World War II started when Poland was invaded. Germany invaded from the west on 1st September 1939. Britain and France had a defensive pact with Poland and, two days later, declared war on Germany.
On 17th September, the USSR invaded Poland from the east. Britain and France never declared war on the USSR which, after Operation Barbarossa, joined the allies. Why the double standards?
Also, the same nations that guaranteed Polish freedom before the war, stood aside when, after the war, the USSR occupied Poland along with most of Eastern Europe. The so-called victors, Britain, France and the USA let this happen when they could have pushed the Soviets back. So what was the point of the war if it was to supposedly save Poland (and other nations) from German occupation just to allow The USSR to occupy these same countries?
Any thoughts on this?

JSP1488: Precisely!

It's worse than that though. Many Poles actually fought in both the French Resistance and the Battle of Britain. To put it bluntly, Churchill was a &*@%^%! )(&% for selling them out, but would we expect anything less from a man who gassed the Kurds and gave us the Gallipoli campaign? What always amazes me is how people lionise the man. What's even more amazing is that many Poles saw, and see, the U.S. as what saved them from Communism. Hello?! Who got you in that mess in the first place? Can we mention Yalta and Potsdam?

Personally, I think WW2 was even more inane than WW1. If it wasn't a criminal conspiracy, then it was gross incompetence on the part of the Allies.

Originally, Hitler had no beef with western Europe because he saw it as 1) of the same stock, 2) too crowded. However, he had a big problem with the Slavs (doubly against the Communist Russians) and intended to expand into their lands for "living room".

As such, given that the West wasn't prepared to take a stand for the people of Eastern Europe, it should have at least sat back and waited for Hitler and Stalin to tear each other apart, and then mopped up the survivor. Instead, we got a shattered West and a Communist East, and Europe has been on the downward slide ever since. Good one.

I think that you are being a bit unfair with your comments although what you say is based on fact. However, I think you also have to look at the dilemma that Britain faced at the time with France on its knees and the threat of invasion when Britain stood virtually alone. How could it have taken on the USSR at the time. If Britain had, it might be doubtful if Hitler would have invaded Russia after breaking its non agression pact with her. Don't forget that the USSR lost many more men in fighting Hitler than the USA and the allies put together. As for Yalta you will find that it was FDR, who was an ill man at the time, gave into Stalin and very much against Churchill's will, gave much of Eastern Europe away. Britain by that time was in no position to argue having a devestated economy and exhausted population with many cities in ruins.

Many year ago when I was a postgraduate, another postgradute who was researching WWII remarked that the communiques between Britain and Poland at that time were such that Britain was doing everything it could to avoid coming to Poland's assistance. I did not see this primary material, but was told that Britain tried to impose conditions that Poland could not meet.

Perhaps others have access to the same primary sources. it would be interesting to
know what was going on in the background.

JSP1488 said: "The so-called victors, Britain, France and the USA let this happen when they could have pushed the Soviets back."

Considering the massive sacrifices the Soviets made on the Eastern front, Moscow felt a sense of entitlement to Eastern Europe and was prepared to defend that claim. The Western Allies were simply not prepared to risk open confrontation with the Soviets, especially when they needed Moscow's co-operation in occupied Germany. Churchill did attempt to ensure free and fair elections in post-war Poland, but if memory serves me correctly, Stalin had the British-backed Polish government-in-exile murdered in favour of Boleslaw Bierut and his cronies.

It wasn’t only that “Moscow felt a sense of entitlement to Eastern Europe” but, it is alleged, Stalin had plans to take over Western Europe too. According to the book “Hitler: Stalin’s Stooge”, Stalin envisioned World War II as a replay of World War I, in which the Europeans would destroy each other and be ripe for conquest. While Germany was fighting in the west, Stalin planned to defeat Hitler in a massive surprise attack; Hitler pre-empted him by two weeks. This book followed closely the claims in “Icebreaker: Who Started the Second World War?”, written by Viktor Suvorov, an ex-Soviet intelligence defector. The plot thickens, doesn’t it?