Talk:Commission for Polish Relief

Timing
Some of the material in the background section appears to refer to 1941 and after. Given that the organisation this article covers was active mainly in 1939 and the first half of 1940, this seems rather out of place. The material on 1941 in the 'Reduction and ending of relief' section also seems out of place. Nick-D (talk) 07:30, 28 February 2011 (UTC)


 * The German food policy was instituted in 1939. Raul Hilberg estimates 500,000 Polish Jews died of malnutrition prior to 1942 when the death camps were set up. The Germans in fact improved the rations for the Poles who were working in 1943 in order to boost war production--Woogie10w (talk) 10:38, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

I've just removed the following material as, judging from the text and it's reference, it is actually about the Ukraine under Nazi rule from 1941:
 * The seizure of food supplies in the Ukraine brought about starvation, as it was intended to do to depopulate that region for German settlement. Soldiers were told to steel their hearts against starving women and children, because every bit of food given to them was stolen from the German people, endangering their nourishment.

Parts of Ukraine that were in Poland before WW2 were attached to German occuption zone of General Gouvernment after invasion of Soviet Union in 1941. We need a better map to reflect this.--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 12:44, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Role of Churchill
While the guide to the Commission for Polish Relief's records states that Churchill's accession to Prime Ministership drove the tightened blockade, the British official history of of the economic blockade of Europe states that the measure was introduced in response to the German conquest of Europe (which of course also happened at pretty much the same time) and the decision to do this was made by the British cabinet following several discussions between ministers and British Government departments and the only role Churchill is specified has having taken was to announce the policy (though he presumably would have approved it as a member of the cabinet). As the guide to the records is written by an anonymous author and, by it's nature, is fairly limited in scope, I don't really see how it qualifies as a RS on British Government policy when the official history of this says something quite different. As such (and to cut a long story short), I'd suggest removing the sentence which begin 'In May 1940 Winston Churchill replaced Chamberlain as the UK Prime Minister' which is cited to the guide. Thoughts? Nick-D (talk) 10:19, 2 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Agree with the above proposition.--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 12:44, 2 March 2011 (UTC)


 * I'd prefer to clarify it in-text, with refs, that the decision was not Churchill's alone (or Churchill's at all). Currently, the sources I read, do finger him. Certainly Hoover did. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 17:56, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Not really valid-even if UK would agree to shipping of food, it would amount to nothing-Nazis would just take it for the Germans and in any case it conflicted with their plans to exterminate Slavic and Jewish populations by famine. Also-the German Red Cross was not "under control of Nazis"-but Nazified-that is integrated with Nazis political organisation and much of the personal became Nazis, they also had other measures to make them integrated within Nazi Reich.--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 20:34, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Those are separate issues. Who was responsible for the blockade and opposed the food shipments, that's one. What did the Nazi do with the shipments, that's two. What would they have done with more of them, that's three. Even through it is likely that the Nazi would divert much of the aid, this does not change the fact that Allied policy towards aid is notable and interesting. All of those should be referenced if we are to discuss them here more extensively. PS. Nazification redirects to Gleichschaltung. Interesting, I didn't know it was a word... by all means, restore it - if the ref you cited uses it. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 20:50, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
 * "I'd prefer to clarify it in-text, with refs, that the decision was not Churchill's alone (or Churchill's at all)." - it's already there ("As a result, and after extensive discussions by the British cabinet and between government departments, Churchill announced on 20 August that Britain would maintain a strict blockade of Nazi Germany and countries it occupied" summarises the relevant passage in the British official history. Churchill wasn't a dictator, and the normal cabinet and beaurocratic processes underlay most non-urgent policy development. Nick-D (talk) 21:45, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
 * But he was influential. The refs suggest that he was responsible for taking a more harsh stance on the blockade policy than Chamberlain was. If you want to say that Churchill's cabinet had a harsher stance than Chamberlain's; that's fine, too. But I think the different attitudes of the two cabinets are important. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 04:15, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
 * They were largely the same people... The British official history attributes the change in policy to the worsening war situation, not the change of PM. Nick-D (talk) 07:02, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Again agree- Churchill was not a dictator, and the situation was not fault of the British but due to Nazi agression. I support rewritting this to reflect Nick's remarks.--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 17:10, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

B-class
Confirmed for WP:POLAND per MILHIST review. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; talk to me 21:09, 18 May 2012 (UTC)