Wladyslaw Sikorski survives

Because the Allies were timid, overtrusting chickens who vastly overestimated the honesty of the Soviets.

But what would happen if they were able to get to Poland before Stalin did? The war would have to go on without Stalin's help and the effort to defeat Hitler would have to be borne by US and Britain alone. The war would last longer and Stalin would also be very angry after he had been denied Eastern Europe
 
But what would happen if they were able to get to Poland before Stalin did? The war would have to go on without Stalin's help and the effort to defeat Hitler would have to be borne by US and Britain alone. The war would last longer and Stalin would also be very angry after he had been denied Eastern Europe

But on the way to Poland from northern Italy the U.S. and British forces would already have occupied Austria, western Czechoslovakia, and Silesia, giving them bases to strike at the heart of Germany.

And as for Stalin being angry, if he is blockheaded enough to invade Europe, if it's before July 1945 the Allies can invade through Iran and either the Caucasus or Central Asia, and if it's after July 1945... *cough**cough*nuke Moscow and Leningrad*cough**cough*
 
Last edited:
Sikorski wasn't really relevant in the overall scheme of things, neither was Poland. For example, one way that Poland could have been saved would be if the Allies pressed north after breaking through the Gothic Line during Operation Olive, then through the Ljubljana Gap into Austria, Hungary, Czech Republic and then into Poland. So why didn't it happen?

Because any time the Allies tried anything fancy instead of relying on fire-power & methodical preparation, the Germans made them regret it. The Germans considered the Allies morbidly sensitive about their flanks. And small German formations & ad-hoc battle-groups stalled countless Allied advances

Plus they had Mark''Jackass'' Clark running things in Italy.
That didn't help...


But on the way to Poland from northern Italy the U.S. and British forces would already have occupied Austria, western Czechoslovakia, and Silesia, giving them bases to strike at the heart of Germany.

And as for Stalin being angry, if he is blockheaded enough to invade Europe, if it's before July 1945 the Allies can invade through Iran and either the Caucasus or Central Asia, and if it's after July 1945... *cough**cough*nuke Moscow and Leningrad*cough**cough*

:rolleyes:

Yeah, because democratic nations who had been praising ''our gallant Soviet allies & Uncle Joe'' to the heavens. Can pull a face-heel-turn and break every public & diplomatic agreement with the Soviets without a major fucking domestic backlash.
 
Last edited:
seraphim74 said:
They still wanted the Soviets to help with Japan.
Wanted, but didn't actually need. All it took is a trifle more sense in DC to allow Japan's surrender in April or May '45, & Sov aid becomes moot.
Alternate History Geek said:
Because the Allies were timid, overtrusting chickens who vastly overestimated the honesty of the Soviets.
Word.
Urban fox said:
Plus they had Mark''Jackass'' Clark running things in Italy.That didn't help...
What didn't help was invading Italy in the first place...:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:

Cook

Banned
Sikorski wasn't really relevant in the overall scheme of things, neither was Poland. For example, one way that Poland could have been saved would be if the Allies pressed north after breaking through the Gothic Line during Operation Olive, then through the Ljubljana Gap into Austria, Hungary, Czech Republic and then into Poland. So why didn't it happen?
Well asside from the very narrow front this would have required the Germans to defend, allowing them to scrape together a blocking force out of recovering units withdrawn from the Balkans, plus anything else on hand, it would have meant trying to supply an allied force out well beyond anything like the distance they had the logistics to handle; allied forces in North West Europe were provided with far more motorised transport for supplies than were forces in Italy and they still ground to a halt in Northern Belgium and the borders of Germany, not because of German resistance but simply because it was impossible to provide enough supplies for them to keep going from the ports of Normandy.

Until Antwerp was opened, providing the allies with not only the largest port in Europe, but a port right on the door step of the Third Reich, thereby massively shortening the distances that supplies had to be moved, reducing turn around times and fuel consumption proportionately, no attack into Germany stood any practical chance of succeeding.

Your proposal involves supplying an advancing army over a longer distance on much worse roads, from smaller ports and with less transportation.

Besides which, the allies didn't have the forces in Northern Italy to push beyond Italy anyway.
 
Sikorski wasn't really relevant in the overall scheme of things, neither was Poland. For example, one way that Poland could have been saved would be if the Allies pressed north after breaking through the Gothic Line during Operation Olive, then through the Ljubljana Gap into Austria, Hungary, Czech Republic and then into Poland. So why didn't it happen?

a. the Allies already had agreements in place as to who would go where.
b. logistics.
 
1) Sikorski is able to make things work, and accepts a kind of Finlandization to keep Poland free. Its foreign policy is constrained, but internally Poland is able to make its own decisions.

2) Sikorski tries to balance everything, but fails. Communist coup takes place (either internal or external), and we have the Poland of OTL, but probably with even more of a history of trouble.

3) Sikorski tried to balance everything, but fails. Attempted Communist coup sparks WWIII.

So the most likely scenario is still one where a puppet Communist regime is established. However, there remains an outside change that Poland might become an even more compromised Finland, that retains its own domestic destiny. This has massive impacts in how the Cold War will happen - and if anything like NATO or the Warsaw Pact develops. It's possible that Stalin will have his own empire in the Balkans, but there is a border of neutral states (Poland, Czechoslovakia, Austria) between the Western democracies and him.

Interesting analysis, well throught through. I still believe 1) and 3) are extremely unlikely.
We might ask ourselves, how would Stalin see a neutral, finlandized Poland? What examples would come to his mind? Well, Finland, and the Baltic states; and to a minor extent, Poland itself. Would he accept such a layout, given such precedents, being of a mind that the Westerners might attack the SU some day?
I say no.
 

Gregorius

Banned
Sikorski didn't have any influence on Allied politicians. Poland was a defeated country and Allies would decide themselves what its status would be.
Before his final "accident", he apparently planned to pull out of Allies in protest over Katyn and end of Polish sovereignty, rather than push for Finlandization of Poland or such.
We might have known the full details of the "accident"-unfortunately, probably only due to administrative reasons, UK extended the secrecy the files regarding the event secret until 2050, at the time when Poland restarted investigation a couple of years ago. Pure coincidence of course, and no conspiracy claims should be made.
 
Top