View Single Post
  #6  
Old March 3rd 04, 04:08 PM
Michael Petukhov
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message ...
"Michael Petukhov" wrote in message
om...


(2) Should one of the Contracting Powers become engaged in hostilities
with a European Power in consequence of action by that Power which
threatened the independence or neutrality of another European State in
such a way as to constitute a clear menace to the security of that
Contracting Party, the provisions of Article 1 will apply, without
prejudice, however, to the rights of the other European State
concerned.

WOW! "another European State" now.
------------------


Irony Mode On
Gee what a surprise when the original treaty referred to
'a European State' it really meant 'a European State'


Exactly. according to this SECRET PROTOCOL Britain and Poland agreed
to start aggresive war against "a European State" using ANY action
of that "a European State".


Try again Michael , the agreement states clearly that this only applies
if the action of that European states threatens the security of either
Britain or Poland.


Too wide range of cases to be true defensive pact.
Who will decide what is threat and what is not?
Imagine for a moment if Poland invaded Lithuania
in 1939 and USSR moved forces to protect
it against Poland would it "threatens the security of
either Britain or Poland"? Very probable scenario
in 1939 by the way. Poles tried actually ones and were
stoped by strong Stalin reaction only. I think this is
why Mr. Halifax signed that mutual assistence pact
with (Keith note) THE SECRET PROTOCOL. His hopes for
big war in eastern europe of all against USSR were quite
real. In august 1939 there were two states who were practicing
aggresive attacks against its neibours namely Germany and
Poland, and both were united in pathological hate of USSR.

Stalin signed a defensive pact with Hitler.
Mr. Halifax signed aggresive pact with Poland.
Both had secret protocols. Feel the difference.

Michael






Keith