Added: 3 years ago
From: LietuvosRespublika
Views: 5,303
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (169)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • VILNIUS IS THE CAPITAL OF LITHUANIA ESTABLISHED BY OUR GREATE DUKE GEDIMINAS IN 1323 YEAR, REMEMBER YOU DIRTY SLAVS

  • antanavicius- antanas, antanauskas taip pat antanas, danilevicius- danielius, vilkevicius- vilkas, vilkauskas taip pat vilkas, - lietuviai nubraukit tas slykscias slaviskas galunes, nedarykit gedos Lietuvai, ypac belarusai ir lenkai saiposi is to ir vagia musu istorija, jie remiasi tuo kad musu slaviskos pavardes

  • @khulik Now I will explain you about inconsistence in Polish census. Currently Suwalki region has 35,600 people. Taking into account the increase of population, there were about 26,700 people in 1939. Now out of these people about 3,000 were Lithuanians whose offspring live there now. One thing which don’t know is that 11,955 Lithuanians were repatriated from Suwalki to Lithuania by Germans in exchange for Germans living in LT in 1941.

  • @mnplastic1

    Suwałki region was 35,600 ppl?

    "Według spisu powszechnego z 1921 roku, powiat w ówczesnych granicach zamieszkiwało 70412 osób, w tym 60754 (86,3%) Polaków, 5400 (7,7%) Żydów, 2570 (3,6%) Litwinów, 1013 (1,4%) Niemców, 641 (0,9%) Rosjan, 24 Białorusinów, 4 Rusinów, 1 Belg, 1 Francuz, 1 Grek, 1 Łotysz[1]."-"according to census 1921 Suwałki region (in today's boders) had 70412 citizens, including 60754 Poles (86,3%)... etc.".

  • this clip is sad. lithuanians paraded in vilnius like hienas. accepted the city from the soviets after poland was taken apart by hitler and stalin. we did the exact same thing in zaolzie when we took that area after hitler was done with czechoslovakia. we too marched, wee too trymphed. hehe stalin took vilnius back 10 months later, hitler took zaolzie back 11 months later. history is a biatch.

  • @polishranger

    You missed, that both Lithuania and Czechoslovakia attacked polish army during war in 1920.

  • @polishranger Maybe Gdansk was similar claim to Vilnius, but Gdansk was not capital of Poland for 600 years ;) In that way Lithuania's claim was unikue. You say Lithuanian's paraded like hienas. Well, Vilnius was in mind of every Lithuanian for 20 years. It was huge ecstatic joy for all nation and especially for Lithuanians who lived in Vilnius region including my parents' families. The parade simbolised nations 20 years strugle. I don't know what simbolised Zaolzie parade.

  • @mnplastic1 can you seriously be proud that lithuania was given vilnius by stalin and instead of just accepting it, lithuanian army made a victory parade like they took it in a fight? it was just handed to them by comerade stalin, they didn't win. why the parade then? to show those few hundred lithuanians who lived in vilnius that lithuania is back by the great of great Ста́лин. ohhh please. at least in zaolzie most people welcomed our hienas.

  • @polishranger First of all nobody saw it that way. Everybody saw it as historical justice. Only later they saw the real price. Besides in 6 weeks of the Soviet occupation Vilnius region suferred looting and arests so everybody were more than happy to see Lithuanian army taking control of the region.

    At the end of the day, if Lithuania had not accepted the Soviet offer, Vilnius was now part of Belorus and LT would have suffered same fate anyway.

    I am proud LT didn't renaunced its claim.

  • @mnplastic1

    Historical justice? Historical justice would be to kill 100000 Lithuanians and give rest of nation like a slaves for Belarussians.

  • @khulik why would you say something like this? any kind of retribution for things that happened centuries ago makes no sence. in addition hundreds of years ago, people didn't think of a nation the way we do today. belorussians didn't mind lithuanian rule, lithuanians didn't mind uniting with poles. back then, loyalty was to the ruler, to the landlord.

  • @polishranger

    Tell this to him. I told some Lithuanians about that, but they probably don't understand.

  • @khulik look: i'm polish, you're polish and mnplastic1 is lithuanian. we are discussing and debating history and such here. all 3 of us have different opinions and different views. we can all have a civilized debate and learn from one another. relax a bit. don't get frustrated when others don't agree with you. to nie jest polska scena polityczna. przeciez mozna wszystko troche bardziej "kulturnie". szkoda, ze w polskich szkolach nie ucza jak prowadzic debaty :o((

  • @khulik nie kazdy musi sie od razu z toba zgadzac. widze, ze te babskie awantury kaczynskiego wplynely na spoleczenstwo. widze, ze duzo naszych dalo by sie zabic za swoja racje. w debacie chodzi albo o przekonanie kogos do twoich racji, albo o rozwalenie argumentow adwersarza, albo o dowiedzenie swojej racji. jak sie zaczynasz frustrowac to oddajesz paleczke zwyciestwa przeciwnikowi. wez wszystko na spokojnie.

  • @polishranger

    Moim ulubionym zajęciem jest rozwalanie argumentów takich jak on. :)

  • @polishranger

    I sorry, ale z Yarkiem nie chcę mieć nic wspólnego.

  • @mnplastic1 yes, i agree that lithuanian army seems like a much better alternative than the soviet NKVD. i'm just saying, that lithuanian army could have been a little more descrete. you see, you hold victory parades only when you achieve victories. that's why i think us marching into zaolzie like that, or you into vilnius was grossly overdone. that's all i'm trying to say.

  • @polishranger Believe or not every single country in the world would parade in the capital lost for 20 years and it doesn't matter much how it was recovered ;)

    BTW in 1938 Poles paraded in Vilnius after Polish ultimatum when they together with Nazi Germans threatened to invade Lithuania. I think that was one of the reasons why Lithuanians paraded in 1939 ;)

  • @mnplastic1

    So, we were discussing all this time, but you didn't know, that I don't want to retake Wilno?

    Well, only thing I want from Lithuania is EU minorty laws for Poles in Lithuania and end of anti-polish propaganda.

  • Comment removed

  • Summa Summarum. Poland army invaded the land which never ever belonged to Poland and always belonged to Lithuania (the best and most loyal ally Poland ever had) just to have a city Pilsudski once lived and studied in. It gave Poland nothing and made enemies for years to come. And you just making sure Pilsudski's betrayal is not forgotten.

  • @mnplastic1 pilsudski called himself lithuanian, so did zeligowski. politically anexing vilnius was a huge mistake. but when you look back, lithuanians and poles were very nationalistic then. both countries were occupied for 123yrs before 1918. new born nations tend to be blinded by nationalism and chauvinism. do you think lithuania was so innocent?

  • @polishranger

    What meant "Lithuanian" in Piłsudski's, Mickiewicz's or Narutowicz's mind?

  • @khulik i don't really understand your question. please try again or maybe try in polish.

  • @polishranger

    Gdzieś napisałeś, że Piłsudski był Litwinem. A ja się zapytałem: "kim według Piłsudskiego, Narutowicza, czy Mickiewicza był Litwin"?

  • @khulik this is the whole point i'm trying to make: 100yrs ago everybody living there called himself lithuanian. when pilsudski told zeligowski to "rebel" and take over vilna both called themselves lithuanian. it was the lithuanian nationalists who started saying that only those who speak lithuanian at home are lithuanian leaving many polish speaking lithuanians on the outside. they are doing the same thing today, discriminating against polish speakers in vilnius region.

  • @polishranger Could you explain me in what way Poles are discriminated in Lithuania more than in any other country in the world?

  • @mnplastic1 poland wanted a plebiscite (referendum) in vilnius. lithuania never agreed. lithuania had historical claims to vilnius, poland had demographic claims to vilnius. if you look at history lithuania's claim to vilnius was simillar to poland's claim do gdansk (danzig). ppl in lithuania were divided. there were 3 choices: independant lithuania. independant lithuania within polish, bellorussian and lithuanian federation and lithuania as part of the commonwealth (rzeczpospolita).

  • @mnplastic1 remember back then things did not appear so black and white. people who lived in one land, who were friends, neighbours, relatives and family had different ideas as to the future of the land. our enemies didn't want to see us being friends anymore. and i think they succeeded.

  • Another fact is, that Vilnius region was the least developed region in Lithuania after 19 years of Polish occupation and now Vilnius is the most prosperous city in Lithuania because Lithuanians love it and for Poles it was just one more peripheral town.

  • @mnplastic1

    If it was "polish occupation", tody Lithuania is lawless occupying polish city of Wilno.

  • Comment removed

  • @khulik

    The fact is, everybody knows that Poland in between two World Wars was one of the most militaristic and aggressive countries in the world. It attacked all its neighbors and grabbed their lands except Germany. So live with it.

    This movie shows how people greeted Lithuanian army. It was not propaganda and happiness was clear. 6 weeks the Red Army was looting and rampaging Vilnius region and arresting bright people. Even Polish speakers were glad to see Lithuanian army.

  • @mnplastic1

    "The fact is, everybody knows that Poland in between two World Wars was one of the most militaristic and aggressive countries in the world."-Lithuanian weren't better. And Poles didn't kill hundreds of thousands civilians , in which Lithuanians took big part. You weren't as agressive as Poland just because you were to small shit to fight in real war, so you tried to play not fair. As a result of your idiotic actions you lost independence withou one single shot.

  • @khulik My comment was unfortunately removed. Inter-war Poland was one of the most brutal country in Europe against the minorities and it was almost completely opposite for Lithuania. Killings during German occupation is a different matter more related to the individuals differently from Poland where repressions against minorities were made at state level.

  • @mnplastic1

    Yep? So, what happened to 300000 Poles in Liaude?

    "repressions against minorities were made at state level."-you're just making Lithuania's cowardness into "+". Lithuania closed polish schools too, but exept anti-polish propaganda it could do only shit.

  • Comment removed

  • @khulik I have tried to find any information in English about Liaude. Found only in Polish - that looks fishy.

    What cowardness?

  • @mnplastic1

    Lithuanian propaganda of "polish occupation of Vilnus" looks fishy as well.

    You were afraid of open fight with Poland. For instance, in 1927 Voldemaras told, that if Poland will not gve back Wilno, Lithuania will start attack, but when "Grandpa" (Piłsudski) (on international conference) hit a table with his fist, and asked "War of not?", terryfied Voldemaras said: "Peace". Only in lies Lithuania were and as I see-still is strong.

  • Comment removed

  • @khulik :))))) So why Polish surrender Warsaw or Lwow in 1939 when they could continue fighting.

    Why they did not attack the Soviet Union in 1945 to recover Lwow or Vilnius. Considering your logic Poles are cowards. Regardless of hopeless situation Lithuanians fought against the Soviets for another 10 years.

    You see first look at yourself before declaring such nonsense otherwise it comes back :))

    BTW Peace was only from 1938 when Poland in collaboration with Germany threated with another war.

  • @mnplastic1

    Could fighting? Don't be silly. No ammo, civillians were dying. But look at major "Hubal". He fought to his death, to march or april 1940, and from 01.IX.1939 he was always in uniform.

    "Why they did not attack the Soviet Union in 1945 to recover Lwow or Vilnius."-who should attack? Polish communists from AL? AK, which wasn't after Warsaw 1944 big army anymore? NSZ, who had to defend civillians in Wołyń from UPA?

  • @khulik They had enough ammo but civilians were dying - you right. This is the reason why before going to war every intelligent leader should think.

    Polish communists are Polish aren't they? Lithuanians fought the communists for the next 10 years while there were many more coward Polish non-Communist who neither dare to resist the Communists nor to attack the Soviet Union. Why don't you attack now, you are no longer communists? Afraid? ;)

  • @mnplastic1

    You, as Lithuanian should know, that commies are without natinality. No matter from which place they came from: Georgia (Stalin), Poland (Dzierżyński), Russia (most of them). They felt only citizens of "motherland of pesants and workers".

    "intelligent leader should think."-have Lithuanian leaders then planned in 1939, that Soviets will capture Lithuania and murder about 1 mln ppl? Or you accuse leaders of II RP of non-predicting future?

  • @khulik It is you who is accusing. Lithuanian leadership was trying to avoid civilian losses. They could foresee the future. Neither did Poland nor whole Europe when they gave CZ to Germany. I am su if not the Allies guarantee Polish leadership would give Danzig to Germany without a shot.

  • @mnplastic1

    "avoid civilian losses"-same as France?

    "could foresee"-witches? magics? :) Did they foresee, that taking Wilno will cause legall end of Lithuania?

    "Neither did Poland nor whole Europe when they gave CZ to Germany."-that's true. Author of strategy plans of defending from Germany was Piłsudski, who died 1935. He was calling CZ "niemandland" (today Belarus is similar).

    "I am su if not the Allies "-If not Allies, in II WW (not occupied) Poland would be in Axis.

  • @mnplastic1

    "Lithuanians fought the communists for the next 10 years"-soldiers of WiN and NSZ fought in big formations 16 years, in small groups-24 years.

    "neither dare to resist the Communists"-how many Lithuanians took weapon and came to forest? I understand, that st of your nation was cowards?

    "Afraid? ;)"-of what? Of your army which is smaller, than one polish brigade? Or Russian army-which is able to attack with only few divisions, because it has to guard border with China?

  • @khulik to attack now and retake Vilnius, Grodno and Lviv. Afraid?

  • @mnplastic1

    Ask commander of polish army :)

    But I repeat qestion: afraid of your tiny army? Lwów-afraid of 4x bigger Ukrainian army, which training and equipment costs 6x less than in case of Polish army? Ukraine can even broke itself on two parts.

  • @mnplastic1

    "Considering your logic Poles are cowards."-most your beloved countrymen says like that. Lithuania capitulated without single shot, Poles although the order was not to fight with Soviets-fought with them and hundreads of thousands never took off their uniforms. In September campagin even civillians took part in defending, without talking about Warsaw Uprising. And about Uprising: do you know, who kicked Krauts from this your "capital"?

  • @khulik Lithuanian never capitulated. It fought with weapons until the last soldier died in 1965 in battle.

    Whole Lithuanian army in 1940 was 28k. During the war against the Soviets in 1944-1953 20,000 were killed, 6,000 were captured, tortured and mostly killed later and only about 8,000 survived. It means that only about 17% surrendered and 59% died in battles while out of 904k “brave” Poles, 7% died and 77% surrendered! Poles were “brave” to surrender while Lithuanians were “cowards” to die.

  • @mnplastic1

    "Lithuanian never capitulated"-same as Poland. But Lithuania gave its territory without single shot. This is diffrence.

    From this "904k" soldiers 300k were really soldiers, rest were reserves, who took rifle and 5 bullets. And theoreicly Lithuania could mobilise 130k soldiers. So why you didn't mobilise them?

    7%+77%=84%

    And 200k polish forces on west were regular soldiers.

    As we can see, there's little diffrence:your reserves didn't went to your army. Maybe they were too scared?

  • @khulik That was misjudgment in order to save civilians but not the act of cowardness. Later events showed that Lithuanian soldiers had no fear.

    Lithuanian mobilisation didn't go through due political reasons. In theory Poland could mobilese 2mil or even more so why you didn't mobilise them? Too scared?

    On the other note 904k Poles killed 16k Germans and 66k died. While 34k Lithuanians killed 12k Soviets and 20k died. Basicly oversized Polish army was useless.

  • @mnplastic1

    We killed 16000 Germans in one month, you killed 12000 Soviets in more than ten years. But you should count as well, that: Soviets had much worse soldiers than Germans, you try to compare open war to partisan war, you counted dead Germans only in September campagin.

    "mobilese 2mil"-exacly 3 mil. Mobilisation started in 29.VIII.1939, but we needed 2 week for full mobilisation.

    "Polish army was useless."-they showed it in Narvik, Tobruk, Monte Cassino, Battle of Britain, and more?

  • @khulik Yes 950k Polish killed 16k Germans in 1 month but they were completely destroyed in 1 mth too.

    "But you should count as well, that: Soviets had much worse soldiers than Germans,"

    You are forgetting that 1939 Soviets and 1945 Soviets were completely 2 different armies. 1945 Army was the best in the world and much better than inexperienced 1939 German army.

    "Narvik, Tobruk, Monte Cassino, Battle of Britain"

    Yes when they were under supplied and commanded by British.

  • @mnplastic1

    Completly destroyed? So, an all fronts of II WW fought their ghosts? :)

    "1945 Army was the best in the world"-the best-no. The biggest number-yes. But WiN fought with post-1945 army.

    You had only partisan war, we had both partisan and regular war. Pre-1939 army never capitulated and fought in Tobruk and many others. II WW is not only September Campagin.

  • @mnplastic1

    And one more important thing: you were fighting ONLY with USSR. We fought with III Reich, USSR, OUN-UPA, and Plechavicius's legion (only in Poland).

  • @khulik Yes but you fight on 2:1-4:1 terms. Lithuanians on 100:1. I believe you understand the odds. Even if we mobilise whole army we would had 25:1 and Polish drafted men proved useless anyway. So Lithuania saw no point of doig the same mistake.

  • @mnplastic1

    Russians in 1945 could have even 16 mln. soldiers+allies (Czechs, Poles, Jugoslavians). Germans had for sure few mlns. too (most on the eastern front). After Uprising there were about 150000 polish partisans. It's less than 1% of more than 20 mlns.

    "Polish drafted men"-you mean soldiers/civillians, who escaped to LT in 1939?

  • @khulik ""Polish drafted men"-you mean soldiers/civillians, who escaped to LT in 1939?"

    No, 950.000 out of which in 1 month 904.000 were casualties. It means only 46,000 were able to escape. 20,000 of them were accepted by Lithuania. It is a huge luck you didn't mobilize 3 millions otherwise in 2 months there were no men to fight. Your army suffered a complete disaster due to very poor planning.

  • @mnplastic1

    "950.000 out of which in 1 month 904.000 were casualties"-decide yourself. 904000 killed?

    From that number about 150000 fought on west, many fought on east, but most fought in underground/forest.

  • @khulik Read some history. Most of "brave" Poles surrendered.

  • @mnplastic1 mnplastic could you tell me what you guys are fighting about? i don't feel like reading all that. what is the point you're trying to make and what is the point khulik is trying to make?

  • @mnplastic1

    Most, so how many?

  • @khulik the same question for you. i don't feel like reading all this. could you please tall me what are you guys are fighting with mnplastic about? i really want to know. and please make a genaral point. i tylko mi nie mow zebym ostroznie mijal kalisz hehe.

  • @polishranger

    To z Kaliszem nie ma nic wspólnego. Chodzi o "polską okupację" miasta, które miało 70% ludności Polskiej i z której może 5% nie chciało Polski w tym mieście. Mowa o Wilnie.

  • @mnplastic1

    "950.000 out of which in 1 month 904.000 were casualties"-decide yourself. 904000 killed?

    From that number about 150000 fought on west, many fought on east, but most fought in underground/forest.

    "3 millions otherwise in 2 months there were no men to fight."-vice versa. If your "heroes" would fight a few years more, there would be no Lithuanians today.

    Lithuania 1939-4mln., soldiers fought 35k

    Poland 1939-36 mln (9x more than Lithuania), soldiers fought about 1,4-1,6 mln.

  • @mnplastic1

    If we would today conquer Wilno and send lots of ppl to greet Polish Army this would be similar.

    "Even Polish speakers were glad to see Lithuanian army."-in one film it was shown something diffrent.

  • sorry 1-2 % in Vilnius before II world war 

  • @neiroimlex even if 0%, Vilnius is a city that means "CAPITAL" for evry single lithuanian, no matter where he lives.

  • Shame that Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia did not Militarily resist the Soviets in 1939

  • Lithuanian people colaborated in Soviet aggression on Poland. They had no problems with Vilinius occupating. They were also colaborated with nazi germans.

  • @CzarnaHanka Polish collaborated with Nazi Germans when occupied part of Czechoslovakia. Later again collaborated with Nazi Germans in order to get their support in Polish ultimatum to Lithuania in 1938.

    Lithuania later refused to join Germany in war against Poland in 1939. Also don't forget that Lithuania let in about 20.000 retreating Polish soldiers who could end up in Katyn or any other similar place.

  • @mnplastic1

    Continue watching Soviet anti-polish propaganda. :)

    Czechoslovakia in 1920 did the same what did Lithuania: attacked Poland during war with Bolscheviks. Both Wilno 1923 and Zaolzie 1938 were revenges.

    Lithuania later refused to join Germany in war against Poland in 1939.

    Poland refused Germanz to exchange Gdańsk for part of Lithuania in 1938.

  • @khulik

    Have you been watching Polish propaganda recently?

    Read the history. Poland attacked Lithuania in 1919 and occupied Vilnius while Lithuania was fighting with Bolsheviks.

    Lithuanians later retook Vilnius and in 1920 signed the Treaty of Suvalkai with Poland, which Poland broke and invaded Lithuania again.So that was not a revenge but Polish backstabbers imperialistic expansion.

    Gdansk was independent city state and not part of Poland and it was 98%German.So there was nothing to exchange.

  • @mnplastic1

    No, I haven't. I watched some Lithuanian propaganda.

    "Poland attacked Lithuania in 1919"-so, Lithuanians were Bolscheviks? Because in 1919 we took Wilno from BOLSCHEVIKS' hands. What is more, on 07.VII.1920 Lithuanian army cooperating with Red Army attacked polish forces from behind.

    "Lithuanians later retook"-both in 1920 and in 1939 USSR took Wilno and gave it to Lithuania (but after Poland's fail they wanted to anex LT anyway).

  • @khulik

    Soviets took Warsaw from German hands so what?

    Lithuanian independence was declared in Vilnius in 1918. Vilnius became the capital of Lithuania. In 1918 the Soviets attacked Lithuania and took eastern and northern Lithuania. In 1919 Poland attacked the Soviets, invaded Lithuanian territory and captured Vilnius. Lithuania beat Soviets at Ukmerge and pushed them to Daugavpils. Polish refused to acknowledge Lithuanian independence and attacked Lithuanian units in several places.

  • @mnplastic1

    "Soviets took Warsaw from German hands so what?"-when?

    "Lithuanian independence was declared in Vilnius in 1918"-Otto von Bismarck declared raise of German Reich in Paris.

    "Vilnius became the capital of Lithuania"-if we would in 1918 claim Chicago or Paris as our capital, Americans/French should give us back this city?

    "invaded Lithuanian territory and captured Vilnius"-I repeat-it wasn't Lithuanian territory.

  • @khulik "Soviets took Warsaw from German hands so what?"-when?

    cha cha cha. Have you ever read the history? In 1945. So now all Poland belongs to Russia. Isn't it?

    "Otto von Bismarck declared raise of German Reich in Paris." Was Paris capital of Germany for 600 years?

    "Vilnius became the capital of Lithuania"-if we would in 1918 claim Chicago or Paris as our capital, Americans/French should give us back this city?

    Was Chicago ever part of Poland? Like lets say 12,000 years?

  • @mnplastic1

    @mnplastic1

    Yep, everybody knews that. I asked, because I didn't know if you were talking about 1920 (2 yrs after I WW) or 1945.

    "So now all Poland belongs to Russia. Isn't it?"-according to Ribbentrop-Molotov pact almost all today's Poland should belong to III Reich, all Lithuania-to USSR. We fought with this pact, you accepted this.

    "Was Paris capital of Germany for 600 years?"-was Lithuanians majorty in Wilno?

    And was something like "Wilno" or "Vilnaus" 12000 years ago?

  • @khulik If I let my flat to Poles the majority will be Poles. Does it belong or ever belonged to Poles? - never.

    It is clear that majority in many cases means nothing, otherwise the USA will have to give one state after another to Mexico. It seams you clearly do not understand the point.

  • @mnplastic1

    Some of your countrymen says, that they're "polonised Lithuanians"...

  • @mnplastic1

    Was something like "Lithuanians" 12000 years ago?

  • @khulik Yes. They spoke Lithuanian dialects without huge change.

  • @mnplastic1

    You asked them? :)

  • @mnplastic1

    "Daugavpils"-(in PL Dźwińsk). Great! And you thrown this shit onto your "Latvian brothers". And in January 1920 we with Latvian army had to kick them out of Latvia.

    "Polish refused to acknowledge Lithuanian independence and attacked Lithuanian units in several places."-refused only if it goes about borders. And I have to remind you, that nobody knows who started shooting. If you tell that Poles-it wil be the best prove, that you are fabricating facts.

  • @khulik Read history. They refused acknowledge Lithuanian or Ukrainian independence. They conquered western Ukraine and tried to grab the rest of it. Pilsudski planed to the same with Lithuania.

  • @mnplastic1

    Ukrainian? Then don't tell me, "read history". Ukrainians in 1920 were our allies against Bolscheviks and Poland accepted Ukrainian Peope Republic (no, it had almost nothing in common with Ukrainian SSR).

    "They conquered western Ukraine"-Lwów was Western Ukraine?

  • @khulik Yes, indeed. Western Ukraine, in which vast majority of the population was Ukrainian. Polish speakers tended to live in cities where they were Polonized due to hundreds of years of Polish state language. Even then Polish speaker were just 20%.

    Allies they became after Poland invaded and conquered them. Allies by force and then annexation which included closure of Ukrainian schools etc.

  • @mnplastic1

    Lwów was absolutly and legally polish (it came into Poland by similar way which Mazowsze).

    "Even then Polish speaker were just 20%."-I can see, that you've read Ukrainian nationalist propaganda. Well, I must inform you, that polish speakers were 50% in all "Western Ukraine" and in Lwów-more than 70%.

  • @khulik I assume you read Polish sites as inofrmation in English state completely different information. Don't rely on Polish propaganda. There were only 20 pc of Polish speakers.

  • @mnplastic1 does this look like polish to you? Remiantis 1916 m. gruodžio 14 d. (Vokietijos okupacija) duomenimis, Vilniuje buvo 138 794 gyventojai, iš kurių 53,67 % sudarė lenkai (74 466 gyventojai), 41,45 % žydai (57 516), lietuviai 2,09 % (2 909), rusai 1,59 % (2 219), vokiečiai 0,63 % (880), baltarusiai 0.44 % (644) ir kitų tautybių atstovai 0,13 % (193 gyventojai). be proud of lithuanian history, be proud to be lithuanian. don't subscribe to propaganda.

  • @polishranger

    No, Polish propaganda is that Vilnius belonged to Poland just because there were majority of Polish speakers in Vilnius. I never claimed that Polish speakers were not majority in the city. However, I can prove that Lithuanian speakers were majority in 5 counties out of 7 Lithuanian counties occupied by Poland - Druskininkai, Varena, Trakai, Svencionys and Ignalina.

  • @mnplastic1

    "No, Polish propaganda is that Vilnius belonged to Poland just because there were majority of Polish speakers in Vilnius."-which building in 1920 in Wilno was built by Lithuanians then? Which building in Wilno was built by Lithuanians since 1569?

  • @khulik Does it matter what furniture tenants brought in? :) Does it change ownership?

  • @mnplastic1 i didn't know that. i wouldn't doubt it though. about 83,000 lithuanians lived in pre war poland. so probably most of them lived in thouse counties. could you tell me if they were discriminated against by polish government? do you know the name of the most famous lithuanian who lived in pre war poland?

  • @polishranger If you could give number of Lithuanians living in Suwalki region I will give some numbers to think.

    Discrimination was simple - basicaly no secondary or higher education in Lithuanian. Churches were filled with Polish priest, abolishion of Lithuanian organisations, pressure to change surnames into Polish etc.

  • @mnplastic1 there are almost 8,000 lithuanians (according to the most recent census) living in poland. there are places in suwalki area, where lithuanians are actually a majority. you are talking about discrimination in pre war vilnius area... you can reverse that and it will all fit the disrimination in pre war lithuania. stupid tit for tat game. just silly games the governments were playing.

  • @polishranger No, I need pre war number in Suwalki region.

  • @mnplastic1

    In Suwałki 1921: Poles 60%, Jews 34%, Lithuanians, Germans, Ukrainians, Belarussians 6%.

  • @khulik I need 1931 number - not pc.

  • @khulik It means that about 15,000 Lithuanians were in Suwalki and all population was about 38,700. 41% Lithuanians! Not less than 6% like Polish 1921 census insists. This number of Lithuanians was well recorded and accounted by Germans and Russians without Lithuanian and Polish involvement. It just shows how Polish census was skewed.

  • @mnplastic1

    "W 1921 r. miasto liczyło 16 780 mieszkańców, a w 1937 r. już 22 120 mieszkańców."-"In 1921 city had 16780 citizens, and in 1937-22120 citizens". These your 15000 (you should rather tell 20000) were around Puńsk and Sejny. And there was no such region even in II RP, which had only xx000 citizens.

  • Comment removed

  • @mnplastic1 here you have lithuanian statistics from 2001. Dabar lietuviai yra vyraujanti grupė: 2001 m. Vilniuje gyveno 542 287 žmonės. Iš jų etniniai lietuviai sudarė 57,8 %, lenkai 18,7 %, rusai 14 %, baltarusiai 4 %, žydai 0,5 %, kiti – 5 %. took 85yrs for polish speaking lithuanian population of vilnius to dip below 18%. do you think official lithuanian statistics lie?

  • @mnplastic1

    Polish propaganda? The same, which some years ago said, that Lithuanians are our friends?

  • @mnplastic1

    "Treaty of Suvalkai with Poland, which Poland broke and invaded Lithuania again"- from this "invaded" it should be: "lands, which goverment in Kowno claimed as Lithuania's".

    Lithuania at the beggining of PL-USSR war told, that it will be neutral. Eye for eye.

    "Gdansk was independent city state and not part of Poland and it was 98%German.So there was nothing to exchange."-independent? I don't think so. It was controlled firstly by LoN, then by both Poland and Germany.

  • @khulik "Treaty of Suvalkai with Poland, which Poland broke and invaded Lithuania again"- from this "invaded" it should be: "lands, which goverment in Kowno claimed as Lithuania's".

    It was Lithuania's or a part of Lithuania annexed by Russia from the first Lithuanian settlements 10,000 BC until 1920 when Polish occupied the territory and then from 1939 until now. In 12,000 years it was part of Poland for 16 years! Vilnius was built by Lithuanians and was capital of Lithuania since 1323.

  • @mnplastic1

    "10,000 BC"-of course, but you are wrong. First Lithuanian was there 3 mln years ago. His name was Australopithecus :) Or Lithuanians are Neanderthals?

    Anyway, if Lithuania would be 10000 years ago, it would be older than Mesopotamia. And relax dude, in a while you will tell, that near Grunwald there were no polish forces, or there were few polish pesants, throwing stones, while Lithuania won using B-2 Spirit bombers :)

  • @khulik

    First people came into Lithuanian territory 12,000 years ago and remained until now without much change. This is why Lithuanian language is the closest European language to Sanskrit. So, dude, read the history first. Slavs, including Poles came to Baltic one of the last.

  • @mnplastic1

    Does it mean they were Lithuanians?

    "Poles came to Baltic one of the last."-of course. There were German tribes there, but they moved west.

  • @khulik Yes, even though they were not called Lithuanians for very obvious reasons.

  • @mnplastic1

    But you without permission wanted to force them to your rule.

  • @mnplastic1

    Krauts wanted Poland to give back Pomorze and instead they proposed part of Lithuania (for person who knows international pre-war history knews, that Hitler wanted alliance with Poland against USSR, but Poland refused (III Reich was as "friendly" for Poland, as USSR for Lithuania).

  • @khulik What part? Another Polish speaking? Poland was already close to be kicked out from the LoN for its invasion to Lithuania and constant breaking of treaties.

    "Lithuania at the beggining of PL-USSR war told, that it will be neutral. Eye for eye."

    Until Poland invaded Lithuania in 1919 and refused give back Lithuanian territory to Lithuania. So this is far from Eye for Eye. Lithuania recaptured that belonged to Lithuania in 1918 and then Polish imperialists attacked again.

  • @mnplastic1

    "kicked out from the LoN"-of course it was. Same as Lithuania.

  • @mnplastic1 you are not 100% truthfull here. the treaty of suvalkai (suwalki) was a temporary truce with temporary ceasefire lines. all the while poland wanted to have a plebiscite (referendum) in the disputed territories (as was the idea in all cases of land dispute prescribed by the treaty of versailes) lithuania refused so pilsudski and zeligowski conspired to take vilnius. in the long run lithuania benefited more from this anexation than poland did.

  • Hmm, 1939 capital of Lithuania was Vilnius?

  • Comment removed

  • @neiroimlex Vilnius was allways a capital of Lithuania, even after polacks anexed it

  • Comment removed

  • @juokis

    yea yea yea, but how many % Lithanian people was in before 1939 in Wilno, You now?

    This was a multinationals big town whit a Germans, Jude and most of Polish people and no many of LITHUANIAN

  • @neiroimlex percentage of the population means that London doesnt belonge to England or even United Kingdom anymore?

  • Comment removed

  • @juokis

    Poles in London are (in big number) from 1940. Poles in Wilno were for almost half of this city's history majorty.

  • @khulik depends on what u'r calling "city's history", poles came there only when Poland took Lithuanian rulers.. Vilnius existed long before it happens

  • @juokis

    Wilno (Vilnaus) was built in XIII century if I good remember. In half of XVI century it was Union of Lublin, and city from this time were more and more polish. We know, that in XVII century it was for sure polish if it goes about langauge (we cannot say ethnicity, because there were no nations in that times-there were servants of king/dutch...). Although we had massive depolonisation from end XVIII century, in early XX century most ppl in Willno were Poles, according to Germans.

  • Comment removed

  • @khulik

    German speakers were majority in Prague and Bratislava. Hungarian speakers were later majority in Bratislava. Swedish speakers in Helsinki, Danish speakers in Tallinn. Russian speakers are majority in Kiev and Minsk, Alma Ata, Riga and many other capitals. It is natural because capital residents tend to speak state language especially because there are many civil servants. However, that doesn't give any rights to invaders like Polish to grab any lands which never belong to them.

  • @mnplastic1

    "German speakers were majority in Prague and Bratislava. Hungarian speakers were later majority in Bratislava."-both true.

    "like Polish to grab any lands which never belong to them."-did I miss something? All of these countries (exept Swe/Fin and Da/Est) did similar to Poles. Diffrence between Poles and Lithuanians in 1920 were not language (Many "Lithuanians" only could speak polish or russian) simple: polish wanted lands, were majorty were Poles, LT wanted cities, in which...

  • This is Pilsudski’s propaganda. Out of whole Lithuanian territory occupied by Poles only Vilnius and Salcininkai counties had the Polish speaking majority. The rest of counties: Varena, Druskininkai, Trakai, Svencionys, Ignalina had and has Lithuanian speaking. This was nothing to do with “Polish” and everything with the failed conquest of Lithuania which Pilsudski had in his dreams. If Lithuanians had not defeated Polish invaders at Sirvintai Pilsudski would claim another “Polish” town Kaunas.

  • @mnplastic1

    Do you know, what propaganda means? Propaganda isn't true-it's a lie or part-true. Dmowski's made propaganda, Piłsudski exept mobilisation posters during PL-USSR war had propaganda in his dark place (ass) . Believe me-if not Piłsudski, Dmowski and his ND would earse LT from map.

    "Varena, Druskininkai, Trakai, Svencionys, Ignalina"-possible, but I dn't think so. In "Liaude" (territory north of Kowno/Kaunas) there were 300 th. Poles. They disappeared mostly before war.

  • @khulik ""Varena, Druskininkai, Trakai, Svencionys, Ignalina"-possible, but I dn't think so."

    It is up to you.

    More than 30,000 Lithuanians disappeared from Suwalki before the war.

    How do you call Pilsudski order to invade Lithuania and then claim that it was done by mutineers and after that instead of shooting mutineers for a treason making them heroes? This is a brilliant example of propaganda.

  • Comment removed

  • @mnplastic1

    ...we had few Lithuanians (if I remember good, 56 in Grodno/Hrodna, similar in Białystok).

  • @khulik Lithuanians, like Czechs, Slovakians, Latvians, Estonians, Irish many other nations wanted their capitals back even when in their capitals national language was no longer spoken. You should know that almost nobody speaks Irish in Dublin even now.

  • @mnplastic1

    Yep, because Irish speak English today, but they never lost their nationality.

    In case of Latvia and Estonia russification was forced. But in Czechoslovakia and Lithuania germanisation/"hungarisation"/­polonisation was peacefull. If it wasn't, then name battles, wars.

  • @neiroimlex

    If you let your flat to anybody and then tenant claims that he is the owner of the flat what do you do? I simply call police and throw out the nasty tenant from the flat.

    There many places where Polish are majority around the world. They even tried to make the second state language Polish in Ireland. If you don't like the rules of the tenancy don't go live there and especially don't invade with your relatives and then claim it belongs to you.

  • @mnplastic1

    "There many places where Polish are majority around the world. "

    For instance?

    "If you let your flat to anybody and then tenant claims that he is the owner of the flat"

    You did this with Belarussians in XIII century and in Poland in 20' of XX century.

    "I simply call police"

    "Police" (League of Nations) proposed plebiscite, on which Poland agreed, Lithuania not.

    "They even tried to make the second state language Polish in Ireland" XD, I will even not comment this.

  • @khulik Another propaganda. Neither Poland nor Lithuania wanted plebiscite. Poland already lost two plebiscites to Germany including East Prussia therefore didn't want another fiasco. Lithuania didn't want because Polish military occupied the territory.

    "You did this with Belarussians in XIII century and in Poland in 20' of XX century."

    What we did?

    ""There many places where Polish are majority around the world. "

    For instance?"

    Parts of London or Dublin.

  • @mnplastic1

    Why shouldn't we want plebiscite, when we were sure of victory? On Masuria we totally failed, but everybody new, that:

    a)Germans sent on Silesia lots of ppl borned there, and that's why they won. We knew as well, that even if Lithuanians would sent there all their ppl borned in Wilno region, they would lost anyway. We weren't afraid of these kinds of "fiasco"

    b)Masurian plebiscite was organised, when polish army was retreating in disorder, so exept few ppl, nobody wanted to vote.

    b

  • @mnplastic1

    "Lithuania didn't want because Polish military occupied the territory."-Lithuania told about it's borders wthout talking with citizens of the city. They just told:" this is ours, if Poland will cross this (accepted by nobody) border, we will recognize it like agression". So, you are still insulting us (this your "history is indeed an insult), because of our reaction on your arrogance.

    P.S. Lithuania was too afraid of even one plebiscite-fiasco and you're calling this " because P..

  • @khulik Well then read the history once again and find out why Poland refused to carry out plebiscite. I don't know what propaganda was used by Pilsutski to cover this fact but the fact remains the fact.

  • @mnplastic1

    Firstly: Poland proposed plebiscite on special rules, LoN accepted, Lithuania refused.

    Secondly: LoN proposed plebiscite on it's own rule, both refused.

  • @khulik So why Poland refused Lithuanian rule and why Poland didn't want "neutral" rule?

  • @mnplastic1

    And why Lithuania didn't want Polish rule?

    Neutral probably wouldn't sove anything.

  • @mnplastic1

    "Parts of London or Dublin"

    Unfortunatly not :)

    If it would be like that, we, as bastards would use other Żeligowski to make mutiny there and occupy it. :)

    "What we did?"

    Conquered their land and later, in 1920 (and still) claimed, like "ethnic Lithuanian land" (although I don't understand what exacly "ethnic land" means, but I can see in other Lithuanians texts, that this word is a "special guest" in LT propaganda). It's about Grodno (especially).

  • @khulik Study history and find out Lithuanian ethnic lands. Vilnius region was always Lithuanian. However after union with Poland, Lithuanians were Polonized. There were no arrival of Poles into region as Lithuania was always considered backward country by Poles.

  • @mnplastic1

    Once again I ask you: what is "ehnic land"?

  • @khulik Study history and find out Lithuanian ethnic lands. Vilnius region was always Lithuanian. However after union with Poland, Lithuanians were Polonized. There were no arrival of Poles into region as Lithuania was always considered backward country by Poles.

    First of all all those lands belong to Lithuania since XIII century. It belong to Poland 0 years before it invaded Lithuania and Russia in 1919. Could you count the difference? Grodno was part of Lithuania since 1240.

  • @mnplastic1

    I repeat: WHAT A F*** HELL MEANS "ETHNIC LAND"?

    "Vilnius region was always Lithuanian."-yep? And maybe Lithuanians built all human civilisation?

    "Lithuanians were Polonized"-and?

    "Grodno was part of Lithuania since 1240."-and part of Slavic states since beggining.

  • @khulik But never Polish state and not even Polish ancestors. Is isn't it?

  • @mnplastic1

    My surname shows, that my family came somewhere from Belarus probably in XVII century. If I would live in Wilno in 1920, I wouldn't let Lithuanians decide on my natioanlity anyway.

  • If your surnamee is O'Connor and you pretend you are English it doesn't mean Ireland belongs to England just because all population speaks English.

  • @mnplastic1

    In Ireland nobody wants to be English.

    In Wilno 1920 almost nobody wanted to be Lithuanian.

  • @khulik Incorrect. Polish speakers were just 57.8. The rest of the population tended to be neutral or preferred to be Lithuania due to widespread Polish repressions against minorities and better standards of living in Lithuania. While Vilnius was periphery in Poland it was the capital in Lithuania. That gives you a clear answer why Poland was afraid of LoN proposed plebiscite.