> bring in foreign allies against Rzeczpospolita, thats an invasion.
> >
> >Ahh...so then Sobieski's defence of Vienna was also an "invasion", as
> >were the French support of Poland (Haller) during 1918-1919. You are
as
> >absurd as you are uncultured.
> >
>
> Sobieski's defense of Vienna happened at an invitation of an existiong
> state. Poland did not invite the Tatars into Poland. Thet tatars came
> at a request of a band of insurgents, not the King of POland.
>
> >Babai
> >
> >
> >
bab...@my-dejanews.com
> >
> >Poland chose Western Christianity even though it was culturally *far*
> >behind Eastern Christianity because he did not want to fight Western
> >Crusaders.
> >
>
> Poland always was Western oriented.
Not true. Parts of Poland once used the Cyrillic alphabet.
> Poland chose the West because it
> offered more than the East could in the long run.
I doubt that Polish leaders were prophets, i.e. could predict that in 2
centuries the Mongols and Turks would end Eastern superiority. Poland
had aggresive Western Christians next door and wanted to eliminate the
chances of a crusade.
> >
>
> REad about Boleslaw's campaign against Kiev.
I have. It was as much Yaropolk's as Boleslaw's campaign.
> As for the first part,
> Poland was able to expend Westward into the HR Empire, and defeat
> Germany in multiple wars.
Good for Poland. Rus' managed to defeat Byzantium at a time when
Byzantium was far stronger than the HRE.
..cut..
> >> >
> >>
> >> REally? Why then was Boleslaw able to trounce Kiev with very little
> >> trouble and to loot the city, and secure an ally on its throne?
> >
> >Hahaha....The Rus' princes were in the habit of fighting each other
for
> >the Kyivan throne, and often used foreign troops for this purpose.
> >Boleslaw was merely playing the role of Pecheneg (Turkic tribesmen)
> >who were also often used as auxilary soldiers. Boleslaw's sponsors
> >were soon expelled anyways.
>
> Maybe so, but Boleslaw had little trouble with Kiev, and made off with
> a lot of treasure.
Well, booty (he made off with some of one of the prince's sisters as
well, I beleive) was the price of helping Yaropolk "prokliaty" (he
killed his brothers, ss. Boris and Hlib the martyrs). You did not
expect the Poles to work for free? The turkic pechenegs had the same
rewards for services rendered. Really, Boleslaw's participation in Rus'
princely intrigues was a mere footnote in history. Your heroic
portrayal of it shows how desperate you are to proove Poland's
glory, and shows how "suspect" your other statements are. After
a brief period of time, Yaropolk was expelled from Ukraine, he came back
with Polish assistance. After the Poles left Yaropolk was again driven
out, killed en route to Poland. His succesor Yaroslav (whose daughter
married the French King and bacame Queen of France herself) invaded
Poland and left with much booty, including thousands of slaves sold to
the Byzantines.
> Kiev was no match for him, afterall he defeated the
> Holy Roman Empire many times,
Rus' had a population similar to HRE, and was most likley stronger.
> and expanded Poland Westward into the
> HRE.
Yet Poland lost terrotory to Kyivan Rus'...
> >
> >> >The Ukrainian supporters of Khmelnitsky ranged across all social
> >> >strata, they were not just peasants (although to a rare Polish
racist
> >> > such as yourself Ukrainians must all be a bunch or "dirty",
> >> >"uneducated" peasants, right?) Khmelnitsky as well as most of his
> >> > officials were minor noblemen. Several of Khmelnitsky's
successers,
> >> > such as Ivan Vyhovsky, Pavlo Teteria, and Ivan Mazepa were from
the
> >> > gentry. In fact, although Polish invaders and Polonized traitors
> >> > such as Wisnowiecki
> >>
> >> Wisniowiecki was a great man, and great hero.
> >
> >Yup. Like Judas was for some Jews. Both W. and Judas ultimately
> >failed.
>
> Wisnioweicki died after Beresteczko, but his cavalry trounced the
> Tatars and Kozaks at that famous battle. As for him being a Judas, he
> defended his motherland, and so he was not a Judas. You compare a
> horde of criminals to Jesus Christ?
What do you think of the heroic portrayal of Khmel. in the new Polish
movie "Fire and Blood" (the most expensive Polish movie ever made)?
It seems most Poles do not share your twisted opinion of
Ukrainian-Polish history. Poles are decent and intelligent people, you
are either a traitor or an embarrasment.
> >
> >> Far greater han your
> >> Chmiel, who was a man angry because he lost a woman. Its funny how
you
> >> call Poles invaders. Invaders invade oither countries, and Poles
didn
> >> invade Poland. Thats sheer lunacy.
> >
> >Suure, Ukraine = Poland. Then Russians and Germans never invaded
Russia
> >and Germany either (according to your logic Poland should be iether
> >"General-Government Germany or part of the Russian crown).
> >
> >...cut...
>
> Wrong, Germany and Russia invaded Poland. Poland invaded no one.
> POland did not take Ukraine by sword,
Hmmmm...Poles were defeated in 1340 but were succesful in 1349 when they
made an alliance with Hungary. Kind of like Germany and Russia together
dividing Poland.
Babai
bab...@my-dejanews.com
Well, one of the normal Polish majoirty has corrected the improperly
spelled heading.
Babai
In article <7iadl2$2i3$1...@panix.com>,
j...@panix.com (Jerzy Pawlowski) wrote:
> In article <7i9nt0$n75$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, <bab...@my-dejanews.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Krakow was once one of the most beautiful of Austrian cities...
>
> Thank you.
>
> > What happened to the old Ukrainian church in Peremyshl?
>
> This reminds me, we have an old saying in Polish:
> Before you say anything, Peremyshl.
>
> P.S. Czy ta baba to chlop, czy baba?
> --
> "Imbéciles réveillez vous!"
>
> Jerzy Pawlowski (j...@panix.com)
>
Leszek Andrzej Kleczkowski
: Well, one of the normal Polish majoirty has corrected the improperly
: spelled heading.
Well, Jerzy should ingrave your words in brass and hang them over
his office desk:-)
Regards
Leszek
: In article <7iadl2$2i3$1...@panix.com>,
: j...@panix.com (Jerzy Pawlowski) wrote:
: > In article <7i9nt0$n75$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, <bab...@my-dejanews.com>
: > wrote:
: >
: > > Krakow was once one of the most beautiful of Austrian cities...
: >
: > Thank you.
: >
: > > What happened to the old Ukrainian church in Peremyshl?
: >
: > This reminds me, we have an old saying in Polish:
: > Before you say anything, Peremyshl.
: >
: > P.S. Czy ta baba to chlop, czy baba?
: > --
: > "Imbéciles réveillez vous!"
: >
: > Jerzy Pawlowski (j...@panix.com)
: >
: --== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
: ---Share what you know. Learn what you don't.---
---
Smart questions to stupid answers
mba...@my-dejanews.com
bab...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> In article <37486eca...@news.kwom.com>,
> le...@mail.netinc.ca wrote:
> > On Sun, 23 May 1999 21:17:06 GMT, bab...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> >
> > >
>
> > >Western Europe (it was forced to adopt Roman Catholicism in order
to
> > >forestall German crusaders).
> >
> > Wrong. Poland was not forced to ccept christianity by anyone. It
was a
> > voluntary step taken by Mieszko I, who realized that only
Christianity
> > allowed for a type of system that would move POland into the Western
> > sphere.
>
> Poland chose Western Christianity even though it was culturally *far*
> behind Eastern Christianity because he did not want to fight Western
> Crusaders.
world from other cultural and political reasons.They simply did't
wanted to stay outside.
> > It worked brilliantly, as Boleslaw I's wars with Germany
> > showed, when he defeated the Emrpror's armies, was able to take land
> > previously under the HRE's rule. And was able to trounce Kiev.
>
> I am not familiar with the first part, but your laughable comment on
the
> heroic Polish "trouncing" of Kyiv makes me suspicious.
previously,during crossing of Bug,rus warriors mocked him that they
will "rip his fat belly with spear".Well,they failed.You could learn
from their experiences and not mock Poles.
No
> > >>
> > >> Under the rule of Kozak peasants? You must be joking.
> > >>
> > >
> > >Ahh, the famous Polish racism and misguided elitism. There is a
> > >wonderful description of your Polish "gentlemen" in Dostoyevsky's
> > > "The Brothers Karamazov".
> >
> > Taking Dostojewski's worda about Poland as fact is like taking
> > Hitler's wods about Jews as fact.
>
> kind of like taking the words of a Polish racist and
> apologist for imperialism such as yourself as fact : -) ...
Unfortunately words of ukrainian nationalist are of similiar value...
The only problem is that Germans were mercenaries,which means there was
no political involwement of Germany,while Chmielnicki was allied with
tatar state.
> > as
> > they burnt villages and killed anyone, Ukrainian or not who got in
> > their way. It was great men like Wisniowiecki that put down this
blood
> > thirsty horde.
>
> W. lost to Krononos, then ran like a dog with his tail between his
legs
> (burning alive peasant children for "revenge"), and hid behind the
> safety of a fortress, afraid to come out before eventually
>surrendering.
Kozaks did similiar things to nobles and Jews.And he did't surrended
himself,he only surrended the fortress.And remember that Wisniowiecki
was a Ukrainian,not a Pole.
> BTW, did this traitor ever return to his estate?
>
> ...cut...
>
> >
> > >Of course, the Orthodox Church also supported the rebellion (the
> > >Patriarch of Jerusalem visited Kyiv at this time and proclaimed
> > >Khmelnitsky a modern Moses)...
> >
> > Oh well, what the Muscovite, err I mean Orthodox church suports must
> > be good.
>
> You once again demonstrate your ignorance. The Orthodox leader of
> Ukraine urged Khmelnitsky *not* to sign the Pereyaslav agreement.
And so the Orthodox leader of Ukraine was the real ukrainian hero,while
Chmielnicki was a traitor to both Poland and Ukraine.
spea...@netcom.ca
>
> <spea...@netcom.ca> wrote in message news:374380...@netcom.ca...
> | mba...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> | >
> | > Today,as stated in polish-ukrainian agreement,a new tablet was placed
> | > in the polish cementer in Lwow.But Ukrainians breaked the agreement,by
> | > placing tablet with a text different from one that was agreed upon.
> | > The insulting words wrote:
> | > "Nieznanym polskim wojakom poleglym w wojnie polsko-ukrainskiej"
> |
> |
> | What is so insulting in the above statement, unless the
> | names of those soldiers are known...?
> |
> | It is a fact that they died in the course of the war between
> | Poland and Ukraine. Do you wish to dispute that?
>
> Mr. Spearman
> A term "wojak" has joking, ridiculing or derrogatory meaning in today's
> Polish, depending on intention and context and is not equal to "zolnierz".
> Therefore if the phrase was written in Polish it could not have been taken
> otherwise and there is nothing to dispute, unless the description was in
> Ukrainian.
> It happens that "word-for-word" translation from one language to the other
> frequently does not work very well. If this is the case, it prooves
> either.
You may have a point there, if the plaque was inscribed in Polish.
In Polish, "wojak" is a common or popular term for "soldier",
perhaps derived from the now obsolete noun "woj" meaning "warrior".
This could have been an innocent error in translation, for example,
someone who thought that s/he was fluent in Polish (i.e., a 2-nd.,
or 3-rd generation Polish-Ukrainian) may have been given the task.
Alternatively, considering how much attention is usually paid to
the issues of the military dead, such choice of words may have a
certain political significance. Perhaps, with the understanding
that plaques can always be rewritten and changed, this was a not
so subtle reminder that similar issues, dealing with the matter
of the Ukrainian military dead, have not yet been positively re-
solved in Poland...
You may correct me if this does no longer apply, but is it not
true that the dead soldiers of the Ukrainian Insurgent Army, who
fell in battle or were executed following capture because they
fought to defend the Ukrainian population on the Ukrainian ethno-
graphic territories presently under Poland, are still burried in
unmarked graves, some under farmer's pasture, and are commonly
referred to not as "wojaks" but as "bandits"...?
Perhaps, when the graves of the UPA soldiers in Poland are
afforded the same level of recognition as is customarily given
to the enemy combatants by the NATO alligned countries, will the
graves of the Polish insurgents on the territory of Ukraine be
similarly honoured.
Hopefully, this will transpire soon,... as perchance may alight
a respect for the civilian dead. A couple of years ago we learned
that a mass grave of twenty, or so, civilians executed by the
Polish security forces in the 1946-47 period was unearthed in
the village of Olchowce, in the Krosno district of Poland.
After one of the bodies was positively identified as that of a
Ukrainian political prisoner ( Ms. Rosalia Minko), all official
interest in their proper burial has waned, while the attempts by
the relatives of the victims to have the exhumed bodies released
for burial have so far been frustrated. Body remnants have been
archived and remain under lock and key...
GHC
mba...@my-dejanews.com
bab...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> In article <37489f66...@news.kwom.com>,
> le...@mail.netinc.ca wrote:
> > On Sun, 23 May 1999 23:27:30 GMT, bab...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> >
>
> > >
> > >Poland chose Western Christianity even though it was culturally
*far*
> > >behind Eastern Christianity because he did not want to fight
Western
> > >Crusaders.
> > >
> >
> > Poland always was Western oriented.
>
> Not true. Parts of Poland once used the Cyrillic alphabet.
>
> > Poland chose the West because it
> > offered more than the East could in the long run.
>
> I doubt that Polish leaders were prophets, i.e. could predict that in
2
> centuries the Mongols and Turks would end Eastern superiority. Poland
> had aggresive Western Christians next door and wanted to eliminate the
> chances of a crusade.
their growing decadency and weakness,and other Europeans propably saw
this process.
> > >
> >
> > REad about Boleslaw's campaign against Kiev.
>
> I have. It was as much Yaropolk's as Boleslaw's campaign.
Boleslaw who commited rather unhonorable deed of raping Kijowian
princes sister.
> > As for the first part,
> > Poland was able to expend Westward into the HR Empire, and defeat
> > Germany in multiple wars.
>
> Good for Poland. Rus' managed to defeat Byzantium at a time when
> Byzantium was far stronger than the HRE.
Somehow polish sources name Germans the real threat,not the Kijowians.
Yet Boleslaw took Kijow,while Yaroslaw could dream of conquering
polish capitol.
> > Kiev was no match for him, afterall he defeated the
> > Holy Roman Empire many times,
>
> Rus' had a population similar to HRE, and was most likley stronger.
>
> > and expanded Poland Westward into the
> > HRE.
>
> Yet Poland lost terrotory to Kyivan Rus'...
Territories were constantly gained and lost...
"Twisted opinion of Ukrainian-Polish history"? IMHO you both have
opinions twisted to some degree.
For example Wisniowiecki and Chmielnicki.Both of them were rather shady
individuals,acting more from personall reasons than ideological ones
and both guilty of a lot of suffering and death.
"Poles are decent and intelligent people" -Thank you
mba...@my-dejanews.com
bab...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> In article <nrM03.2840$8p2....@cynws01.we.mediaone.net>,
> "WaRR" <Wa...@OjczYznA.OrG> wrote:
> >
> > mba...@my-dejanews.com wrote in message
> <7hvi1d$rgg$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > Most of these soldiers were brave scouts and students from
> > various schools in Lwow.
>
> Misguided and ignorant fools who died in vain for a wrong cause.
> > They defended the city agains the
> > overwhelming forces of ukrainian aggressors.
>
> Very funny. With French support/leadership against a people
> simultaneously fighting the Russians.
> > Lwow used to be one of the most beautiful cities in Poland and
rivaled
> > Krakow.
>
> Krakow was once one of the most beautiful of Austrian cities...
But Austrians have no objections...
> > Lwow had by far the most nicest population which called
> > themselves "Lwowiacy". They were well known througout whole
> > Rzeczpospolita. The most beautiful churches, universities,
monuments,
> > government buldings, palaces, residences and castles were
> > build by Poles and later destroyed by ukrainians.
>
> What happened to the old Ukrainian church in Peremyshl?
>
> Moreover, please see my comments re: auto theft (in another post) for
an
> appropriate analogy of the Polish beautification of Lviv.
>
> Babai
>
> > After Lwow
> > was ripped away from Rzeczpospolita, it totally lost its splendor
> > and importance. Today under ukrainians this once beautiful city
> > is dying and desintegrating.
> >
> > WaRR
mba...@my-dejanews.com
bab...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> In article <37443e8a...@news.kwom.com>,
> le...@mail.netinc.ca wrote:
> > On Thu, 20 May 1999 06:20:30 GMT, Yanko <ya...@my-dejanews.com>
wrote:
> >
> > >What bothers you, buddy? Does anyone prevent you from visiting the
> > >beautiful Ukrainian city of Lviv as a tourist? If the "nicest
> > >population" did not try to prevent restoration of Ukrainian rule
in a
> > >Ukrainian city, I doubt there would be any reason to place tablets
> like
> > >the one discussed.
> > >
> > >Yanko
> >
> > Restoration of Ukrainian rule??????? There never was a Ukrainian
rule.
> > Before Lwow was in Poland, there was no such thing as Ukraine. There
> > was a Rus Halicka, or Rus Czerwona (Red Rus), but no Ukraine.
>
> Why do you assume that Rus' was not Ukraine? Did Ukrainians come from
> Mars to Galicia then, sometime after Polish rule was established?
> Perhaps those Ukrainians referring to themselves as Rusyny as late as
> the early 20th century were somehow deluded?
>
> ----
>
> Perhaps you should learn some English?
>
> > into Poland by Kazimierz III Wielki, the
> > village flourished,
>
> It had flourished prior to the invasion...
>
> > and over the centuries became a great city, full
> > of churches, received a University, all under the care of Polish
> > Crown.
>
> So? Irrelevent to the issue of theft. If you steal my old and rusted
> car, add a new stereo system, rebuilt the engine, do major body work
> (new paint job, etc.), put in new head lights, etc. etc. that car is
> still stolen; it still does not belong to you, no matter how many
> improvements you have made or for how long you controlled it.
:)
This is not the case...
But if you steal car from somebody else,and I later steal it from
you,than the car is still stolen and does't belong to either you or
me,but rather some tribes which names were lost in time.Remember that
our ancestors came from Asia thousands of years ago...
> >The city and the region were also Polish in the majority, with
> > a smaller non-Polish, or Ukrainian minority, as well as others like
> > Jews.
>
> Last Austrian census: app. 50% Polish, 25% Ukrainian, 25% other
> (primarily Jewish and Austrian-German)
>
> Babai
>
> > That is the history of the city.
bab...@my-dejanews.com
mba...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
...cut...
> > I doubt that Polish leaders were prophets, i.e. could predict that
> > in 2 centuries the Mongols and Turks would end Eastern superiority.
> > Poland had aggresive Western Christians next door and wanted to > >
> > eliminate the chances of a crusade.
> That's the part of truth.The other part is,that Byzantium fell due to
> their growing decadency and weakness,and other Europeans propably saw
> this process.
That was hardly the case. At the time of Poland's adoption of Western
Christianity Byzantium was at the height of its "second" phase of power
(the first being circa 600 AD). Byzantium really fell into decline with
the destruction at Manzikert of the Byzantine army around 1150 by
invading Seljuk Turks.
I would like to remind you that Volodymyr married the sister of the
Byzantine Emperor Basil II...proof of the importance of power of Kyivan
Rus.
> > >
> > > REad about Boleslaw's campaign against Kiev.
> >
> > I have. It was as much Yaropolk's as Boleslaw's campaign.
> It was Boleslaw who struck the golden gate with his sword.And it was
> Boleslaw who commited rather unhonorable deed of raping Kijowian
> princes sister.
I have just looked at numerous books at a university library on Polish
history written by Westerners. Some devote one line, others omit his
"mighty conquest" of Kyiv entirely. The same is true of Western books
on Ukrainian history. One exception is The Cambridge History of Poland
to 1696: two paragraphs. The latter views it as basically an internal
Kyivan matter in which Boleslaw took part. After Volodymyr's death,
Sviatopolk siezed the throne of Kyiv, martyring his brothers Boris and
Khlib (they are now saints because, rather than fight back, they
peacefully submitted tot heir fate). He was then thrown out by Jaroslav
"The Wise", and fled to Poland, when his father-in-law Boleslaw and he
defeated Yaroslav and entered Kyiv in August 1018. Boleslaw's and
Sviatopolk's forces included 1,000 Pechenegs, 500 Hungarians and 300
German mercenaries. Sviatopolk then instigated an uprising against his
benefector, threw the Poles out, and was then himself exiled by a
returning Yaroslav in 1019. He died while fleeing, and Yaroslav took
the throne. Boleslaw of course left with much booty and captured some
towns in Galicia, which Yaroslav recaptured in 1031.
> > > As for the first part,
> > > Poland was able to expend Westward into the HR Empire, and defeat
> > > Germany in multiple wars.
> >
> > Good for Poland. Rus' managed to defeat Byzantium at a time when
> > Byzantium was far stronger than the HRE.
> Somehow polish sources name Germans the real threat,not the Kijowians.
Other than securing the border areas of Galicia, Kyivans did not care
about Poland at all. It was relatively backward and not very wealthy.
Not worth the trouble, when the rich prize of Byzantium and its trade
beckoned. The lucrative north-south trade kept Kyiv Rus occupied
keeping the steppes free of Turkic nomads. They had as little need of
capturing Poland as they did of conquering Finland.
...cut...
...cut...
> Yet Boleslaw took Kijow,while Yaroslaw could dream of conquering
> polish capitol.
Why would he dream of that? It wasn't worth the effort, frankly.
Yaroslav secured the western border and then crushed the Pechenegs,
leaving the steppes cleared of nomads, enabling trade worth far more
than a hundred 11th century Polish capitals.
> "Twisted opinion of Ukrainian-Polish history"? IMHO you both have
> opinions twisted to some degree.
I base my information on books written and published primarily by
Westerners. How "twisted" could that be? And how is it "twisted"?
>
> For example Wisniowiecki and Chmielnicki.Both of them were rather
> shady individuals,acting more from personall reasons than ideological
> ones and both guilty of a lot of suffering and death.
Khmelnicki may not have been a saint, but whatever his bad aspects, he
led an uprising of his people against foreigners and their Polonized
lackeys, while W. forsook his native Faith and his people, siding with
the occupiers. So there is a wide, wide gulf between them.
Babai
...cut...
bab...@my-dejanews.com
mba...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> >
> > I am not familiar with the first part, but your laughable comment
> > on the heroic Polish "trouncing" of Kyiv makes me suspicious.
> "Laughable"? Boleslaw Chrobry took Kijow in about AD 1018.It said
> that previously,during crossing of Bug,rus warriors mocked him that
> they will "rip his fat belly with spear".Well,they failed.You could
> learn from their experiences and not mock Poles.
Please see my other post concerning why turning Boleslaw's expedition in
Kyiv into some kind of "mighty conquest" is, indeed, laughable.
As for mocking Poles, it is quite easy to mock the ridiculous fairy
tales of people such as RPP. I don't feel that I have mocked any normal
Poles, however...
...cut...
> > >
> > > Taking Dostojewski's worda about Poland as fact is like taking
> > > Hitler's wods about Jews as fact.
> >
> > kind of like taking the words of a Polish racist and
> > apologist for imperialism such as yourself as fact : -) ...
> Unfortunately words of ukrainian nationalist are of similiar value...
Do you equate nationalism with racism and imperialism? Please explain
why my words are "of similar value". Which of my points seemed
incorrect to you? I'm quite curious...
bab...@my-dejanews.com
...cut...
I already addressed much of this!
>
> Wisnioweicki died after Beresteczko, but his cavalry trounced the
> Tatars and Kozaks at that famous battle. As for him being a Judas, he
> defended his motherland, and so he was not a Judas. You compare a
> horde of criminals to Jesus Christ?
Jesus Christ was also called a criminal...
>
> >
...cut...
> >You forgot to note that the number of tatars fighting along side
> >Khmelnitsky was comparable to the number of Germans fighting for the
> >Poles. (30,000 to 20,000). The cossacks had more trouble with the
> >German mercenaries than with the Poles. Remember Pyliavtsi, where
> >80,000 Poles were defeated?
>
> Wow, at ;east stick to historical accuracy. The battle of Pilawce,
> 20-23 September, 1648 30,000 strong army of the Crown. Where do you
> get your falsified 80 thousand? Poland never had an 80 thousand man
> army during these times. Sheer fantasy and lies.
My figures are from historical sources, the one at hand now is Paul
Magosci's "History of Ukraine", published by the University of Toronto
press. Similar information is contained in other sources such as the
Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute, and numerous others found in
university libraries int he US. Yours, I surmise, are either from the
works of biased tendentious Galician Polish 19th century historians or
from dramatic Polish authors of pseud-historical literature based upon
those 19th century biased Galician-Polish historians.
> POland was almost
> always heavily outnumbered by the Tatars and Kozaks whose ranks often
> swelled opver 150 thousand. For example at Zbaraz, a 150 thousand
> strong Chmilel/Khan army was held back by a small army of Jeremi
> Wisniowiecki who first defeated you on the battle field and then held
> you off for 6 weeks.
It is not brave to be able to hide behind a strong fortress for 6 weeks.
W.'s success there was a tribute to the engineers who built the
fortress.
Bravery is proven on the battlefield, and at Pilawce 80,000 "brave
Polish warriors" were "routed".
On the battlefield, W. fled from Kryvonos before engaging in brutal
reprisals against any unarmed civilians he encountered during his
cowardly flight.
> The army which came in help was only 15 thousand
> strong. Is lieing the only way you can argue?
Were you looking in a mirror when writing that last line?
Babai
bab...@my-dejanews.com
mba...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> > So? Irrelevent to the issue of theft. If you steal my old and
rusted
> > car, add a new stereo system, rebuilt the engine, do major body work
> > (new paint job, etc.), put in new head lights, etc. etc. that car is
> > still stolen; it still does not belong to you, no matter how many
> > improvements you have made or for how long you controlled it.
> :)
> This is not the case...
> But if you steal car from somebody else,and I later steal it from
> you,than the car is still stolen and does't belong to either you or
> me,but rather some tribes which names were lost in time.Remember that
> our ancestors came from Asia thousands of years ago...
Galicia was part of the original Slavic homeland. Thus it can be argued
the original Slavic inhabitants were there first (unlike the Balkan
Slavs, Russians, etc.) Moreover, it was conquered by the Poles long
after a Rus' (Ukrainian) identity was established, i.e. was not some
random tribes.
Babai
> > >The city and the region were also Polish in the majority, with
> > > a smaller non-Polish, or Ukrainian minority, as well as others
like
> > > Jews.
> >
> > Last Austrian census: app. 50% Polish, 25% Ukrainian, 25% other
> > (primarily Jewish and Austrian-German)
> >
> > Babai
> >
> > > That is the history of the city.
> > >
> > >
> >
flight of the phoenix
> > car, add a new stereo system, rebuilt the engine, do major body work
> > (new paint job, etc.), put in new head lights, etc. etc. that car is
> > still stolen; it still does not belong to you, no matter how many
> > improvements you have made or for how long you controlled it.
> :)
> This is not the case...
OF COURSE IT IS.
THAT'S WHY YOU DON'T LIKE IT.
> But if you steal car from somebody else,and I later steal it from
> you,than the car is still stolen and does't belong to either you or
> me,but rather some tribes which names were lost in time.Remember that
> our ancestors came from Asia thousands of years ago...
THAT MADE NO FUCKIN' SENSE.
SO WHO DID THE *ANCESTORS* OF UKRAINIANS/RUS "STEAL" IT FROM?
IT'S MOST OBVIOUS THAT YOU ARE "REACHING FOR SHIT".
THAT'S WHY YOU PRETENDED AND PLAYED WITH THE NAMES, "UKRAINE",
"RUS" ETC.
THAT HAVING FAILED, YOU NOW SAY THE ABOVE RIDICULOUS SHIT.
DOESN'T CUT IT.
YOU'RE FUCKED HERE.
... ANY YOU KNOW IT.
STUPID LITTLE GREEDS SUCH AS THIS, IS WHY POLES
ENJOYED THE PLEASURE" OF RUSSO-MONGOLO DOMINATION, ISN'T IT?
OR DO YOU WANT TO SAY HOW "GOOD" UKRAINIANS HAD IT UNDER THE
DOMINATON OF POLAND AS OPPOSED TO THE RUSSIANS?
WANT SOMEONE TO ASK YOU HOW "GOOD" POLAND HAD IT UNDER THE
AUSTRO-HUNGARIAN EMPIRE AS OPPOSED TO THE RUSSIANS? :)
WAKE UP.
WORK WITH YOUR NEW FRIENDS OR BE PREPARED TO LICK
THE ASSES OF THOSE YOU WOULD RATHER NOT.
WANNA GUESS WHO THAT WOULD BE?
YOU NEED ANY CLUES? :)
PHOENIX
flight of the phoenix
====================================
YOU SAID EARLIER, IN *THIS* POST:
> > their way. It was great men like Wisniowiecki that put down this
blood
> > thirsty horde.
TRY TO BE MORE *LOGICAL* AND *CONSISTENT*.
YOU KNOW SOME SHIT, IT'S HOW YOU *PROCESS* AND
INTERPRET YOU OWN DATA.
YOUR MIND BEGINS TO BORE ME.
DID YOU UNDERSTAND?
PHOENIX
======================================
flight of the phoenix
>
> In article <7icddg$hjr$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> mba...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
> ...cut...
>
> > > in 2 centuries the Mongols and Turks would end Eastern superiority.
> > > Poland had aggresive Western Christians next door and wanted to > >
> > > eliminate the chances of a crusade.
>
> > That's the part of truth.The other part is,that Byzantium fell due to
> > their growing decadency and weakness,and other Europeans propably saw
> > this process.
>
> Christianity Byzantium was at the height of its "second" phase of power
> (the first being circa 600 AD). Byzantium really fell into decline with
> the destruction at Manzikert of the Byzantine army around 1150 by
> invading Seljuk Turks.
>
> I would like to remind you that Volodymyr married the sister of the
> Byzantine Emperor Basil II...proof of the importance of power of Kyivan
> Rus.
>
> > > >
> > >
> > > I have. It was as much Yaropolk's as Boleslaw's campaign.
>
> > It was Boleslaw who struck the golden gate with his sword.And it was
> > Boleslaw who commited rather unhonorable deed of raping Kijowian
> > princes sister.
HMM... YOU SEEM TO TAKE A PARTICULAR DELIGHT IN MENTIONING THIS
DISGUSTING
ACT. DO YOU WANT SOMEONE TO TALK ABOUT A "*HOARDE* OF POLISH SAVAGES
ATTACKING KYIV.."?
>
> I have just looked at numerous books at a university library on Polish
> history written by Westerners. Some devote one line, others omit his
> "mighty conquest" of Kyiv entirely. The same is true of Western books
> on Ukrainian history. One exception is The Cambridge History of Poland
> to 1696: two paragraphs. The latter views it as basically an internal
> Kyivan matter in which Boleslaw took part.
SOME GOOD *SCHOLARSHIP* HERE...
> After Volodymyr's death,
> Sviatopolk siezed the throne of Kyiv, martyring his brothers Boris and
> Khlib (they are now saints because, rather than fight back, they
> peacefully submitted tot heir fate). He was then thrown out by Jaroslav
> "The Wise", and fled to Poland, when his father-in-law Boleslaw and he
> defeated Yaroslav and entered Kyiv in August 1018. Boleslaw's and
> Sviatopolk's forces included 1,000 Pechenegs, 500 Hungarians and 300
> German mercenaries. Sviatopolk then instigated an uprising against his
> benefector, threw the Poles out, and was then himself exiled by a
> returning Yaroslav in 1019. He died while fleeing, and Yaroslav took
> the throne. Boleslaw of course left with much booty and captured some
> towns in Galicia, which Yaroslav recaptured in 1031.
>
> > > > As for the first part,
> > > > Poland was able to expend Westward into the HR Empire, and defeat
> > > > Germany in multiple wars.
> > >
> > > Good for Poland. Rus' managed to defeat Byzantium at a time when
> > > Byzantium was far stronger than the HRE.
>
> > Somehow polish sources name Germans the real threat,not the Kijowians.
>
> Other than securing the border areas of Galicia, Kyivans did not care
> about Poland at all. It was relatively backward and not very wealthy.
> Not worth the trouble, when the rich prize of Byzantium and its trade
> beckoned. The lucrative north-south trade kept Kyiv Rus occupied
> keeping the steppes free of Turkic nomads. They had as little need of
> capturing Poland as they did of conquering Finland.
MAKES SENSE.... LOGICAL...
>
> ...cut...
>
> ...cut...
>
> > Yet Boleslaw took Kijow,while Yaroslaw could dream of conquering
> > polish capitol.
>
> Why would he dream of that? It wasn't worth the effort, frankly.
HMMM... TRUE... IN A *NONOBJECTIVE* POINT OF VIEW..
YOUR "OPPONENT" REVEALS HIS ETNOCENTRIC, *GRANDIOSE* AND
VERY UNREALISTIC VIEWS...
WHY INDEED WOULD YAROSLAV BOTHER WITH POLAND???
THEY HAD, FROM HE POINT OF VIEW OF WEALTH, ETC.. NOTHING
WORTH THE EFFORT AND EXPENSE, MANPOWER, OF MOUNTING A MILITARY
EXPEDITON AGAINST. THEY WERE SAVAGE AND PRIMITIVE THEN, AS
UKRAINIANS ARE SAVAGE AND PRIMITIVE COMPARED TO THE POLISH
ECONOMY NOW....
YO! mba...@my-dejanews.com, WAKE UP!
> Yaroslav secured the western border and then crushed the Pechenegs,
> leaving the steppes cleared of nomads, enabling trade worth far more
> than a hundred 11th century Polish capitals.
>
> > "Twisted opinion of Ukrainian-Polish history"? IMHO you both have
> > opinions twisted to some degree.
>
> I base my information on books written and published primarily by
> Westerners. How "twisted" could that be? And how is it "twisted"?
>
> >
> > For example Wisniowiecki and Chmielnicki.Both of them were rather
> > shady individuals,acting more from personall reasons than ideological
> > ones and both guilty of a lot of suffering and death.
>
> Khmelnicki may not have been a saint, but whatever his bad aspects, he
> led an uprising of his people against foreigners and their Polonized
> lackeys, while W. forsook his native Faith and his people, siding with
> the occupiers. So there is a wide, wide gulf between them.
>
> Babai
>
> ...cut...
>
flight of the phoenix
>
> In article <7icc0n$gli$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> mba...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
> > >
> > > on the heroic Polish "trouncing" of Kyiv makes me suspicious.
>
> > "Laughable"? Boleslaw Chrobry took Kijow in about AD 1018.It said
> > that previously,during crossing of Bug,rus warriors mocked him that
> > they will "rip his fat belly with spear".Well,they failed.You could
> > learn from their experiences and not mock Poles.
>
> Kyiv into some kind of "mighty conquest" is, indeed, laughable.
>
> As for mocking Poles, it is quite easy to mock the ridiculous fairy
> tales of people such as RPP. I don't feel that I have mocked any normal
> Poles, however...
>
> ...cut...
>
> > > >
> > > > Hitler's wods about Jews as fact.
> > >
> > > kind of like taking the words of a Polish racist and
> > > apologist for imperialism such as yourself as fact : -) ...
>
> > Unfortunately words of ukrainian nationalist are of similiar value...
>
> why my words are "of similar value". Which of my points seemed
> incorrect to you? I'm quite curious...
DAMN bab...@my-dejanews.com, I AM *FORCED* BY LOGIC TO AGREE WITH YOU,
WHEATHER I LIKE IT OR NOT. NO CHOICE HERE, IS THERE?
I AM CURIOUS TO SEE HOW YOUR OPPONENT REPLYS TO YOUR POINTS FURTHER.
YOU HAVE HIM BY HIS ASS.
PHOENIX
RPP
>In article <3748de74...@news.kwom.com>,
> le...@mail.netinc.ca wrote:
>> On Sun, 23 May 1999 20:28:00 GMT, bab...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>>
>> >In article <37443fcf...@news.kwom.com>,
>> > le...@mail.netinc.ca wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>
>> >German mercenaries (20,000) as the Kozaks used Tatars (30,000).
>Perhaps
>> >it was a German "invasion" as well?
>> >
>>
>> Yeah, just like ther were 80,000 Polish troops at Pilawce. Do you
>> always exaggerate by a factor of 2.67?????
>
>Ummm...my sources were from American or Canadian universities such as
>University of Toronto or Harvard, the former published a book claiming
>80,000 defeated Poles at "Pilawce". These are Western sources subject
>to professional peer review and criticism. I suspect your Polish
>children's fables were written by 19th century Poles trying to justify
>their claim of Galicia. They, like yourself, failed utterly.
You should change sources then, they are obviously way off the mark.
80 thousand is a fairy tale story. But if it makes you feel proud of
Kozak warriors go ahead anf think that. I will be here to correct your
lies.
>
>> >
>> >> without whom they were nothing as a force. A Kozak uprising without
>> >> foreign help would have been crushed in the first weeks. When you
>> >> bring in foreign allies against Rzeczpospolita, thats an invasion.
>> >
>> >Ahh...so then Sobieski's defence of Vienna was also an "invasion", as
>> >were the French support of Poland (Haller) during 1918-1919. You are
>as
>> >absurd as you are uncultured.
>> >
>>
>> Do you not see the huge difference? At Vienna and then during the
>> POlish Soviet war, you had nations dealing with nations.
>
>No, no, no...according to your twisted logic the Polish-Soviet war
>involved "rebels" (Pilsudski was a rebel against Russian occupation)
>bringing foreign troops (Haller and other Frenchmen) into "Russia".
>
>
Gen, Haller was Pole btw. He brought POLISH troops from France. Did
you get your information about him being a Frenchman from those
sources hat quoted he 80 thousand Polish troops????
>
>> In Chmiel's
>> case you had a band of insurgents bringing in a foreign force. Chmiel
>> was not a head of state, he was a bandit as was his horde.
>>
>
>
RPP
>In article <3748d8ed...@news.kwom.com>,
> le...@mail.netinc.ca wrote:
>> On Sun, 23 May 1999 20:28:00 GMT, bab...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>>
>
>>
>> The number of foreign mercenaries you provide is an absolute
>> fabrication just like your fabricated 80 thousand at Pilawce,
>
>Ah, so professor Paul Magosci of the University of Toronto is a
>fabricator. I have read similar figures in things published by Harvard
>(which has a Ukrainian Institute), and other American-Canadian sources.
>I recall reading similar things in Encyclopedias as well. In fact, one
>author claiming 80,000 also contributed to Encarta '98.
>
He may not be a fabricator, but he is misinformed.
>Do you think that there is a vast pro-Ukrainian conspiracy in American
>academia (if so, this is another example of your "Russian-ness")
>
Its a conspiracy of ignorance actually.
>These sources are subject to peer review and professional criticism.
>
>What are *your* sources Lech? Some 19th century Polish children's books
>written by Galician Poles to justify their claims on Galicia?
>
My sources are "Kronika Polski" which is an Encycopedic type
chronicle. It quotes 30 housand.
Henryk Dominiczak's "Granice Panstwa i ich Ochrona na Przestrzeni
Dziejow, 966-1996" HE is more indepth. For Zolte Wody and Korsun, he
gives a figure of 1040 Hussars, 1170 "Kozaks" (not the ukrainian
kozaks, its a name for a formation of light cavalry), 900 Dragon, 300
infantry. Thats a total of about 3410 soldiers.. It was not the main
army, but a small segment of it. (Wojska kwarciane, which I dont know
how to translate into English). in 1649, the army was increased to a
number of 30 thousand troops. Wokso kwarciane was reformed, and
beside it "wojska suplementowe" (suplemental forces). In 1652 they
were joined into "Wojsko komputowe". The highst number this reached
was 1658-1659 when it reached 36 thousand.
During Wladyslaw IV's reign, near the southern border (1638
figures), ther was only 1040 Hussars, 850 "kozaks", 500 Dragoons. In
the Kudak fortress there was 600 infantry of Zoltkowski, 600 Polish
infantry, 100 kozaks,. 200 infantry in Kamieniec. In 1645, there was
1100 Hussars, 1300 Kozaks, 1200 dragoons, 600 POlish infantry.. In
1646, 1100 Hussars, 1300 Kozaks, 1200 Dragoons, 600 infantry.
80 thousand is an absolute fantasy, seeing how in total the army never
surpassed 40 thousand, half that number.
Henryk Dominczak was professor of History-Philosophy at Wroclaw
Iniversity, has published over 100 publications, in that 22 boooks.
>
>
>> where
>> only 30 thousand Polish troops took part in the battle. Do you feel
>> the need to overglorify your history or are you simply uninformed?
>
>Yes, Harvard tries to overglorify Ukrainian history...it is quite
>obvious that that is *your* problem...
>
Harvard's problesm is tha they are misinformed about the subject.
>
>Babai
>
>
>> >
>> >> without whom they were nothing as a force. A Kozak uprising without
>> >> foreign help would have been crushed in the first weeks. When you
>> >> bring in foreign allies against Rzeczpospolita, thats an invasion.
>> >
>> >Ahh...so then Sobieski's defence of Vienna was also an "invasion", as
>> >were the French support of Poland (Haller) during 1918-1919. You are
>as
>> >absurd as you are uncultured.
>> >
>>
>> Sobieski's defense of Vienna happened at an invitation of an existiong
>> state. Poland did not invite the Tatars into Poland. Thet tatars came
>> at a request of a band of insurgents, not the King of POland.
>>
>> >Babai
>> >
>> >
>> >
RPP
>
>> >
>>
>> REad about Boleslaw's campaign against Kiev.
>
>I have. It was as much Yaropolk's as Boleslaw's campaign.
>
Did you get this in those Harvard sources? More fairytales????
>> As for the first part,
>> Poland was able to expend Westward into the HR Empire, and defeat
>> Germany in multiple wars.
>
>Good for Poland. Rus' managed to defeat Byzantium at a time when
>Byzantium was far stronger than the HRE.
>
And fell to Poland in 1018.
>>
>> Maybe so, but Boleslaw had little trouble with Kiev, and made off with
>> a lot of treasure.
>
>Well, booty (he made off with some of one of the prince's sisters as
>well, I beleive) was the price of helping Yaropolk "prokliaty" (he
>killed his brothers, ss. Boris and Hlib the martyrs). You did not
>expect the Poles to work for free? The turkic pechenegs had the same
>rewards for services rendered. Really, Boleslaw's participation in Rus'
>princely intrigues was a mere footnote in history. Your heroic
>portrayal of it shows how desperate you are to proove Poland's
>glory, and shows how "suspect" your other statements are.
I dont have to prove POland's glory, its on paper for you to read. You
lie about 80 thousand troops, to show how mighty the Kozaks were. When
in reality the numbers of POland's forces fighting over 100 thousand
Kozaks/Tatars were never greater than 40 thousand. Anyway, you can see
the value of Kozak swords at Beresteczko after the Tatars were
trounced.
>>
>> Wisnioweicki died after Beresteczko, but his cavalry trounced the
>> Tatars and Kozaks at that famous battle. As for him being a Judas, he
>> defended his motherland, and so he was not a Judas. You compare a
>> horde of criminals to Jesus Christ?
>
>What do you think of the heroic portrayal of Khmel. in the new Polish
>movie "Fire and Blood" (the most expensive Polish movie ever made)?
>It seems most Poles do not share your twisted opinion of
>Ukrainian-Polish history. Poles are decent and intelligent people, you
>are either a traitor or an embarrasment.
>
No, that was Hoffman's politically correct version of the movie.
Nothing more. Chmiel deserves the Sienkiewicz version not the Hoffman
version.
bab...@my-dejanews.com
>
> Gen, Haller was Pole btw. He brought POLISH troops from France. Did
> you get your information about him being a Frenchman from those
> sources hat quoted he 80 thousand Polish troops????
Nope. I knew that Haller was French, but was unfamiliar with him being
a Polish exile. I stand corrected.
Do you, RPP, however deny that the Polish army was lavishly
equiped/financed by France while the Ukrainians were running out of
ammo?
(I will deal with your lying "rebuttal" of the 80,000 figure in a
similar post)
Babai
>
> >
> >> In Chmiel's
> >> case you had a band of insurgents bringing in a foreign force.
Chmiel
> >> was not a head of state, he was a bandit as was his horde.
> >>
> >
> >
flight of the phoenix
RPP wrote:
>
> On Mon, 24 May 1999 16:17:08 GMT, bab...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
> >In article <3748d8ed...@news.kwom.com>,
> > le...@mail.netinc.ca wrote:
> >> On Sun, 23 May 1999 20:28:00 GMT, bab...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> >>
> >
> >>
> >> The number of foreign mercenaries you provide is an absolute
> >> fabrication just like your fabricated 80 thousand at Pilawce,
> >
> >Ah, so professor Paul Magosci of the University of Toronto is a
> >fabricator. I have read similar figures in things published by Harvard
> >(which has a Ukrainian Institute), and other American-Canadian sources.
> >I recall reading similar things in Encyclopedias as well. In fact, one
> >author claiming 80,000 also contributed to Encarta '98.
> >
>
> He may not be a fabricator, but he is misinformed.
>
> >Do you think that there is a vast pro-Ukrainian conspiracy in American
> >academia (if so, this is another example of your "Russian-ness")
> >
>
> Its a conspiracy of ignorance actually.
>
> >These sources are subject to peer review and professional criticism.
> >
> >What are *your* sources Lech? Some 19th century Polish children's books
> >written by Galician Poles to justify their claims on Galicia?
> >
>
> My sources are "Kronika Polski" which is an Encycopedic type
> chronicle. It quotes 30 housand.
:)))
>
> Henryk Dominiczak's "Granice Panstwa i ich Ochrona na Przestrzeni
> Dziejow, 966-1996" HE is more indepth. For Zolte Wody and Korsun, he
> gives a figure of 1040 Hussars, 1170 "Kozaks" (not the ukrainian
> kozaks, its a name for a formation of light cavalry), 900 Dragon, 300
> infantry. Thats a total of about 3410 soldiers.. It was not the main
> army, but a small segment of it. (Wojska kwarciane, which I dont know
> how to translate into English). in 1649, the army was increased to a
> number of 30 thousand troops. Wokso kwarciane was reformed, and
> beside it "wojska suplementowe" (suplemental forces). In 1652 they
> were joined into "Wojsko komputowe". The highst number this reached
> was 1658-1659 when it reached 36 thousand.
> During Wladyslaw IV's reign, near the southern border (1638
> figures), ther was only 1040 Hussars, 850 "kozaks", 500 Dragoons. In
> the Kudak fortress there was 600 infantry of Zoltkowski, 600 Polish
> infantry, 100 kozaks,. 200 infantry in Kamieniec. In 1645, there was
> 1100 Hussars, 1300 Kozaks, 1200 dragoons, 600 POlish infantry.. In
> 1646, 1100 Hussars, 1300 Kozaks, 1200 Dragoons, 600 infantry.
>
> 80 thousand is an absolute fantasy, seeing how in total the army never
> surpassed 40 thousand, half that number.
>
> Henryk Dominczak was professor of History-Philosophy at Wroclaw
> Iniversity, has published over 100 publications, in that 22 boooks.
KARL MARX WAS BETTER .... YOU LIKE HIM TOO? :))
>
> >
> >
> >> where
> >> only 30 thousand Polish troops took part in the battle. Do you feel
> >> the need to overglorify your history or are you simply uninformed?
> >
> >Yes, Harvard tries to overglorify Ukrainian history...it is quite
> >obvious that that is *your* problem...
SOUNDS TO ME LIKE THE DIFFICULTIES HERE ARE YOURS. :))
> >
>
> Harvard's problesm is tha they are misinformed about the subject.
THEN YOU MUST IMMEDIATELY CORRECT THEIR ERRORS!
REFER THEM TO YOUR POSTINGS!!! :))))
PHOENIX :)
> >
> >Babai
> >
> >
> >> >
> >> >> without whom they were nothing as a force. A Kozak uprising without
> >> >> foreign help would have been crushed in the first weeks. When you
> >> >> bring in foreign allies against Rzeczpospolita, thats an invasion.
> >> >
> >> >Ahh...so then Sobieski's defence of Vienna was also an "invasion", as
> >> >were the French support of Poland (Haller) during 1918-1919. You are
> >as
> >> >absurd as you are uncultured.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Sobieski's defense of Vienna happened at an invitation of an existiong
> >> state. Poland did not invite the Tatars into Poland. Thet tatars came
> >> at a request of a band of insurgents, not the King of POland.
> >>
> >> >Babai
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
GRycar
A simple knowledge of history would go far towards understanding what took
place between Ukraine and Poland in the 17th century.
Poland was destroyed by its stupidity and inability to abide by the peace
treatry signed with the UKrainian Kozaks.
Needless to say, Poland was unable to substantively defeat the Ukrainian
armies.
The Ukrainians were more then capable of totaly desroying the Polish armies in
and with it Poland but lacked the will to do so. Perhaps Chornata was correct
in advising Xmelnitskij to invade Poland after Yellow Waters and on subsequent
occasion when the Polish armies were completely defeated.
It seems that the Poles acomplished the later inspite of Ukraines unwillingness
to contribute to its final demise.
AS to Russia, Vehovsky had it all but eradicated save for Polish foolishness
and interference to their own detriment.
It seems that moranity, stupidity and profligate waste was Poland great
cultural contribution to the 17th century.
George R.
RPP
<flight-of-...@home.com> wrote:
>>
>> My sources are "Kronika Polski" which is an Encycopedic type
>> chronicle. It quotes 30 housand.
>
> :)))
>
>
Its a reputable book. Certainly not a nationalistic book.
>>
>> Henryk Dominiczak's "Granice Panstwa i ich Ochrona na Przestrzeni
>> Dziejow, 966-1996" HE is more indepth. For Zolte Wody and Korsun, he
>> gives a figure of 1040 Hussars, 1170 "Kozaks" (not the ukrainian
>> kozaks, its a name for a formation of light cavalry), 900 Dragon, 300
>> infantry. Thats a total of about 3410 soldiers.. It was not the main
>> army, but a small segment of it. (Wojska kwarciane, which I dont know
>> how to translate into English). in 1649, the army was increased to a
>> number of 30 thousand troops. Wokso kwarciane was reformed, and
>> beside it "wojska suplementowe" (suplemental forces). In 1652 they
>> were joined into "Wojsko komputowe". The highst number this reached
>> was 1658-1659 when it reached 36 thousand.
>> During Wladyslaw IV's reign, near the southern border (1638
>> figures), ther was only 1040 Hussars, 850 "kozaks", 500 Dragoons. In
>> the Kudak fortress there was 600 infantry of Zoltkowski, 600 Polish
>> infantry, 100 kozaks,. 200 infantry in Kamieniec. In 1645, there was
>> 1100 Hussars, 1300 Kozaks, 1200 dragoons, 600 POlish infantry.. In
>> 1646, 1100 Hussars, 1300 Kozaks, 1200 Dragoons, 600 infantry.
>>
>> 80 thousand is an absolute fantasy, seeing how in total the army never
>> surpassed 40 thousand, half that number.
>>
>> Henryk Dominczak was professor of History-Philosophy at Wroclaw
>> Iniversity, has published over 100 publications, in that 22 boooks.
>
>KARL MARX WAS BETTER .... YOU LIKE HIM TOO? :))
>
What an argument.
RPP
<flight-of-...@home.com> wrote:
>
>YOU SAID EARLIER, IN *THIS* POST:
>
>> > their way. It was great men like Wisniowiecki that put down this
>blood
>> > thirsty horde.
>
>TRY TO BE MORE *LOGICAL* AND *CONSISTENT*.
>YOU KNOW SOME SHIT, IT'S HOW YOU *PROCESS* AND
>INTERPRET YOU OWN DATA.
>YOUR MIND BEGINS TO BORE ME.
>
>DID YOU UNDERSTAND?
>
>PHOENIX
>
Hey moron, two things. You doint have to quote 150 lines of text if
you arent gonna refer to it. Second, I wrote that.
RPP
>
>My figures are from historical sources, the one at hand now is Paul
>Magosci's "History of Ukraine", published by the University of Toronto
>press. Similar information is contained in other sources such as the
>Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute, and numerous others found in
>university libraries int he US. Yours, I surmise, are either from the
>works of biased tendentious Galician Polish 19th century historians or
>from dramatic Polish authors of pseud-historical literature based upon
>those 19th century biased Galician-Polish historians.
>
I already answered where my quotes are from, and thats from a
specialist on these matters, not someone trying to write a 1000 years
of all kinds of history. My is from a professor who writes extensively
on the subject of border defense.
>
>It is not brave to be able to hide behind a strong fortress for 6 weeks.
>W.'s success there was a tribute to the engineers who built the
>fortress.
>
>Bravery is proven on the battlefield, and at Pilawce 80,000 "brave
>Polish warriors" were "routed".
>
What lies. 30 thousand were routed, I agree with that. POland never
had an 80 thousand man army at these times, the largest was 34
thousand and that was after the wars with Chmiel.
>On the battlefield, W. fled from Kryvonos before engaging in brutal
>reprisals against any unarmed civilians he encountered during his
>cowardly flight.
Hhahah. Thats hilarious. On the battle field Wisnioweicki routed the
enemy, held Zbaraz for 6 weeks and then at Beresteczko routed the
turks at the head of the cavalry.
As for Chmiel and his hord, Jarema had to evacuate JEws and innocents
because of antisemite Kozaks and maybe the biggest pogrom of the
century they were engaging in.
>
>> The army which came in help was only 15 thousand
>> strong. Is lieing the only way you can argue?
>
>Were you looking in a mirror when writing that last line?
>
Jan Kazimierz came to the help of Zbaraz at the head of a 15 thousand
man army. This is fact. Deal with it.
RPP
<flight-of-...@home.com> wrote:
>
>WORK WITH YOUR NEW FRIENDS OR BE PREPARED TO LICK
>THE ASSES OF THOSE YOU WOULD RATHER NOT.
>
>WANNA GUESS WHO THAT WOULD BE?
>YOU NEED ANY CLUES? :)
>
>
Ukraine? Is there money in Ukraine for tank fuel? Bullets??? HAHA dont
make us laugh.
Slawomir Popiel
<spea...@netcom.ca> wrote in message news:3749A5...@netcom.ca...
[...]
| This could have been an innocent error in translation, for example,
| someone who thought that s/he was fluent in Polish (i.e., a 2-nd.,
| or 3-rd generation Polish-Ukrainian) may have been given the task.
True, however, letting such a translation to people with unproven skills
does not speak very well about theit bosses. Nevertheless, I hope that the
issue will be simply resolved and the matter put to bed.
| Alternatively, considering how much attention is usually paid to
| the issues of the military dead, such choice of words may have a
| certain political significance. Perhaps, with the understanding
| that plaques can always be rewritten and changed, this was a not
| so subtle reminder that similar issues, dealing with the matter
| of the Ukrainian military dead, have not yet been positively re-
| solved in Poland...
You got your point in turn.
| You may correct me if this does no longer apply, but is it not
| true that the dead soldiers of the Ukrainian Insurgent Army, who
| fell in battle or were executed following capture because they
| fought to defend the Ukrainian population on the Ukrainian ethno-
| graphic territories presently under Poland, are still burried in
| unmarked graves, some under farmer's pasture, and are commonly
| referred to not as "wojaks" but as "bandits"...?
Sadly, yes. However, please note, that the youngsters (they were just High
School students) buried in Lviv were not fighting civilians. They were
defending the city, against Ukrainian troops, true, but still they fought as
soldiers against the soldiers. Unfortunately, UPA in many cases had
civilians' blood on their hands. In addition, Polish government is not
expecting that the Ukrainians would erect monuments to honor Polish Army,
but only to preserve certain monuments from the past. At any rate, I think
we all should look into the matters more carefully, keeping in mind that the
others feelings are valid, too.
| Perhaps, when the graves of the UPA soldiers in Poland are
| afforded the same level of recognition as is customarily given
| to the enemy combatants by the NATO alligned countries, will the
| graves of the Polish insurgents on the territory of Ukraine be
| similarly honoured.
|
| Hopefully, this will transpire soon,... as perchance may alight
| a respect for the civilian dead. A couple of years ago we learned
| that a mass grave of twenty, or so, civilians executed by the
| Polish security forces in the 1946-47 period was unearthed in
| the village of Olchowce, in the Krosno district of Poland.
In my opinion, at least during above period, both UPA and WiN and NSZ fought
in many accounts for the same cause against Soviet impostors.
| After one of the bodies was positively identified as that of a
| Ukrainian political prisoner ( Ms. Rosalia Minko), all official
| interest in their proper burial has waned, while the attempts by
| the relatives of the victims to have the exhumed bodies released
| for burial have so far been frustrated. Body remnants have been
| archived and remain under lock and key...
I hope that will change.
--
Pozdrawiam,
Slawomir Popiel
New Jersey
http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/7847/
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Troy/7404/
http://members.tripod.com/kingpopiel/
Mike Davidchik
> And "Lwow" is an insult to Ukrainians when not written in Polish. Yet
> you wrote it on the title of this message, a title not written in
> Polish, even after I explained to you with proof the proper spelling of
> Lviv in English. So you are as bad as those Ukrainian tablet-builders.
> Thus, your complaints are evidence of your hypocracy.
Most geographic books in English identify it as Lvov. Nobody pushed for
the spelling to be Lviv until after 1992. Just like most English books
still say Kiev, not Kyiv. The Ukrainian alphabet has not yet been
absorbed in the West.
>
> > The first time when Lwow was an ukrainian city was in 1945.Although
> > many hundreds of years ago there was an ukrainian village there.But it
> > was the polish rule that maked a city from Lwow.
It was a Rus, not a Ukrainian village. At the time, there were many
Slavic tribes who later were called Rus because of their affiliation with
a Scandinavian aristocracy and adoption of Eastern Christianity. Some of
the Rus ended up as Ukrainians. But, there was no Ukrainian independent
state from the 12th Century until 1992.
>
> When Lviv was captured by Poland during Poland's invasion of Ukraine it
> had a population of approximately 4,000.
Precisely, who did Poland steal Lvov from? There was no country called
Ukraine at the time. The Kievy Rus were decimenated and occupied by the
Mongols. So were the Moscovites. The only strong ally was either Poland
or Lithuania.
> Moreover, Polish improvements upon Lviv are irrelevent to the issue of
> that city's theft.
Would you have preferred Lvov being part of the Khans or Moscovy or the Teutonic
Knights because, if it wasn't part of Poland, it would have been belonged
to one of them? Kievy was dead or dying. There were no Cossacks around
Lvov. The Cossacks were primarily mercenaries fighting in the south.
Mike
Mike Davidchik
>
> This is funny. It was done at the request of one of the Rus' princes
> with his help. Boleslaw thus played a role similar to that of various
> Turkic tribes used by various Rus' princes in their battles against each
> other.
>
> Babai
This is true. But, you must realize that there was no such ting as
either Ukraine or Russia until the 16th or 17th Centuries. After the
Mongols, there was no loyalty of the Rus city-states with Kiev. They all
were looking for somebody to defend them against the Mongols, Teutonic
Knights, and Moscovites.
Even when the Mongols were defeated, they were not united since many fought
for the Litvans and Poles against the Tsarists. In the 15th and 16th
Centuries, the Rus hoped to form a confederation with the Poles and
Lithuanians. In the 16th and 17th Centuries, Poland was weakened because
of too many strong enemies. By the 18th Century, it ceased to exist. Much
of the Polish and Lithuania armies were busy fighting the Moscovites and
Germans. The Polish Empire became the Tsarist Russian Empire in the
East. There really was no independent Ukraine or Belarus possible. There
might have been 80,000 Poles in all areas, but there never was any 80,000
fighting the Ukrainians in the batgtle mentioned. By the 17th Century,
the Poles were usually outnumbered in most major battles. The Cossacks
didn't mind allying themselves with anybody (non-Christian included) and
were raping, pillaging, and plundering everywhere on behalf of themselves
(not a mythical Ukrainian state). They terrorized as many Ukrainians and
Belarussians as they did Poles.
Mike
Mike Davidchik
> > >Poland chose Western Christianity even though it was culturally *far*
> > >behind Eastern Christianity because he did not want to fight Western
> > >Crusaders.
This is really simplistic nonsense. There were many Catholics fighting
against the Teutonic Knights.
> > >
> >
> > Poland always was Western oriented.
>
> Not true. Parts of Poland once used the Cyrillic alphabet.
Poland became Western oriented because of the Renaissance, the Age of
Reason, and the Industrial Revolution.
>
> > Poland chose the West because it
> > offered more than the East could in the long run.
>
> I doubt that Polish leaders were prophets, i.e. could predict that in 2
> centuries the Mongols and Turks would end Eastern superiority.
Where was this Eastern superiority? Byzantium which was already dying by the
13th Century? Russia? It didn't really exist until the 16th Century. In
the 9th to 12th Century, the only thing that the Kievy Rus got from the
East was
Greek Christianity.
Poland
> had aggresive Western Christians next door and wanted to eliminate the
> chances of a crusade.
The Teutonic Knights or other enemies would not have cared whether Poland
was Catholic or not. The big religious rift did not even yet exist.
>
> Good for Poland. Rus' managed to defeat Byzantium at a time when
> Byzantium was far stronger than the HRE.
This is really bad history.
> > >> > gentry. In fact, although Polish invaders and Polonized traitors
> > >> > such as Wisnowiecki
> > >>
> > >> Wisniowiecki was a great man, and great hero.
> > >
> > >Yup. Like Judas was for some Jews. Both W. and Judas ultimately
> > >failed.
There were no patriots and traitors in the modern sense at this time in history.
> Poland took over the official
> > responsibility for Ukraine in 1569 at the Union of Lublin from the
> > Lithuanians. However the lands had been polonised centuries before.
This is only partly true. This was a mistake for the Poles, like when
they dissolved the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. The initial polonization was
mostly voluntary, but it later got nasty because of the Polish fear of
russification. Some of the forced polonization created the prejudices in
Lithuania, Belarus, and Ukraine, that exist today, and seem to be evident
in this thread. Despite Russian propaganda, the Poles were actually
respected in many Rus areas until
they started getting repressive in the mid 17th Century. Of course, the
Russians who replaced them were just as repressive and managed to use two
or three centuries to indoctrinate the Ukrainians and Belarussians and
Lithuanians into thinking the Poles were always the bad guys.
Mike