The people of Poland

[Legbreaker]

I've seen an increase over the past few years in people seemingly believing that in T2K the Polish people are apparently more likely to defect to the west than to fight against them. I'd like to list a few reasons why I feel that in the T2K timeline this is very unlikely.

1. Germany invaded Poland in 1939
I think we know how much the Poles suffered over the next 6 years of occupation....

2. Germany invaded Poland in 1996 - again!
This is a clear cut violation of Poland's borders. Depending on which version you go by, NATO does not support Germany's actions for either weeks (2nd ed I think) or months (1st ed). France and Italy (I believe) go so far as to withdraw from NATO in protest.

3. The Polish people were badly treated by the west at the end of WWII.
The Polish government in exile were promised by the British that they would support them after the war. Obviously there had been a lot of good will prior to the war (England declared war on Germany after they invaded Poland).
Post war, once the Polish manpower and soldiering skill was no longer needed, Poles were made to feel extremely unwelcome - ignored in shops, etc in favour of pretty much anyone else there, passed over for jobs, rejected for housing and so on.
Although most knew what they faced by going home to Poland, many felt they had little choice if they wanted a roof over their heads and food in their children's bellies. That sort of treatment is going to leave a mark, and resurface when the west invade their lands.

4. The Soviets had decades to indoctrinate the Polish people against the west.
Propaganda campaigns must have had some effect. The Soviets had about 50 years to perfect it.

5. NATO nuked the hell out of Poland in their 1997 withdrawal.
Yes, the Soviets probably did a little of the damage too, but NATO wasn't hanging about to tell their side of the story. Once again, Propaganda comes into play.

That's the big 5 points, but I'm sure there's plenty more others can think up.

This is not to say individuals will not defect, even small units and groups, but on the whole it is my belief that the Poles as a nation (even the smoking crater that remains) is likely to be rather hostile to NATO, specifically Germans and to a slightly lesser extent the English and Americans (who deserted them in their hour of need in 1945).

[dragoon500ly]

I do believe that you hit the nail with the first blow of the hammer!

Excellent points!

[Targan]

Great summary Leg. I think that by 2000 the majority of Poles wouldn't be pro-WarPac or pro-NATO, they'd prefer to see all foreigners out of what was left of their shattered country. If they had to choose a preference it would probably be for the side they perceived to have caused the least amount of damage in their local area.

[Rainbow Six]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

1. Germany invaded Poland in 1939
I think we know how much the Poles suffered over the next 6 years of occupation....

Whilst I'm not disagreeing with you, I think it would be remiss not to point out that the Soviet Union also invaded Poland in 1939...

Personally I'm inclined to agree with Targan's point of view.

[B.T.]

Leg, a lot of points are defenitely right, but ...

I talked to several born Poles in the last few years, although I'd never say, these persons share the point of view of the Polish majority. All of the Poles I talked to really did not like communist Russia/Soviet Union (I would not go so far to say they all hated the Soviets.). There have been problems with the minority of Poles with German roots, but there are relatively many Poles with ties to Germany.

I personally think, Targan is right.

One should not forget, that the majority of the Poles are catholics. The Osprey Elite No. 10 "Warsaw Pact Ground Forces" mentiones the Polish chaplain corps, which is unique in the WarPac Armies. And the Soviets were not fond of that!
As Rainbow allready said, the Soviets participated in the invasion of Poland in '39. The Poles did not forget about the slaughter of more than 10 000 officers in the war. And the Soviets did nothing to help the uprisings in Warsaw in 1944 (Where the Home Army - the only kind of anti-communist movement - was killed by the Germans!). So: Although the Germans had been the enemy (and a mean and mercyless one!), the Soviets were not really friends.

All this said leads - IMHO - to the conclusion, that the Poles will not felt tied to the West or the East. The Soviets are supposingly as unwelcomed as the Germans!

[Rainbow Six]

I forgot about the Soviets sitting on their hands on the east bank of the Vistula whilst the Germans levelled Warsaw.

Re: the massacre of Polish officers at Katyn, I think the Soviets only admitted to that after the fall of the Berlin Wall, so I wonder how much the average Pole would have known about that, at least in a V1 timeline? Wikipedia says that Solidarity erected a memorial in 1981, so it would seem to have been out in the open - might have been a useful propaganda weapon for NATO to exploit at the start of 1997.

[Adm.Lee]

Katyn was pretty well known during WW2 among the Poles in exile, AFAIK. That was a big sticking point between the British and Polish governments, as the Poles didn't want to let Stalin off the hook, and the British (and later Americans) rather wished it would go away and not offend the Soviets. Since the information came from the Red Cross through the Germans, some wanted to believe it was a Nazi provocation.

If we're talking invasions, don't forget the 1919-20 Polish-Soviet War.

IMO, the bulk of the Polish population might wish to be rid of the Soviets, but NATO couldn't do much to win them over to active support. And yes, the German participation/leadership of the eastward drive should have depressed that support.

I hypothesize that at least some Polish individuals would have taken the opportunity to join the American/British elements of NATO in '97, but very few after that. A Polish Free Legion could have formed, but I don't think it would be even as big as a division. An argument may be that some would think if they help the Americans and British, then they could have some leverage against the Germans. Thus, my suggestion of an attempted coup among Polish army units in 2000 to suddenly become an independent actor.

[natehale1971]

I've always seen the Poles as being the irate parents of the school-aged hosts of a party that has completely trashed their house when they come home early from their weekend getaway. They don't give a damn who or what you are, just get the hell out of MY HOUSE!

And with how weakened both NATO and Warsaw Pact forces are, the Poles actually have the ability to push everyone out of their country if they were just able to get all of the Polish Nationals to actually work together. And that's the problem... You have the Poles divided into three major political power blocks (not counting the true independents like Krakow), The Pro-NATO Democratic government, the Pro-Warsaw Pact Communist government and the isolationist and Xenophobic group whose ideals have become Poland for Poles ONLY and are shooting at ANYONE NOT POLISH.

And in all honesty, the majority of ANY survivor communities would put on a friendly face to any armed force coming through their territory, if just to keep from getting raped and pillaged. And acting friendly and helping out while the forces are going where ever it is they are going, while keeping track of them for their TRUE allegiance is what is actually happening.

This gives you alot more chances for Role-playing in the setting, especially when the Polish community that is being so nice and helpful is just waiting for you to leave so they can tell which of the three Polish governments they are actually a part of, all about you!

[Legbreaker]

Originally Posted by B.T.

I talked to several born Poles in the last few years, although I'd never say, these persons share the point of view of the Polish majority.

This illustrates my overall point rather well I think. There's been roughly 20 years since the Soviets had any real influence in Poland. 20 years for the Poles to form their own opinions without the propaganda of the Soviets ringing in their ears.
What Poles today are saying isn't really relevant to the world of T2K.

Originally Posted by Rainbow Six

I forgot about the Soviets sitting on their hands on the east bank of the Vistula whilst the Germans leveled Warsaw.

Again, 50 years of propaganda on the Soviets part to level the blame for this squarely on the Germans. Perhaps the Soviets had implicated the other allies, specifically the Americans - they wouldn't release supplies through the lend lease system or something. The scope here is limitless given the time frame and captive audience.

Originally Posted by Rainbow Six

Wikipedia says that Solidarity erected a memorial in 1981, so it would seem to have been out in the open - might have been a useful propaganda weapon for NATO to exploit at the start of 1997.

True, however NATO only had a few short months to act before they were driven back almost in disarray. While PsyOps are certainly important in my view, I doubt there'd have been the time available to undo the previous 5 decades. Remember also that NATO did not move across the border and join the fight until around December 1996. Yes they reached into the Soviet Union, however most of Poland was only under NATO control for a relatively brief period.

Originally Posted by natehale1971

And with how weakened both NATO and Warsaw Pact forces are, the Poles actually have the ability to push everyone out of their country if they were just able to get all of the Polish Nationals to actually work together.

Not likely! Take a look at the information we're given in the books and you can quickly see the Poles barely have the strength to hold onto what little land they're already sitting on. Equipped with T-55's and a few T-72s, and mounted on horses, they don't stand a chance against even one smallish Soviet Army let alone the superior firepower of the west.

One more point I forgot in my original post, is that the locals, and it really doesn't matter what nationality they are, are likely to be friendly, or at least grudgingly supportive, of whatever military unit is in the vicinity, especially if they're making no signs of moving on. By being actively hostile, even passively resistant, they will invite the wrath of that heavily armed unit.

It could be said that Poland actually won the war long term. With the help of their PACT allies, they ejected NATO from their borders. Ok, there's nothing left of the country and the population suffered hideous casualties, but hey, the aim was essentially achieved!

[helbent4]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

What Poles today are saying isn't really relevant to the world of T2K.

Leg,

I would think that's being far too simplistic.

At least during the Cold War the Poles were heavily pro-western. Communist propaganda was relative ineffective; 10 million Poles were members of Solidarność, over 25% of the population (and the largest trade union in the world). This doesn't necessarily make them as pro-western in the T2K timeline (and it depends on if you use v2.2, v1 or something in between) but communist propaganda certainly wasn't all that effective when it was around. My point being that the Poles in T2K may well be similar to the ones nowadays because Poles have always gone their own way.

At the least, most Poles should be primarily self-interested. Probably they would be willing to work with Solidarność and the Home Army (the latter is my concept for the professional Polish military forces loyal to the Free Polish government). They would probably be more inclined towards NATO than the PacWar nations, but it shouldn't be taken for granted.

Tony

[Legbreaker]

Further research shows that the "free Polish Government" aka Polish Government in exile was essentially a joke after 1946. Virtually nobody even acknowledged it's existence, let alone bothered to talk to them. Whatever western backed Polish "Government" existed couldn't possibly be much more than a puppet, heavily dependant on the whims of NATO to keep itself in even the most basic of shape (and remember that virtually nothing remains of the pre-war governments of any nation).

It doesn't really matter which time line you use, 1.0 or 2.x. Both result in Germany invading Poland for what is essentially a flimsy (at best) excuse to protect a handful of ethnic Germans who had enlisted in the Polish military and refused to obey lawful orders. The only significant difference is the time between German action and that of the rest of Nato.

If, as you say Poles are really only interested in getting everyone else out of their country, why would the Soviets have allowed them virtual free reign over the Baltic coastline? There are effectively no Soviet units anywhere near the vitally important Baltic (if only for it's usefulness to transport bulk supplies). This allows a supposedly unwilling ally to cut off the bulk of the Soviet units in the south of the country from "easy" (if anything can be termed that in 2000) resupply (what little there may be, or hope to be) from "home". Yes, supplies could be hauled from the Ukraine region across land, but only slowly and at great risk from the marauders infesting the area.

Poles today, or even ten years ago, are in my opinion, different to those inhabiting the wasteland of T2K. T2K Poles haven't seen the fall of communism, and the lifting of the repressive boot. Yes there were protests and Solidarność, but in T2K these almost certainly were crushed, or their energies redirected by communist infiltrators (who probably existed IRL but weren't as effective as I'm assuming they were in T2K).

I believe the most telling point though is No.5 of the first post in this thread. NATO destroyed Poland in a desperate attempt to slow the advancing Soviet "liberators". The Soviets, Czechs and possibly a handful of other nations forced NATO out and could be seen as saviours by the populace, particularly those in the east of the country who were under NATO control only briefly.

Now there's absolutely nothing to say there can't be individuals or small groups supporting the west either overtly or covertly, but bulk of the evidence I can find clearly indicates the majority are anti-NATO in outlook. They might not like the Soviets, but they're still probably glad they're there and superficially at least on their side.

[Rainbow Six]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

It doesn't really matter which time line you use, 1.0 or 2.x. Both result in Germany invading Poland for what is essentially a flimsy (at best) excuse to protect a handful of ethnic Germans who had enlisted in the Polish military and refused to obey lawful orders. The only significant difference is the time between German action and that of the rest of Nato.

I could be mistaken here (in which case feel free to correct me!) but I think there is a difference between the two time lines - as best as I can recall the ethnic Germans refusing to obey orders refers to V2.x only and doesn't feature at all in V1. I'm at work so don't have any books in front of me, but going from memory wasn't the V1 invasion of Poland a combined NATO operation from the outset (or at least those nations still in NATO)?

[helbent4]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

Further research shows that the "free Polish Government" aka Polish Government in exile was essentially a joke after 1946.

Leg,

You are confusing the old Free Polish Government with the one set up in T2K. Different organisations, the first is irrelevant.

Doing some reading, the Soviets didn't particularly trust the Poles. They especially didn't trust the airborne division in a political sense, although they were quite willing to use them to attack NATO. Attacking the Baltic coast was basically a suicide mission, the Poles knew it and admitted it among themselves.

Really, no Soviet ally was allowed free reign in any meaningful sense. That seems like a complete misunderstanding of how the Soviets ran their show (or had the PacWar run its show) unless I'm not following your point. Simply put, there was no real trust there.

The Poles in T2K are directly descended from their real-world versions, therefore should will share many of their characteristics. The biggest mark against NATO would be the destruction of Poland in 1997, but until then the Poles would at least be able to thank them for kicking out the Soviets before then. While we can debate what happened to Solidarność in the mean time, its still around by 2000 and likely still supported by the CIA (I see the DIA backing a reconstituted Home Army).

That gratitude shouldn't be taken for granted, but it's probably not going to be blind hatred in most cases (some, yes).

Tony

[headquarters]

Imho - and h being for humble :

The Poles would get into a civil war. There was massive popular support for the pro democratic and by assosciation western aligned factions from the late 1970s. A huge chunk of the Poles were actually quite anti Russian in the sense that they wanted them out and their Polish puppets deposed.Solidarinocz was a popular movement that in true revolutionary fashion managed to outwit,outlast and and then oust the secret police of an oppressive regime. Imhumbleo this would be the dominant factor if a NATO invasion supported it and did not alienate it through say bombarding or nuking Polish cities etc.

On the other hand, a fair share of Poles were card holding party members or inclined to lean that way. They would be in a hard place if the system they had invested their lives and themselves in was to be dissolved. The USSSR gave aid and had a finger in every pie about Polish reconstruction post WWII.
I believe it safe to say that this would be serious contender.

A Nato invasion of Poland in the T2K timeline would mean that these factions probably would come to blows and become belingerents of the Bloc or NATO forces.

So a typical grey area answer from me - yes AND no. The Poles would fight NATO. But NATO would be seen as liberators by many too.

[Adm.Lee]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

Further research shows that the "free Polish Government" aka Polish Government in exile was essentially a joke after 1946. Virtually nobody even acknowledged it's existence, let alone bothered to talk to them. Whatever western backed Polish "Government" existed couldn't possibly be much more than a puppet, heavily dependant on the whims of NATO to keep itself in even the most basic of shape (and remember that virtually nothing remains of the pre-war governments of any nation).

I agree with you that the PFG is merely vestigial, until perhaps NATO needs it for propaganda or administration when they drive the Sovs out of Poland in 1997. Then, I would think they would get funding and support.

If, as you say Poles are really only interested in getting everyone else out of their country, why would the Soviets have allowed them virtual free reign over the Baltic coastline? There are effectively no Soviet units anywhere near the vitally important Baltic (if only for it's usefulness to transport bulk supplies). This allows a supposedly unwilling ally to cut off the bulk of the Soviet units in the south of the country from "easy" (if anything can be termed that in 2000) resupply (what little there may be, or hope to be) from "home". Yes, supplies could be hauled from the Ukraine region across land, but only slowly and at great risk from the marauders infesting the area.

Given NATO's presumed air- and sea- superiority in 1996-1999, I don't see how the WP has any meaningful shipping capacity left in the Baltic in 2000.

IMO, the Western Front put the three Polish armies on its left, because there wasn't much to defend up there, and they have the widest part of the Oder between them and the Germans. Since the last Pact offensive was in the southern part of the front (into east Saxony, late in 1999, I think), the Poles are not the main front. However, we have the specter of both the Polish 8th and 14th MRDs deserting (both in late '99?) to take over Krakow and Upper Silesia. Obviously, some Polish forces were based in the south at that point.

Right now, I'm wondering if the KGB and its Polish affiliate purged the command structure after that, or alerted its commissar-equivalents. Funny, now that I think of it, we see in the modules the KGB and GRU, the ORMO and ZOMO, but the Polish secret police, the UB, IIRC, are non-existent. Wonder what happened to them?

[B.T.]

Leg,

the born Polish, which I talked to in the last years, were between 40 and 50 (At the time, I talked to them!). Although I did not tell them, that I asked them because I play a "strange" (from Polish point of view!) RPG, they all shared the same overall arguments. And all of them had served in the Polish Forces. Granted - nowadays they make their living in Germany, therefore we can assume that they are benevolent to the Germans or the BRD, but I still would say that the majority was more anti-Soviet than anti-Western.

You are right in your argumentation, that the West/NATO did more havoc to Poland. That's why a lot of Polish people will hate people from the West. But I do not see this as the opinion of the vast majority.

The whole situation is quite complicated.

And, Leg, I've meant, what I've written in my signature. I don't want to make someone angry. So, if you think I try to upset you - I don't, trust me!!

[Rainbow Six]

Sorry, my previous contributions to this thread have been made from work, so have, by necessity, had to be a bit on the brief side...

I think you could make convincing arguments for both points of view. Legbreaker’s point that NATO caused the most damage in the 1997 nuclear exchange is a perfectly good one (I may be mistaken but I think it was Trident missiles fired from a Royal Navy submarine that did for Warsaw). However, the use of propaganda has been mentioned several times in this thread, so I’d say it’s possible that NATO propagandists might try to put the blame for the destruction of Poland onto the Soviets (whilst at the same time the Soviets are blaming NATO). How widely each side’s propaganda is believed by the other is one of the many unknowns when considering this topic.

I think the Polish Government in Exile / Free Polish Congress / whatever you want to call it might enjoy a (very) brief flourish at the start of 1997 but would be pretty much out of the equation by the summer of that year (although I would expect it to serve as the main mouth piece for NATO propaganda in Poland until then). One point to consider is how few military units actually declared for it (two Border Guards Brigades iirc, but most of the Army remains loyal throughout most of the War, and when they do start to defect it is to local Governments such as Krakow and Silesia).

I have spent time in Poland with work; unlike BT I’ve never engaged in a direct conversation with a Pole that started “So, I play this RPG where your country is nuked to Hell...”, however I have spoken with Poles about the communist system, and one theme that I felt came across repeatedly was that communism encouraged conformity...you didn’t stand out from the crowd, didn’t put your head above the parapet...in a work environment you certainly didn’t suggest ways to do things that deviated from the established procedure...basically you didn’t display any individual initiative – you did what you were told. I just don’t see people like that rising up in mass revolt in 1997 (or later)...they were too indoctrinated (for lack of a better word), and as noted above, the Army remained loyal, which I think would be an influencing factor in any revolt.

That said, overall I remain inclined to agree with Targan. By the summer of 2000 I think most would be neither Pro Pact nor Pro NATO.

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

One more point I forgot in my original post, is that the locals, and it really doesn't matter what nationality they are, are likely to be friendly, or at least grudgingly supportive, of whatever military unit is in the vicinity, especially if they're making no signs of moving on. By being actively hostile, even passively resistant, they will invite the wrath of that heavily armed unit.

I think this is a very good point; I think the average Pole would have to be pragmatic about their situation and by the summer of 2000 any loyalty to pre War Governments would largely have ceased to exist - those living close to NATO cantonments, would ally with the NATO troops that are most likely keeping the marauders at bay, providing opportunities for employment, etc, whilst those close to Warsaw Pact Cantonments would side with the Warsaw Pact troops. Personally I don’t think it’s a case of allying with one side or the other– the average civilian simply has to look out for himself. It reminds me of a line in a Mike and the Mechanics song – “Swear allegiance to the flag, whatever flag they offer” (in this respect I don’t think the Poles are going to be any different from a number of other nationalities throughout Europe).

As others have said it’s certainly complicated...

[helbent4]

Originally Posted by B.T.

And, Leg, I've meant, what I've written in my signature. I don't want to make someone angry. So, if you think I try to upset you - I don't, trust me!!

BT,

My friend, for all the many faults and defects with regards to Legbreaker's personality (and for all I know, personal hygiene) I don't believe he would ever get upset at well-reasoned polite comments such as yours, even in disagreement. Please be reassured he just likes a good (but friendly) argument.

Legbreaker:

Personally, I just like the idea of some kind of Polish counter-weight to either PacWar or NATO running roughshod (literally, now horses are back) over their country.

Tony

[natehale1971]

It was Timeline 2.x that had Germany invading Poland over ethnic Germans refusing their orders... the entire 'Magnificent Seven' (because there was seven of them) comments during the short stories that illustrated the world setting.

[Legbreaker]

I'm just glad we've got a spirited debate going on. Everyone's opinions and thoughts are equally valid as far as I'm concerned and I'm always open to being proven wrong.
I, and many others may disagree, but if we can't express that disagreement in a civil manner then why are we bothering?

[helbent4]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

I'm just glad we've got a spirited debate going on. Everyone's opinions and thoughts are equally valid as far as I'm concerned and I'm always open to being proven wrong.

I, and many others may disagree, but if we can't express that disagreement in a civil manner then why are we bothering?

Leg,

Certainly, it's all in good fun!

It's good to keep in mind in this case there is no "right" or "wrong" answer. It's all a matter of opinion (even technical matters and facts can be disputed) so nothing will be proved either way.

Tony

[natehale1971]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

I'm just glad we've got a spirited debate going on. Everyone's opinions and thoughts are equally valid as far as I'm concerned and I'm always open to being proven wrong.
I, and many others may disagree, but if we can't express that disagreement in a civil manner then why are we bothering?

Exactly! (yes.... said in the voice of Chris Lambert's character from the first "Mortal Combat" movie)

I'm a political news junkie, and the biggest thing that irritates me more than anything else, is when they start calling you a racist, bigot and homophobe just because you believe in individual rights over collective rights. I elevate the individual PERSON over the group, because individuals are unique and precious. Groups are composed of... well, groups are just a mass of nameless and faceless blobs. Easily manipulated and exploited for nefarious means as history has shown time and time again.

[helbent4]

Leg,

I should also mention I'm not basing my views about Polish support for the Home Army/Solidarność completely out of thin air. Defections and even material support from the government (in this case, the communist government) or other warlord's troops closely resemble that in other popular struggles, such as the FMLN in El Salvador, Sandinistas in Nicaragua, Viet Minh and Viet Cong in Vietnam, etc. To a degree perhaps westerners are so used to being on the losing side of that equation it seems impossible it could work for us (or at least Polish PCs).

Solidarność enjoyed very wide (almost overwhelming) popularity before the Twilight War, and who's to say an updated version of the Home Army wouldn't enjoy the same respect during the war as it did during WWII? Granted, Solidarność/Home Army are not going to be as well-organised or centrally supported as these other movements, but that would be balanced out by an equally disorganised/despotic opposition. The hypothetical Home Army may not have inspired entire unit defections (other than the Border Guard Brigades), but the Viet Cong/ARVN did not have any former ARVN units as part of its TO&E, either, but could not be judged as ineffective.

Therefore, in the context of a popular struggle, I think it's not out of the question that Polish PCs affiliated with at least Solidarność and possibly some kind of Home Army could expect or at least hope for defections or support from the population. Support for NATO or the Russians, not so much, I agree!

In other words, I don't think Poles (as PCs) should be lumped in with NATO/PacWar with regards to expectations of defection/local support.

Tony

[StainlessSteelCynic]

I tend to agree that GDW's idea that various large groups of the Polish military/people would be pro-NATO is a bit idealistic (and even downright silly in some cases). Some Polish people I've spoken to have found it insulting that it was thought that they would be so pro-Western that they would just 'jump ship' to NATO given any chance to.
I think the Polish peoples loyalties would not be so much NATO or the Soviet Union as much as it would be: -
1. Poland
2. the Catholic church
3. the Communist ideal
4. WarPac/WTO
I think for many of them, NATO and Russia would not even really enter the equation.

The argument for the Communist State.
Under communism, everyone was entitled to free medical care & education and everyone was given an equal chance to advance themselves within reason (there were no blocks to women becoming engineers for example, but they weren't going to be allowed to be fighter pilots although any peasant farm boy/girl could become a high-ranking research doctor or so on).

The flipside of this is that conformity was encouraged and even today, Polish people generally are still quite conservative and conformist (try being a male with long hair even in 2010, you'll be treated like you're a girl by many men both young and old). Polish women were and still are generally expected to get an education, meet their future husband at school/university, work for a few years, get married & have children - and you are expected to stay married for life.

I agree that various individuals and even groups will be pro-NATO, pro-Western, pro-WarPact, pro-isolationist or whatever and so on but one of the primary sources for propaganda seems to be ignored. Poland is Catholic, if the Pope made an appeal to the Polish people to support NATO, there would be people who would do it, even those who ardently supported the communist regime. The power of the church in Poland is typically underestimated in most game treatments.

[Raellus]

Although I am mixing universes here- the alternate u of T2K and our current reality (or is it?)- I think that it's worth noting that, when given the choice, post-Cold War Poland chose to align with the West, forsaking the Russian Federation. That's cutting ties on a 50-year long association to join up with a 50-year rival power bloc. Isn't Poland currently a part of NATO? Yes, they are allied with the Germans and the U.S.- their historical nemesis and their main Cold War adversary respectively. Russia was not pleased at all at Poland's decision but the Poles did it anyway. Although I am not suggesting that Cold War Poland would have welcomed a NATO invasion with open arms, I don't think that they were as pro-communist/pro-Soviet/anti-West as some are suggesting either.

[Legbreaker]

I have grave doubts that the church would direct Poles to side for NATO, afterall, Poland is essentially defending itself from an invading force.
We also have the important fact that the Vatican is slap bang in the middle of Italy - an opponent of NATO and allied to the PACT at least by default. Admittedly the Vatican isn't a part of Italy, but when you're surrounded like that you do have to think about the potential consequences of your words....

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

I have grave doubts that the church would direct Poles to side for NATO, afterall, Poland is essentially defending itself from an invading force.
We also have the important fact that the Vatican is slap bang in the middle of Italy - an opponent of NATO and allied to the PACT at least by default. Admittedly the Vatican isn't a part of Italy, but when you're surrounded like that you do have to think about the potential consequences of your words....

And I don't disagree with you.
I'm not saying the Pope would tell the Poles to side with NATO, but if NATO were to use the idea of it, it could be the thing that sways some Polish groups to side with NATO (or at least not oppose them).
It needs to be considered that the Pope was Polish and the cult of Pope John Paul II is still strong to this day (they've named streets, parks and so on after him in many towns & cities)

[pmulcahy11b]

This could be the opening for a GM to put a high-level, charismatic religious figure NPC into his campaign -- whether in Poland or not.

[Rainbow Six]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

I have grave doubts that the church would direct Poles to side for NATO, afterall, Poland is essentially defending itself from an invading force.
We also have the important fact that the Vatican is slap bang in the middle of Italy - an opponent of NATO and allied to the PACT at least by default. Admittedly the Vatican isn't a part of Italy, but when you're surrounded like that you do have to think about the potential consequences of your words....

Originally Posted by StainlessSteelCynic

And I don't disagree with you.
I'm not saying the Pope would tell the Poles to side with NATO, but if NATO were to use the idea of it, it could be the thing that sways some Polish groups to side with NATO (or at least not oppose them).
It needs to be considered that the Pope was Polish and the cult of Pope John Paul II is still strong to this day (they've named streets, parks and so on after him in many towns & cities)

I agree with both of you - the Pope would be unlikely to openly support either side, but various factions (not just NATO but also people such as King Julian in Silesia) might falsely claim to have such support to increase their credibility.

Something similar came up before on this thread...

http://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.p...ht=pope&page=2

[pmulcahy11b]

Did Rome get nuked? Is the Pope even alive in T2K? Considering his fragile health even at that time, would he have been in a position to put in any two cents about the war?