Thread: Going to War in a "Tankette"??

Originally Posted by Lunatock

The Polish Army was doing well defending Poland from the third reich. What really contributed to the conquest of Poland was soviet troops swarming into Poland from the east.

Hi Lunatock, Polish were defeated completelly when Soviets entered Eastern Poland..... they did not risk anything then.... It is wrong to say that Poland may have had chance to withstand if Soviets did not invade. After bloody campaign of 1919-20, Red Army was quite of high oppinion on Poles.... hence they waited until Poles collapsed completelly and then invaded. Look, Soviets start invasion on Septembe 17th, when Warsaw was encircled, main part of polish army was encircled near Vistula and some remains were defending on Romanian border.... Already then fragmented Polish army was doomed and Stalin was afraid that he would lose his peace pie... so he russhed into a defeated country....

That is why there any major battle against Soviet troops which captured around 300,000 prisoners. We all know that 22,000 of them (mostly officers) were executed in 1940 while remaining were either joined to Red Army or released....

Originally Posted by Garry

Hi Lunatock, Polish were defeated completelly when Soviets entered Eastern Poland..... they did not risk anything then.... It is wrong to say that Poland may have had chance to withstand if Soviets did not invade. After bloody campaign of 1919-20, Red Army was quite of high oppinion on Poles.... hence they waited until Poles collapsed completelly and then invaded. Look, Soviets start invasion on Septembe 17th, when Warsaw was encircled, main part of polish army was encircled near Vistula and some remains were defending on Romanian border.... Already then fragmented Polish army was doomed and Stalin was afraid that he would lose his peace pie... so he russhed into a defeated country....

That is why there any major battle against Soviet troops which captured around 300,000 prisoners. We all know that 22,000 of them (mostly officers) were executed in 1940 while remaining were either joined to Red Army or released....

i think timing does not matter, only thing is that The Soviets wasnt there to "protect" Poland...right?

even the Poles have been able to withstand against Germans it was sure that they will collapse with the Soviet attack.

and correct me if i am wrong but i think this was the 4th "sharing of Poland" between Germans and Russians...am i right?

Now about tankettes not being tanks. Well, that is true if you define tanks as gun armed. But they were designed with similar thing in mind, giving protection, having cross country capability and ment to deliver firepower. Whether this firepower is gun or MG is matter of detail.

Tanks differ from tankettes in two major areas.

1- Tankettes do not have turrets.

2- All tanks were fully enclosed.

Hmmmm, that's that. though to be honest 37mm gun was used briefly and replaced by larger calibres

Tank cannon from 1916 to 1939 are very ecclectic. The first cannon mounte don a tank had better anti-tank capabilites than any gun mounted on any tank in 1939 found west of the Vistula (British naval 6pdr). The first turreted tank to mount a cannon rahter than MG's nmounted the short barreled low velociy 37mm. This same type of gun and tank was still in use as late as the invasion of Sicily. post war the main british giun was the three pounder, but they entered WW2 with the 2 pounder. America's fleet of Liberty Mk VII's was the biggest force of heavy tanks in the world in the 20's. By the 30's the US outlawed tanks over 11 tons.

The US T-20 medium tank mounted a 57mm gun before the weight laws, this was a ta time when no one else was thinkign of using tanks as the anti-tank weapon.

As zraver metioned, the Poles real fault was forward defense. In a few days, 1/3 of their army was cut off from supplies and C2. Had they not done that, the Germans would have took even longer. They weren't fighting Blitzkrieg style yet, so it woulda been a slogging match. One Germany woulda won probably, but with much higher casualties.

Originally Posted by Big K

i think timing does not matter, only thing is that The Soviets wasnt there to "protect" Poland...right?

even the Poles have been able to withstand against Germans it was sure that they will collapse with the Soviet attack.

and correct me if i am wrong but i think this was the 4th "sharing of Poland" between Germans and Russians...am i right?

Yep, it was 4th Sharing. Poles would have better chosen their aly from either USSR or Germany.... being opposed to both was calling for a problem. It was clear from the very begining that Poland CAN NOT fight both... and that Great Brittain and France would not move a finger to help them!!! So why not to aly with one against another.... Hitler offered Poland to unite against USSR but they DECLINED with despise!

I was so surprised to learn that Politician who got them INTO THAT TROUBLE is now a national hero!!! What an irony.... he was damn stupid and but his nation admires him for that!!!

Still, Lunatock stated that Poles were fine before Soviets got in... while history states that Soviets were very cautious and entered only when they could not have any serious resistance => Germans did all the job for both....

Originally Posted by Stan187

As zraver metioned, the Poles real fault was forward defense. In a few days, 1/3 of their army was cut off from supplies and C2. Had they not done that, the Germans would have took even longer. They weren't fighting Blitzkrieg style yet, so it woulda been a slogging match. One Germany woulda won probably, but with much higher casualties.

Exactly the same guy who was rulling their forces become their national hero today.... what a joke

Garry , maybe some people , even politicians simply had moral standards ? And by 1939 , the most people viewed Britain still as the most important power , having Britain on your side was much more desirable than Germ. or Sov.Union .

@Garry,

i think the problem was not "going in to trouble". they knew that the trouble can find and already found them many times before.

so they had to make a choice.

i think choosing the "right" side was the only thing left to make.

in 1939 Poland was sandwiched between two powers both with territorial designs on it. Who exactly were they supposed to gobbled up by, allying with one would have sparked an instant war with the other?

It was either fight and get taken over, or just let them take over. While it might have spared them a little as far as losses went, they chose to fight instead. I think there is something to be said for that.