Why did the UK declare war on Germany after the partition but not the Soviets?

Because they were not utterly retarded?

Even numerous (100s of 1000s) Pollacks themselves joined red army to defeat Nazis.

Those were Polish soldiers who were sentenced to death but not executed before the Sikorski-Majski deal in 1943 and those who didn't make it to join general Anders. They had no choice as Poland was already doomed when USSR joined the allies and was free to conquer the entire country.

Britain and France already had enough on their plate with the war against Germany, while the USSR partitioning Poland did piss them off, the Western Allies took a "one enemy at a time" approach, and drew up plans to bomb the Soviet Union should they sign an alliance and join the war on the side of Germany. As long as it still a non-aggression pact, the Soviets could wait until Germany was dealt with.

That approach ended up paying off massive dividends though with the start of Operation Barbarossa, with the British no longer standing alone against Germany and giving them a chance in hell of actually winning the war with the Red Army fighting on the Continent.

Cause Brits are smart enough to fight their enemies one by one

Those who consider WWII to be a good war are not worth listening. At first it was a war of conquest of allied Germany and USSR. Then it was a war between the two.

The involvement of USA and UK seems almost like a sideshow. Also they can't claim that they joined "lesser evil" as there was nothing lesser about the Soviets.

no, that was just churchill trying one of his tricks. of course in the end whoever controlled the troops controlled the land.

You give them way too much credit.

Because Britain and France obliged themselves to protect Poland from Germans, not Soviets.

>Those were Polish soldiers who were sentenced to death
Not really. Once Nazis attacked Russia, Stalin cancelled M-R pact and amnestied most of the Pollacks, who then joined him or the western allies.

>They had no choice as Poland was already doomed when USSR joined the allies and was free to conquer the entire country
Simmiliar number of them fought in AK. Virtually nobody fought for Germans and if they did they did so to sneak out and join Brits.

Lechs overwhelmingly took Soviets as the lesser evil, there's no other way how to put it.

Because the invasion was a violation of agreements made between the Allies and Germany, no such agreement existed with the USSR

They must have been doing something right. For more than 800 years, no European power ever became strong enough to actually build a navy that could be used to successfully invade and occupy Britain. I don't think that's just a matter of luck.

Stalin was unprepared for a major war and was playing for time by allying with Germany.

Soviet foreign policy, from 1940 until Barbarossa was all about making the Comintern act like peaceniks toward Germany just to stall while the USSR built up it forces.

Under the Polish-British Common Defense Pact, the UK promised assistance if Poland was attacked by a European nation. But a secret provision of the pact, understood by Poland, was that the European nation it was directed at was Germany. France had perhaps a stronger agreement with Poland, but decided to ignore it based on the swift defeat of Poland.

Also, Germany invaded Poland on September 1st, England and France declared war on Germany September 3rd, but the Soviet Union didn't invade until September 17th. By then it was obvious Poland would fall before England or France could do anything about it so why declare war on the Soviet Union when it was also obvious at some point Germany would turn on Russia?

The UK and France took the long view that they couldn't do anything to save Poland, but they would need the Soviet Union as an ally against Germany in the future.

Sikorski-Mayski was the amnesty.

>Simmiliar number of them fought in AK

Home's Army were simply Polish soldiers who stayed in either German or Soviet occupied Poland. Even after Soviets were forced to change sides bith treated them exactly the same. As a potential danger to their regime.

Just like general Anders said as it written in Patton's autobiography : "He told me, laughing, that if his corps got in between a German and Russian army, they would have difficulty in deciding which they wanted to fight the most."
And I understand them completely.

>before England or France could do anything about it

They decided that they will not honor their alliance with Poland on September 12th in Abbeville. Ironically Abbeville will be liberated by Polish troops in 1944.

because germany could take over the world if it was allowed to conquer europe.

This is the dumbest fucking question on this board and it shows up every day. How are they going to fight both at the same time genius? This isn't HOI4 where you can just console command your way to success with 100 British divisions in 1938

because a unified german state was a threat to anglo and french dominance of europe.

They weren't even fighting one enemy.
According to Jodl if France and Britain attacked in 1939, despite their limitations at the time they would be strong enough to defeat Germany. I don't know if it's true. Even Germany kind of overestimated their chances and needed a break before they attacked France so they weren't as tough in 1939 yet.

Anyway the important point is that the UK had a treaty with Poland with a secret provision that only obligated them to declare war on Germany should she attack. This wasn't revealed until like 1993 as the UK didn't want to draw attention to the fact that they had many treaties with similar secret clauses all over the world.

>He told me, laughing, that if his corps got in between a German and Russian army, they would have difficulty in deciding which they wanted to fight the most.
Laughing is the keyword here. They hated them both, but when jokes went aside they were ready to collaborate with Soviets.

>Home's Army were simply Polish soldiers who stayed in either German or Soviet occupied Poland.
And fought there against Germans. Once Germans were crushed AK was "disbanded", but some soldiers turned against Soviets and fought to the bitter end

>were forced to change sides bith treated them exactly the same
That's not exactely true. During this time Poles collaborated with Russians, but Russians kept betraying them. Case in point: Warsaw uprising.

Just to make it clear, my point isn't that Poles and Russians were bffs, but that Poles clearly saw who's the bigger evil.

On a slightly related note I remember an article in which the author stated that most Poles consider British to be their heroes and only a few are upset about the phony war (nothing about Teheran/Yalta, Monty and the fate of Polish soldiers etc).

Do Brits really believe that? Because I think it's easier to find someone who has a positive opinion on Russians and that's saying something. And I usually defend the British because some people are way too harsh (for example the theory that they stole Polish gold) and it's true that Churchill was far more decent than Roosevelt. Not to mention Alec Douglas-Home was even better as he called Churchill out on his behavior when he was basically appeasing Stalin.
And I think it's cool that they didn't throw out Polish government in-exile. It's a small thing but it's fine.

But to claim that Polish people think that they owe something to the British or that they should be grateful is wishful thinking.

>but when jokes went aside they were ready to collaborate with Soviets.

Anders was wounded in the leg and spine by the Soviets who later sentenced him to death just like many other soldiers. Many others suffered exactly the same under both occupations. Why would they treat one invading army better than the other? A common saying was that the Soviets was "ally of our allies." For Poles everywhere they war just as bad if not worse than Germans but they had to somehow cooperate with them on account of the western allies.

Soviet whitewashing is honestly one of the worst WWII legacies.

>

The Dutch.

[citation needed]

>whitewashing
I'm not even a tankie, but Soviet demonization is much more common than whitewashing.

>Why would they treat one invading army better than the other?
Maybe because one of them considered them to be lesser species that ought to be enslaved or exterminated? It's not some fucking quantum mechanics.

>Soviet whitewashing
Oh boy, you sure got me there. What gave me away? The part where I said "Russians kept betraying them"?

I never found anything that would indicate that Poles liked Soviets better than Germans. It was the Soviets who started anti-Polish ethnic cleansing programs that basically eradicated Poles in the Soviet Union.
Between 1939 and 1941 both occupation zones were just as dangerous, both were killing members of the elite, undesirables and even random people who were at the wrong place at the wrong time.

Bagration and later Warsaw Uprising accelerated German programs. And this is used by some people as evidence that Poles should be grateful to Soviets. "They'd kill you all and we would only kill some of you". This coming from the same regime that was ready to exterminate Polish population for no reason in the late 30s. The entire thing is brought down to statistics and proportions. Million this way million that way. And it's not like they changed after Poland became their "ally". Even after the war they were building new labor camps in Poland.

On personal level no primary sources say that Soviet soldiers were any better. Some could be better than others like with all other armies but they were no heroes to anyone who was living under German occupation. They were probably happy that the fighting was over and hopeful that Soviet soldiers would only come to steal their crops or belongings and nothing more.

>I never found anything that would indicate that Poles liked Soviets better than Germans.
Where do you live? Because it's pretty fucking obvious for any Eastern Europeans. I also alredy gave you a few proofs (Warsaw uprising, Poles in the Red army, S-M agreament).

>It was the Soviets who started anti-Polish ethnic cleansing programs that basically eradicated Poles in the Soviet Union
What are you refering to? I'm not aware of any Soviet programs comparable to GP ost.

>Between 1939 and 1941 both occupation zones were just as dangerous
Where did you get this information? Germans killed considerably more people than Soviets, even if we exclude Jews. Sauce (I hope you can pshek): niniwa22.cba.pl/polska_1939_1945.htm

>On personal level...
That's pretty much irrelevant. Random Fritzes and Ivans raping and plundering were not the main source of damage.

The Spanish

People there always equate Nazis and Commies. Generally it's always people from the West who are claiming that Stalin was the lesser of two evil probably because of guilt. Of course they'd have to eat their words had Stalin got his hands on the hydrogen bomb but nevermind that. Aside from communist era brainwashing it's always been pretty much a normal thing to assume that they were just as bad and you're claiming that it was a general belief held by politicians, military and/or civilians which isn't true. Or is the fact that Poland had communist collaborators and no Nazi ones is supposed to be the proof? Well since communism was supposed to be international it doesn't mean much. By the time Soviets conquered the other half of the country the Polish underground state was decimated, government in exile marginalised and Stalin way more powerful than his other two allies.

I tried to calcuate the percentage of civilian casualties in both occupation zones. It's difficult to find data specifically for 1939-1941. Then I realized how pointless it was. There were five times as many Poles living on the German side than Soviet side. My first results showed just one percentage of difference but I didn't take minorities from the western side or the massacres commited by UPA into account. But even if the gap was wider I don't care. It's absolutely disgusting to pick favorites considering both were just as willing to kill anyone opposing them. Most people don't need to make calculations to know that. The difference wasn't wide enough. Especially since Germans were in a different position once they were backed into the corner. It's different than comparing for example crimes commited by American soldiers on German citizens in small towns which were just incidents and not official state policies. Before Germans started exterminating Poles they wanted them to be their allies. Before Soviets decided to simply subjugate Poles (while still executing their soldiers) they murdered almost the entire Polish population in their country. No side offered any guarantees.

>I'm not aware of any Soviet programs comparable to GP ost.

National programs of the motherfucking NKVD in the 1930s.

jewish lobby

Non-meme answer: Poland was already finished by then and the areas Stalin annexed weren't even polish, but occupied Belarusian/Ukrainian land.

Also the main goal of the war was preventing the rise of a German superpower, not protecting Poland or safeguarding some Slavs; no more than the goal of world war 1 was to protect Serbia.

The allies even let Stalin keep his 1939 annexations after the war, and even left Poland to be a soviet communist puppet state.

All of this cause Churchill had a hate boner for Germany.

In order to establish a new world order, they could have tried to defeat the lesser enemies through a temporary alliance.

Hitler would receive his Lebensraum in Europe and Stalin would establish Soviet control over huge swathes of land with little risk.

In order to establish a new world order, they could have tried to defeat the lesser enemies through a temporary alliance.

Hitler would receive his Lebensraum in Europe and Stalin would establish Soviet control over huge swathes of land with little risk.

>Stalin annexed weren't even polish, but occupied Belarusian/Ukrainian land.

Jesus Christ why don't you say that Poland was asking for it? Many countries couldn't secure their independence following post-WWI chaos. Doesn't mean that those who survived had to be invaded for it.
Also Stalin attacked Poland after he secured peace with Japan not because Poland was already defeated because it wasn't. He still had to fight for it, Hitler didn't give him shit.

Maybe Poland shouldn't have occupied Ukrainian and Belarusian land? Maybe Poland shouldn't have invaded Slovakia in 1938?

Poland wasn't exactly some innocent poor kid. They tried to throw their weight around and got trounced by the bigger kids.

>People there always equate Nazis and Commies
It's common way to insult Commies. It's simmiliar to Americans calling Trump literally Hitler. I also don't trust you saying that people who do that reside on the better side of iron curtain.

>been pretty much a normal thing to assume that they were just as bad
That pretty much goes against historical consensus, political proclamations and what I hear from the elderly people. What are you basing the claim on? Please don't say "It's true cuz I say so". Before you say my claims are hollow too, let me just cite the publication I provided to you: "Jak pisze prof. Wojciech Materski, zasadnicza różnica między okupacją niemiecką i sowiecką polegała na tym, że Niemcy w sposób masowy i systematyczny mordowali całe narody (Żydów i Cyganów wręcz na skalę przemysłową), Sowieci zaś nie podejmowali się planowej eksterminacji całych narodowości (wyjątek zrobiono dla polskich elit), a skala ofiar była spowodowana bardziej warunkami życia będącymi konsekwencją represji."

>Before Germans started exterminating Poles they wanted them to be their allies
I hope you didn't mean Hitler's Germans. That would be very silly thing to say and would indicate you to fancy certain alt-history book.

>It's absolutely disgusting to pick favorites considering both were just as willing to kill anyone opposing them
It was pretty disgusting for Poles, but they did pick favorites.

>National programs of the motherfucking NKVD in the 1930s
You mean Kresy? Or the bullshit claim about "murdering entire Polish population" in 30s?

>I tried to calcuate the percentage of civilian casualties in both occupation zones. It's difficult to find data specifically for 1939-1941. Then I realized how pointless it was.
Who cares, you are not a historian qualified for such research and you would just pick random numbers from wiki. I alredy gave you publication that covers this subject, read it.

The only correct answer so far

youtube.com/watch?v=yh1T7J6ynFU

Worth watching

What is this weird theory now? Ukraine and Belarus lost their independence because of Bolshevik invasion. Poland had some lands with sizeable Belarusian/Ukrainian population. For all of their sake thank God they didn't leave them alone or they would also be taken by the Soviets.

Slovakia didn't exist in 1938. You're talking about Zaolzie. In 1919 a lot of innocent people died in sensless land grab but by 1938 Polish-Czech relations improved a bit. When the country was about to lose its independence it was better to take that speck of land (and you make it sound like total invasion) to protect the Polish population. Everybody understood that and it didn't sour the Polish-Czech relations in exile.
You sound like you're about to post "evidence" about the Bromberg Bloody Sunday.

>P-Polish occupation was peaceful
>belarusians, Ukrainians, and Slovaks wanted to be invaded and occupied by Poland!!

You're embarrassing

>Or the bullshit claim about "murdering entire Polish population" in 30s?
Are you the same kind of guy who calls Soviet invasion in 1939 "controversy", claims that the evidence about the Soviet involvement in Katyn massacre was faked or that anti-communist insurgents were pro-nazi bandits?
I'm talking about the Polish Operation of NKVD of course. There's your lesser evil. Communists killing people based on their nationality.
Despite the best efforts from Russian government nothing will convince people who remember Soviet occupation that they were in any way heroes or at least that they were lesser evil. I'm generalizing I'm sure there are some Polish families with pro-Soviet sentiments. Some who were lucky enough that they didn't lose anyone to them. And they were pretty lucky because Soviets were even eliminating people who were local communists. Doesn't change that Anders's sentiment is still true. For Polish government or soldiers USSR was no natural ally even compared to Nazi Germany.

>Warsaw uprising
Was as much against the Soviets (politically) as it was against the Germans (militarily).

>S-M agreament
The Brits forced the Poles to sign it.

>Poles in the Red army
The bulk of whom were POWs made to fight.

>What are you refering to?
You might have heard of
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katyn_massacre

>unstoppable
I assure you they could not have defeated the UK, the US, and Brazil

If by "occupation" you mean not giving up land to the Soviets which you keep ignoring along the rest of the post then it was really the best thing considering it was impossible for Belarus or Ukraine to exist as independent nations and a sizeable population of Poles was in no hurry to die.

And what fucking Slovaks? Slovakia is that country to the right of Czech Republic you retard. And they invaded Poland when they were created as a puppet state.

Katyn wasn't the first anti-Polish program, wasn't the last and wasn't the largest. The point is USSR was always ready to start purges against anyone. They don't call it a prison of nations for nothing.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_Operation_of_the_NKVD

>muh soviets did everything
And they totally brought the Rising Sun to her knees by the mere act of declaring war

Don't care about this. Whoever claims that people should be grateful to the Soviets for the victory misses the point of the war. It was never good vs. evil and only one of the two main European aggressors was defeated.

The fact that the remainder of Belarus and Ukraine were Soviet Republics doesn't change the fact that Poland was still occupying Belarusian and Ukrainian land. "Better for them" my ass. Ukrainians absolutely loathed poles.

And Poland DID invade and annex parts of Slovakia in 1938, how are you missing that? Why is it justified when Poland partitions and invades a country?

Face it, what happened to Poland in 1939 was exactly what Poland was found to other countries

The spanish were completely capable with better leadership. The dutch literally did it.

IT IS THE ENGLISHMAN'S RIGHTFUL DUTY TO MAINTAIN A BALANCE OF POWER ON THE CONTINENT BY WHATEVER MEANS NECESSARY IN ORDER THAT HE MAY FURTHER THE SUCCESS OF HIS NATION IN THE NEVER-ENDING STRUGGLE FOR GLOBAL HEGEMONY

Just like Poland was occupying German, Russian and Austrian land? Tough shit after a century of stability demographic map of Europe was a mess and the situation wasn't normal with countries like Nazi Germany and Soviet Union nearby. Protecting citizens will always have priority.Maybe if Bolsheviks lost the civil war there was a chance of creating more independent countries like it was originally intended. Polish chief of state was allied with Ukrainian People's Republic and in the conception of the ruling National Democracy those state existed as a buffer zone (as nationalists obviosly wanted a nation state). But Bolsheviks prevailed.

I don't know what's with all this /pol/-tier theories that in the end everybody was just as guilty and really it was just Churchill who with the help of his Jewish bankers wanted to destroy Germany. I'm pretty sure we're not far from thosr fake quotes they always post there.

And I will never feel bad about those villages in 1938. Better than giving them to Germans and everybody understood that. In 1919 a number of civilians and POWs were murdered by the orders of Czech colonel and the land was annected why the rest of the country was busy fighting Bolsheviks.

>Poland is justified in invading and conquering! TOUGH SHIT!
>waaaah!! Why is germany and Russia invading and conquering me!???

Fuck off retard, you got a taste of your own medicine.

So I was right. We're in the area of /pol/-tier manipulation.
Have any fake Daily Mail quotes to share or that infographic with Churchill sitting next to Jews with photoshops star of David?

yet you nerds handed czechoslovakia over to germany on a silver platter

hell you if didn't do this then the generals of germany would've overthrow the nazi government and you would've avoided world war 2 completely

Holy shit, I remember you from the other thread. How hard is to learn where Slovakia is?

Not that guy but he's right, Poland annexed Spis and Orava from Slovakia in 1938 (Slovakia conquered it back a year later though).

They feared the slavic warrior

Reminder that Poland deserved everything it got.

I'm not a very big fan of Poland but this picture always get me laughing by implying refugees are a good thing

They would have, see operation Pike(which would have been a gigantic failure if it came to pass) but then they were too busy getting invaded

Schultz fuck off this board.

Because Churchill wanted war with Germany and not with the soviets. simple.
Germany got too strong economically and by sheer force and power of the nation.
The two big players france and england didnt want that to happen in the slightest so they had to think of a way to off germany.

>Churchill

Even if that was true it wouldn't take off any blame from Germany and USSR from starting the war in the first place. No one forced to do it.

Of course first we'd have to find out what the First Lord of the Admiralty could do to decide the fate of Germany in 1939.

Given that Britain and France had already committed themselves to war with a European superpower and Poland was all but overrun, it would have made little sense to declare war on the largest nation on the planet on top of that as well. A bit like committing to challenging a 6 foot bully to a fist-fight but realizing there's an 8 foot bully nearby beating someone else up as well. In the end, when that bully got attacked by this bully, he was considered a friend until the first bully was brought down. Then a cold war ensued with the surviving bully.

The only legitimate question then, is how Britain and France would have acted, had the opposite been the case: the Soviet Union invading Poland first, and Nazi Germany two weeks later. Would their defense treaty have included guaranteeing Poland's safety from a Soviet attack? The answer is no: there was a legal loop-hole that meant the treaty was mostly tailored to respond to German aggression. The idea of the Soviet Union invading Poland, and nothing happening as a result, and then Hitler invading to take back Danzig, and having Britain and France declare war on him wouldn't have sat well with post-war morality. Good thing for the victors then, that Hitler turned out to be an ideological warmonger after all, and Stalin the cold opportunist, rather than the other way round.

>What is Operation Pike

>and Brazil
how could I forget our biggest liberator Brazil!

Churchill wanted to attack the Soviet union and liberate Eastern Europe but it couldn't be done. It would have brought more bloodshed for little reward.

This it the Anglo-Polish treaty from April of 1939, whcih convinced Hitler to attack Poland.

avalon.law.yale.edu/wwii/blbk19.asp

>ARTICLE 1.
>Should one of the Contracting Parties become engaged in hostilities with a European Power in consequence of aggression by the latter against that Contracting Party, the other Contracting Party will at once give the Contracting Party engaged in hostilities all the support and assistance in its power.

>ARTICLE 4.
>The methods of applying the undertakings of mutual assistance provided for by the present Agreement are established between the competent naval, military and air authorities of the Contracting Parties.

No words about this agreement being specifically about Germany so according to this article Britain should've not only help Poland (and by help I mean military assistance not bullshitting war by dropping leaflets) against Germany but against the Soviet Union as well.

Well the reward would've been significant for the other part of Europe which would've been liberated.
Churchill at least wanted to honor his alliance. He had some remnants of honor.

Churchill wasn't even the prime minister.

/pol/ likes to make up quotes about Churchill and obscure Polish politicians wanting war and about Hitler wanting peace and security for German minority.
Literally nobody forced him or Stalin to start the war.

> Maybe Poland shouldn't have occupied Ukrainian and Belarusian land?

So a multi-ethnic Soviet state = good but a multi-ethnic Polish state = bad?

> Maybe Poland shouldn't have invaded Slovakia in 1938?

Maybe Czechoslovakia shouldn’t have seized a territory full of Poles, while Poland was fighting the Bolsheviks?

> Poland was still occupying Belarusian and Ukrainian land.

At best, all you can claim is that the lands were populated by multiple ethnicities and after WWI, were up for grabs by whoever could hold on to them (and that would NOT have been Belorussia and Ukraine).

Though Petlura from Ukraine was Polish ally. I guess Ukrainian independence was off the table during the negotiations. Not that Ukraine would be able to stay independent for six months when left alone next to the Soviets.

> Though Petlura from Ukraine was Polish ally. I guess Ukrainian independence was off the table during the negotiations.

Poland’s plan (or at least, Piłsudski’s) was to surround the U.S.S.R. with independent nations all allied together for their own protection; Prometheism or the Międzymorze (Intermarium) Plan.

This would have obviously and critically included an independent Ukraine but the West didn’t give a shit after WWI and the Poles could barely hold on to their independence, so Ukraine and Belorussia (as well as the Caucasus and other regions) fell to the Soviets.

British hypocrisy.

This: is sad bullshit.

Soviets acted according to British plan.

>Are you the same kind of guy who calls Soviet invasion in 1939 "controversy", claims that the evidence about the Soviet involvement in Katyn massacre was faked or that anti-communist insurgents were pro-nazi bandits?
Fuck off, I don't suffer brain damage.

>I'm talking about the Polish Operation of NKVD of course
OK, but that didn't killed "entire Polish population in the USSR". Shit was pretty disgusting on itself, there's no need to exagerate it.

>Despite the best efforts from Russian government nothing will convince people who remember Soviet occupation that they they were lesser evil
Again that's just hollow rhetorics. In reality Russians did not aimed for extermination of Polish nation (if they did there would be no Poland now), so the choice was obvious.

>For Polish government or soldiers USSR was no natural ally even compared to Nazi Germany
Yet they massivelly collaborated with them against Nazis. If Russians would win, Poles were fucked, if Germans would win both Poles and Russians would be no more.

>Was as much against the Soviets (politically) as it was against the Germans (militarily).
As much? The uprising relied on Soviet help, when Soviets betrayed them it was drown in blood. Resulting destruction of city too, was nothing like Russians managed to pull of.

>The Brits forced the Poles to sign it
Did Brits forced AK not to attack Russians?

>The bulk of whom were POWs made to fight
But they fought well. POWs forced to fight with 0 motivation would desert en masse (like did Poles forced to fight under Germans), In our case 200k Poles fought in Berlin, instead of joining AK.

>You might have heard of Katyn
Katyn massacre is not comparable to GP ost.

If you're the same apologist from the last thread then you were surprised to learn that the Soviets established a number of labor camps in Poland after WWII.

>OK, but that didn't killed "entire Polish population in the USSR". Shit was pretty disgusting on itself, there's no need to exagerate it.
What do you think was the goal of the operation? It didn't actually kill every single Pole living in the USSR but it doesn't change that every single one was a potential victim of the purge. It wasn't action against rich Poles or those who had military background or anything. This alone proves just how full of shit tankies are. The policy of both regimes towards Poles could change at moment's notice. When Germany was losing the war and were facing uprising in the occupied territory they accelerated the genocide programs. 5 years earlier Hitler seriously considered alliance with Poland. For Stalin Poles were a potential fifth column and obstacle on the way of global revolution which is why AK members were a target during and after the war.

>Yet they massivelly collaborated with them against Nazis.

Who? Who goddammit? Them?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trial_of_the_Sixteen

Who aside from people involved with the communists like Berling, Wasilewska or Gomułka was collaborating witht he Soviets? USSR attacked Poland allied with Nazi Germany in order to spread the revolution westwards. From September 17th onwards they were the enemy. They were the aggressors. Again Anders's words speak the truth about the Polish sentiments towards them.

And the forced alliance between the Soviets and USA/UK made the situation even more delicate because people involved with the legal government like Sikorski, Mikołajczyk, Sosnkowski had to make the best of the situation in which they were surrounded by more powerful players including one that was still occupying half of their country's territory.

>In our case 200k Poles fought in Berlin, instead of joining AK.
The leader of AK was arrested and murdered. Members of anti-German/anti-Soviet groups were arrested and murdered even those like general Nil who retired and just wanted to live in peace.

The official german position: declare war on Poland and conquer it.
The official soviet position: Poland as a state no longer exists, we are just going to annex this empty land before the germans can do so.

One is easier to swallow, I guess, and they couldn't go to war with both, thus cementing the alliance between them. They needed (and achieved) divide and conquer to deal with that.
A good way to divide two allies is to declare war on one and keep trading with the other. The British also did it during Napoleon's years, between France and Russia.

Well they could claim so in their propaganda. Doesn't change the fact that the invasion on Poland continued and so did the battles.
It's really fascinating. One of the only times the three factions (for the lack of better term) of WWII met on the field of battle. Soviet Union was on the sides of both Axis and Allies but really they had their own plans.

>and occupy

>The official soviet position: Poland as a state no longer exists, we are just going to annex this empty land before the germans can do so.
They made a nice excuse for economic cooperation, political promise of frienship and litertal agreement to divide eastern Europe together with Nazi Germany

...

>implying Brazil didn't single-handedly win both world wars