Talk:Cieszyn/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Following the Czechoslovak invasion of Poland in January 1919, the city was divided in 1920 by the Conference of Ambassadors.

Czechoslovakia annexed the land, but "invasion" is too much. Xx236 13:40, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Well, there was a military invasion, with almost a week of fights, with several regiments of Poles defending the area against two Czechoslovak divisions and the Poles being pushed back almost to Wisła. If that is not an invasion then what was it? A friendly visit? Halibutt 13:45, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Halibucie, ni mosz tak na zajst rechtu ;) Pepiki dolozły pod Skoczów, a mój prastarzik się ta z nimi loł. D T G 18:05, 3 February 2006 (UTC) Ah, tobie chodziło o rzekę, a nie o miasto, teraz rozumię :)

Yes, here trully was an invasion in the past. D T G 18:20, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Zaolzie wasn't formally part of Poland, so Czechoslovakia eventually invided Zaolzie but not Poland. Xx236 12:20, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

After first World War there was an agreement between Polish Rada Narodowa Księstwa Cieszyńskiego and Czech Zemskym Narodnim Vyborem pro Slezsko that the part of Duchy of Cieszyn which was ethnically Polish should belong to Poland (76%) and rest (24%) which were more Czechs, the neighbourhood of Frydek and Silesian Ostrawa (the part of Ostrawa to the east of Ostravica river, Silesian Ostrawa was created, if I good remember from villages, one of them was so called Polish Ostrawa). Then in 23 January 1919 the Czechs invasioned that lands. They were stopped under Skoczów. There is a mistic legend in my family that my grandgrandfather fought in that battle ;) So, yes, Zaolzie belonged to Poland from the night between 5 XI 1918 to 28 VII 1920. D T G 10:12, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Citation needed in article about Czechoslovak invasion in 23 January 1919

Why sb add "Citation needed" to that info? Here truly was such an invasion. There were 30 polish prisoners of war killed with bayonets by Czechs, they are planted in Stonawa in Czech Republic. Czechs also dispatched injured captain Haller (brother of Józef Haller). You can go to Cieszyn, Mennicza Street, there is an archive were you can find all needed documents to citate that fact. Maybe it was a small conflict, Czechoslovaks attacked only a small land belonging to Poland (Cieszyn Silesia - my motherland), I can tell you that here still live people who remember exactly where Czechoslovak army drove, which roads they tooked. However nowadays we have good relationships with Czechs, and for us it's only a history, we must remember it, especially when some Czechs pass over conflict in 1919 and very loudly say about year 1938, and our pact with Hitler (untrue, but what can I do :S), however it is another story. D T G 19:23, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

My request for citation doesn't mean that I deny that Czechoslovaks took over the city militarily in 1919. I simply doubt the applicabiliuty of using the wording "Czechoslovak invasion of Poland" for this events. Strong terms are used too liberally around Wikipedia and I raise my objections when I see it. If someone can quote sources that call the '19 events the "Czechoslovak invasion of Poland", fine, and we can leave it then. I have not seen such phrasing that's all. Similarly, while it is correct to say that in '39 Poland participated in partitioning of Czechoslovakia, it is incorrect to say talk about "Polish invasion" in this respect. Please bring the citations or adjust the phrasing. Or I can do it myself, if others don't mind. --Irpen 00:06, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

As for the fact that Czechs took it by force in 1919, it's easy to find. e.g. in Piotr Wandycz, "Cena Wolności", p. 292 (which is a good synthetic book on history of central Europe BTW). As for "Czechoslovak invasion of Poland" maybe we could find better wording ? How about "Czech invasion of Cieszyn Silesia" instead ? Let me try this. Similarly, we would not be talking about 1938 "Polish invasion of Czechoslovakia", would we ? --_Lysy^talk 00:29, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

I believe we would. Otehrwise, why do you talk about "Soviet invasion of Poland" and not about "Soviet invasion of Western Belarus and Ukraine"? We should refrain from such a blatant double-dealing. Currently, every action by the Poles is termed "liberation" and every military action by the Soviets is either an "aggression" or "invasion". The Soviets saved Krakow from total destruction during the WWII, using a clever stratagem. Comparing the fate of their city with Dresden or Warsaw, the Cracovians should have been grateful to the Soviet soldiers forever. Instead, they refer to the liberation as "occupation" and sent the Marshal Konev statue back to Russia. When you chose to use such a vehement POV phrasing, please remember that Wikipedia is not a propaganda machine. --Ghirla | talk 10:01, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

,'the Cracovians should have been grateful to the Soviet soldiers forever. Instead, they refer to the liberation as "occupation" and sent the Marshal Konev statue back to Russia. Maybe because they were subject to terror of NKVD, had their relatives deported to Gulags, or murdered in Katyn, and endured half of century without freedom and in communist induced poverty When you chose to use such a vehement POV phrasing, please remember that Wikipedia is not a propaganda machine. --Molobo 10:15, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Davies uses "Czechoslovak invasion of Ciescyn (Těšín)" and I suggest we stick to it. No, I don't think that "Polish invasion of Czechoslovakia" is appropriate unlike "complicity in partitioning of Czechoslovakia". But this would relate to a Cesky Tesin article raher than this one. --Irpen 01:44, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

And why won't we simply stick all of the region's history in the article on... History of Cieszyn and Těšín rather than here and there? One size fits all, I'd say.. :) Halibutt 12:58, 15 February 2006 (UTC)