Wars and Conflicts听 permalink
Russia's role in the World War 2
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.听
Posted by MaksimL (U1987256) on Wednesday, 7th September 2005
Having read some articles on this web-site about World War 2 I didn't find a single word about russians. For example, if I were a very young boy who knows nothing about the most terrific and horrifying war of the 20th century, I would simply think that there were 3-5 countries (participants) which tried to conquer new lands to each other, to show their military power and potential of the army.
But, it wasn't so. After conquest of some european countries, Hitler's army unexpectedly attacked Russia in the june of 1941. German soldiers destroyed cities and towns, killed children and women. Lots of men were driven out of the country (to German camps)and after some period of time were killed there or died because of the lack of food, water...
I am not going to tell the whole story of this historic event because everybody knows it ( I suppose, I hope) or it may be not interesting for all readers.
I wrote this message because I live in Russia. Nearly everyday I meet veterans of the Great Patriotic War. They remember everything they had to get over 60 years ago. Moreover, we know that they won that war instead of all difficulties and sacrifices. We grieve about relatives, friends and all others.
To my mind, those people deserve our and your respect. Besides, they deserve an article about actions that happened in Russia that time. Why? Because it isn't only the history of our country, but it is the history of the whole world and all human society. -
Message 2
Posted by Nik (U1777139) on Wednesday, 7th September 2005
I will tell you something dear Maksim,
Your comments show that you seem to read too many US history writers or British - it is natural that each writer will emphasise on the story of his country's battles and victories. Why don't you read some Russian ones, there you will find lots about the 'Great Patriotic War'.
I am not so sure about the 'Patriotic' though. Indeed Russians love their country and should be proud about it, it is the greatest in the world (US was from the beggining a company for europeans to invest, not a country in the european sense of the world). I have said in the past here that Russians alone could sweep easily the Germans any time even if Germans took Stalingrad and Moscow and to stretch my argument a bit more even if Japanese would attack on Kamtchatka and Vladivostok!! The main part of Russian military industry was beyond Krasnoyarsk and deep in the centre of Siberia so far away that Moscow was more close to Berlin than to its industries in Siberia! Russia had as many schoolchildren as Germany had population. Thus, after a slow start they would eventually eat the Germans like the shark eats a sardine and could as well walk up to devour France and after that eat England as a dessert and all you would have would be a pan-Slavic empire from the Atlantic to Pacific. For those who think that this could not be done since Russia could not move so far without rebellion problems and such then I should remind that a country which sacrifices 60.000.000 of its citizens for the shake of an economic system, well it would not have any problem using chemical bombing and carpet bombing, perhaps later sending nuclear bombs, to all dissident areas in Europe.
That is no fantasy at all, it is pure statistics and numbers - if it was not for America we would speak in Russian know on this channel. Personally I am happy this did not happen, as a human because there were saved 1-2 lifes more, then as a Greek because Panslavism was traditionally against our interests despite the greek roots of the slavic civilisation.
The fear of a greater Russia is not knew, it exists well since the times of Katherine the empress. It was natural that such a large and expanding empire with all its inherent grave social problems could not get into the industrialisation era quickly like the others in the west, but as soon as they would start then there could be nothing, really nothing to stop them. They had everything, endless massland and all the ressources to control the world.
People think that what I say is out of imagination but then they seem to forget that the first and second world war seem as small problems in comparison with the 60.000.000 Russians that died between 1920-1950 because of communism (and it was not only Stalin the responsible but the whole system of communism imported from abroad). Had these people lived in a non-communistic Russia, they would be a population of around 400.000.000 and more.
That is why I have brought into question the relevance of Red Revolution with Russia and have claimed more or less that communism in Russia was actually the secret desire of western capitalist countries (mainly Britain and US) that a communist system (bound to bring slower development and finally fail). Arguments like the White armies (english and western allies) fighting against the communists are no arguments at all since I can claim with ease that these were sent to ensure the final defeat of tcharist and democratic armies. I have heard some half-convincing arguments following a stereotyped approach of history, failing blatantly to explain the revolution on its financial aspect (i.e. where did the communists find funds - since they were almost all of them full time revolutionaires - were they the peoples' children or not? How could they travel all over the world and work on such projects and on whose funds?).
Did I go too much out of your initial subject? Yes. Specially for you that you are a Russian guy and afterall you should know better about your country that was ruled by the worst rule ever to show up on earth, a rule that was imposed by revolutionaires that were coming from New York and Switzerland.... -
Message 3
Posted by Duke of Northumberland (U1751006) on Wednesday, 7th September 2005
Comming from A Britain I would say that without the Russains the WW2 would have been a different prospect. But the 麻豆约拍 do tend to wave the flag! I have argued on other places before joining this one that if the Germans didn't attack russia it would have left Britain very exposed.
You must believe me that my grandas generation where expecting an innvasion with little defense. Crack SS against the homeguard. Yes there was alot of sacrifice from russia but don't think that if the nazis's had invaded britain there would not have been the same. Remember ordinary people where willing to sacrifice there lives without surrendering to germany. Even high command was willing to use mustard gas.
If the russians had better equipment and training I don't think there would have been as high rate of casulties.
Thanks to the internet and fourms like this I can disuss this as the war was never mentioned in my family. I did find out with a bit of digging that my grandad lost seven brothers! The only thing I can say is that in some quarters there is shame on how this could happen. -
Message 4
Posted by gooserss (U1983611) on Wednesday, 7th September 2005
the russian commitment can be overlooked by some in the west. indeed it was the one of the most important parts in winning the war. However this goes on both sides as my neighbour was in moscow and people were referring to world war 2 - 1941 - 1945. The russian history in the war needs to be looked at in entireity, the bravery of the troops, the rapes comitted by the troops in germany, treatmenet of russian pow by the germans and the ussr, the stalin hitler pact.
Like any side in a war there are good points and bad points. yet the russian part in the allied victory is crucial. -
Message 5
Posted by Dirk Marinus (U1648073) on Wednesday, 7th September 2005
You must believe me that my grandas generation where expecting an innvasion with little defense. Crack SS against the homeguard. Yes there was alot of sacrifice from russia but don't think that if the nazis's had invaded britain there would not have been the same. Remember ordinary people where willing to sacrifice there lives without surrendering to germany. Even high command was willing to use mustard gas.
听
Duke of Northumberland.
Very interesting reply but do you really think that ordinary people would have opposed German invasion and eventual occupation.
We have to accept that ordinary people had no means to resist an army.
Men would tend to protect their families instead of trying to stop armed men.
You did mention that even high command was willing to use mustard gas.
Let us be honest and admit that many people in high places ,and this includes the Armed Forces, were not that unsympathetic towards the Germans.
Therefore ordinary people without proper leadership would have been no match for the German Army.
Yes millions of Russians were killed by the Germans purely on account of the German idiology of them being sub human.
The German army was helped in this by Ukranians ,Cossacks and volunteers of the three Baltic states.
I doubt if this would have happened in Britain, as the Germans considered the population of the West European countries to be Nordic.
There was no mass murder on grand scale in any of the occupied countries.
Only those who resisted German authority were liquidated.
I stand to be corrected on this thread and welcome any comment> -
Message 6
Posted by lolbeeble (U1662865) on Wednesday, 7th September 2005
Hmmn, journalism for the most part Nick, you know selling pamphlets and the such like containing polemical pieces, see Iskra, Saria or Pravda. Mind you the first two were distributed through London and Geneva so goodness knows what you'd make of that. Personally I'm more inclined to believe this was because of the liberal attitudes of the respective regimes to foreign emigres rather than on account of any financial backing they were offered. Then of course there are public meetings where a good orator, whether secular or religious, can command a fee for their performance. I'm reminded of Ian "notes only" Paisley. For that matter Stalin was busy sabotaging the interests of the Rothchilds by organising a strike at Batum.
-
Message 7
Posted by Nik (U1777139) on Thursday, 8th September 2005
Dear lolbeeble,
No it is obviously not journalism at all. And do not confuse what I say with yellow pamphlets of the past and of the present because everything I write I write it on the moment thus some generalisations or at times some inaccuracies are inherent - though the main idea remains here as strong as always to withstand opposition.
You know something,... now that you said pamphlets... this is often the means of debasing the truth or a good idea. What you do is you put a 'dubious' or an even ridiculous person talking 9 truths and one lie so the truth becames all a lie and people regard these ideas as false or ridiculous or out-of-fashion. For me, the dirty pamphlets they give in universities (usually of left wing parties and anarchics) and the most revered newspapers are more or less of the same caliber - mind you they come often by the same circles though people do not realise that not knowing that the one who wants to control things will not 'touch' the mass from one direction but will probe it from all directions.
That is something nicely written in a pamphlet like the ones you mention dear lolbeeble, one that was first published in Russia by a monk (of course you know it), one that came from Switzerland and one that pretty much described what followed up to our days (describing events like the global wars, the sexual revolution, the disappointment of people from democracies etc.). Now most historians simply avoid the issue dissmissing the papers as the work of religious fanatic monks and tcharist officers failing however to explain to us why these papers seemed more prophetic than the bible, Nostradamus and the weather forecast all together! It is not accidental these papers were first printed in Russia (due to the events I described earlier) and it is not accidental that these events are not being studied at all by historians who are afraid of losing their seats in their universities (few have tried but some ended up being charged with fascism!!! that goes for the freedom of speech). For example, we are taugh the works of Henry Ford but dismiss that he wrote a whole book based on these papers, while the fact that Leo Trotsky left from New York after having received orders and finance to go to play the revolutionaire back in Russia was well known to him.
Now, do you think I share all these ideas? Not at all. I cannot believe that there is a master plan that moves so well to cover a whole century - the best plans cover an era of 10-20 years. The Russian revolution is an example, it was a prearranged one that somehow went offshoot when Stalin took over all power (of course one that gained absolute power of such an empire would not sit down and listen to orders coming from abroad... mind you he was not alone, certain people were in his cabinet and were doing their job just fine). A yes, forgot to mention all about masonic,jewish,occult,zionist or whatever story cos people will fall on me on that charge (why everybody is so sensitive on these issues honestly I do not know!) - well if anyone does that, I will return the charge by accusing him of putting all these in the same jar which is unfair. Jewish orthodox and Jewish zionists and new-Jewish are not of exactly the same political direction (mind you there were numerous anti-zionist Jewish groups in the beginning of the century), free-masons are the middle-lower end of financial circles (they do the smaller tasks) - though I do not understand how can secret clubs exist in democratic societies... again few people touch this issue (only pamphlets .... ahhh... this pamphlets), the occult (some religious groups accused masons or their likes of being satanists) has little to do here though it seems that it has been used repeatdely in intelligence gathering in the past in the absence of other technological solutions (like drags etc.). -
Message 8
Posted by Nik (U1777139) on Thursday, 8th September 2005
drags I said?... Sorry, drugs.
Marx was saying that religion is the drug for the masses and honestly that was a really nice description he found. A drug makes you feel ok for sometime by giving you a distorted picture of reality. Of course, religion is not the only drug for the masses... there are circulating many many more (and I am not reffering to narcotics or pop/rock music and such things...). There are other more dangerous ones that affect intellectual people, the ones supposed to guide human intelligence. To give an example, imagine that we lost more than a century consuming our way of thought within the narrows of left-right obviously because that fitted perfectly the capital... people are so naif
PS: I am a part of naif people but they say that you can give the silly-grass to people for eating 1-2 times not more... -
Message 9
Posted by lolbeeble (U1662865) on Thursday, 8th September 2005
Well I don't know, Norman Cohn is quite good on the development of the Protocols of Zion. Popper does a fair amount on conspiracy theories for that matter. I'd suggest that Ford was as much influenced by Nestor Webber's Secret Societies and Subversive Movements although to be honest most of it was nonesense scraped from a pulp German novel Biaritz. Generally the accusations are well founded, this being an English speaking board we do have tendency to assume that if it looks, sounds and smells dubious, then there is a good chance it probably is. You do sound like Mussolini as you continually go on about conspiracists subverting the state by not actively engaging in its rituals. There agin you seem to have swallowed the Aristocratic Nationalist White propaganda about the revolution that focused heavily on Trotsky's Jewish ancestry. Admittedly many Rssian aritocrats were resentful of foreign intervention and tried to paint the revolutionaries as the culmination of all that was wrong with this influx of foreign capital concentrated in Russian urban centres.
Would you care to suggest which members of the politbeurea were illuminati? -
Message 10
Posted by Nik (U1777139) on Thursday, 8th September 2005
A no lolbeeble, I did not expect to be called ... Musollini, I am Greek afterall, fascists were enemmies. (... though for your information it was England that implicitly pressured Musolini to invade Greece seeing Greece's initial intention was to be out of that).
I have never read any of all these, let alone white propagandas (for any shake I am anything but american), I do not even believe in indoeuropean theories, I do not believe in such things. All I believe is what I see... All Russian revolutionaires one way or another had no Russian ancestry (if you like that way), that was well known earlier than 1940, then that mention was dismissed in pretty much all history books because it would give food to anti-jewish feelings.
At last, why can't we stop talking about anti-jewish and anti-semitic (Arabs and Jewish are supposed to be in that?), orthodox Jewish are supposed to be in anti-jewish? Yes, Stalin was a Jew but he massacred a large part of the jewish population in his empire, and if there existed the zionist movement there were equally numbered anti-zionists within the jewish communities however nobody writes on that knowdays). Not to mention that there are still some of them.
Now if a revolution occured in UK and all of the leading figures of that revolution would be say of German or Indian or Egyptian origin, would that be accidental and worthless of mentioning or would that be irrelevant in the explication of that revolution?
I am not here to propose a formed theory on what happened exactly and organised by whom. All I know is that the Red Revolution and the two World Wars did not happen for the reasons that history books tell us, something like the French Revolution that actually did not happen because common people did not have to eat...The political forces are not necessarily the rulers and the masses, there are always more complex mechanisms that international political events occur and there is always one will to intervene in one countries politics in one way or another no matter how big or small is that country. The Rothchilds you mentioned earlier could both invest in England (being situated in England), they could also invest at the same time in France. In the end they could not lose no matter who would have won the Waterloo battle. Nice tactic. -
Message 11
Posted by Bishwarrior (U1759943) on Thursday, 8th September 2005
After conquest of some european countries, Hitler's army unexpectedly attacked Russia in the june of 1941. German soldiers destroyed cities and towns, killed children and women. Lots of men were driven out of the country (to German camps)and after some period of time were killed there or died because of the lack of food, water...
I am not going to tell the whole story of this historic event because everybody knows it ( I suppose, I hope) or it may be not interesting for all readers.
听
Well, i'd hardly say the attack was unexpected. But your right, we should remember the role of the USSR in WW2. This includes invading other countries, Poland and Finland. It includes holding POWs for upto 9 years after the war, for the lucky ones that lived that is. It includes the execution of former Soviet POWs by their own govermant for treason. Then yopu ahve commisars shooting their own men rather than let them withdraw, men being sent into battle un armed and slaughtered in waves. It includes war crimes against German soldiers from the very first day of the German attack.
And of course lets not forget the fate of the Poles under the Soviet boot. First we have the Katyn massacre, blamed by the Soviets on the Germans. Then we have the Warsaw Rising when the Red Army halted outside the city so that the Germans could get rid of any trouble makers before the Reds moved in.
And finally the country is lead by the one man who can beat Hitler to the claim of being the biggest mass murderer in history. -
Message 12
Posted by lolbeeble (U1662865) on Thursday, 8th September 2005
Well I don't know, perhaps its the nature of the fuel for your assumptions. The illuminati were first introduced as an agent controlling the French Jacobins in the late eighteenth century by that aristocratic French reactionary the Abbe Barruel, although admittedly the Jews were not introduced into the equation until 1806 and a correspondance with Captain Simoni who concluded the Templers were in league with the old man of the mountain and mani, who were both reputed to be Jews and thus they had infiltrated every secret society since the year dot. Stalin was rumoured to be of Indo Iranian extraction so far as I was aware.
In so far as Mussolini's invasion of Greece, do you think it was more an attempt to catch up with their expansionist Northern ally and deprive the British of further inflence in the Adriatic? By chance you may want to look at Radio fours Document programme this week about how radical left wing groups were generally more implaccable towards the fascists than the nationalists, conspiracy works both ways. -
Message 13
Posted by TonyG (U1830405) on Thursday, 8th September 2005
It is only natural that each nation views events from how they affect that nation. At the risk of making sweeping generalisations, many in Britain know little of Russia's involvement and their contribution is little more than a footnote, and we often give the Americans only grudging respect for their war contribution ("late as usual"). Many Americans are confident that they won the war single handed, as indeed are many Russians. Anyone who has done any real study appreciates that all three nations were major contributors to the war in Europe.
Hitler's biggest mistake was to attack Russia before he had conquered Britain. While Britain was, militarily, in little condition to trouble Germany in 1941, its strategic location was always going to provide a platform for eventual invasion of Europe. If America had not joined the war, it would have taken an awful lot longer, but Britain still had its Empire and would have provided a base for troops from all over the world, including, of course, the refugees from places like France, Norway, Poland and Czechoslovakia -
Message 14
Posted by BOS'N (U2042156) on Tuesday, 13th September 2005
Yes,Hitler's army unexpectedly attacked the USSR (i.e.Ukraine,Belorussia and Baltic countries)...for Stalin or as he liked to claim-it was a 'treacherous(!!!) attack' from the side of Hitler.Two years earlier they both ,in a very friendly way,splitted Poland between themselves.Those ones who have the ears and eyes these are to be understood the real meaning of the word-'treacherous'. Okay.Let's go far...Hitler came to the power in Germany on the grounds in order to put an end with Bolshevism for once and for ever so as the Germans were scared nearly to their death by Soviet commies and their way of ruling over the USSR. Hitler was just an outcome of the events which had been occurred in USSR in those days.Although they both looked like the twins by their views on some things.Your poor veterans in modern Russia didn't fight for Liberty but for Stalin and his own political system.The real figures of losses from the side of USSR during WWII are to be unknown for anyone even before now.P.S.The biggest part of fightings took place on the territories of the modern countries-Ukraine,Belorussia and the Baltic ones...and more less on Russian soil itself.It is the real fact.
-
Message 15
Posted by SmegheadRed (U1879559) on Wednesday, 14th September 2005
You're right,
without the Russians, the outcome of the Second World War would have been very different. 70% of the German war effort was on the Eastern Front; Stephen E Ambrose and Steven Spielberg tend to forget that.
Read Armageddon by Max Hastings to get a really good account of the Russian contribution to the end of the war.
Smeg -
Message 16
Posted by MaksimL (U1987256) on Thursday, 15th September 2005
I should confess that I am not very interested in history and I am not going to make people (on this forum) change their minds. It would be very stupid, because everybody has his own point of view for all problems or events.
I started this discussion, because I was quite surprised by the fact that there was no information about Russia鈥檚 role in the WW2. I couldn鈥檛 even find a single date of German assault to USSR.
You may think that I want to tell you something like:
- Russia (USSR) was the greatest country鈥
- Russians won the WW2鈥
- There is no other country which can be compared with鈥
No, it isn't right.
I am sure that WW2 is the most important event of the 20th century. And it can鈥檛 be studied wholly without mentioning such an important facts as military operations of the two Great Powers against each other on the territory of Europe and USSR (Russia). -
Message 17
Posted by SDG (U2050287) on Thursday, 15th September 2005
Quote
"Very interesting reply but do you really think that ordinary people would have opposed German invasion and eventual occupation.
We have to accept that ordinary people had no means to resist an army."
The British would put up no fight. Obviously You know very little about the 麻豆约拍 Front in WW2.
Well let me explain. Under Chuchill the Entire country was to be turned into a killing ground. with a very well established resistance network set up in every village town and city whose sole job was to harass and attack german supply lines if the worst came to the worst. secondly the British high command had ordered that every major communications link be turned into a weapon. ie the british army made a crude expolsive almost like a sophisticated petrol bomb. which could be detonated when german advance scout units were moving through the area. this would mean that the german advance would be slowed down machicegun posts were bulit on the enterance to every major bridge and town the sole job of these were not to beat the germans but again slow down the german advance with ultimate price.
to say that the crack SS units would have walked over the 麻豆约拍 Guard may well be true. But you should never underestimate the power of love for ones country. Hell the power of love for ones family, friends and way of life to the British the nazis and hitler represented the devil and the armies of Hell.
tell me if your whole livelyhood family and loved ones were threatend by someone such as hitler would you lay down your arms and let them walk over you. Chuchill himself was prepared to die prepared to show the british public what it meant to be British and what was required to remian British. The man even said he wanted to be in the first wave to land at normandy. only a certain member of the royal family: THE KING. said if you go i go to. i rest my case. -
Message 18
Posted by SDG (U2050287) on Thursday, 15th September 2005
the german assault was planned for may 1941 but aws postponned due to problems in the Balkans region. the Attack came on 22nd june 1941.
-
Message 19
Posted by Bishwarrior (U1759943) on Thursday, 15th September 2005
Shane, planning something and acctually carrying it out are two different things entirely. Firstly, the string of defences set up around London and the South would have delayed the Germans from one or two days. They were nothing compared to the Maginot Line, West Wall, Atlantic Wall and so on, and these others at best delayed the enemy.
And i'm sure that the Dutch, Belgiums, French, Norwegians and others loved their country as much as we did.
Hitler also said he would die fighting the enemy. Its alright for Churchill to say he wanted to be the first on the beach, he knew damn well he wouldn't be allowed. -
Message 20
Posted by Meczeslaw (U2061598) on Saturday, 17th September 2005
-
Message 21
Posted by Jozef (U1330965) on Saturday, 17th September 2005
Hi Maksim,
I should confess that I am not very interested in history and I am not going to make people (on this forum) change their minds. It would be very stupid, because everybody has his own point of view for all problems or events.
I started this discussion, because I was quite surprised by the fact that there was no information about Russia鈥檚 role in the WW2. I couldn鈥檛 even find a single date of German assault to USSR.
You may think that I want to tell you something like:
- Russia (USSR) was the greatest country鈥
- Russians won the WW2鈥
- There is no other country which can be compared with鈥
No, it isn't right.
I am sure that WW2 is the most important event of the 20th century. And it can鈥檛 be studied wholly without mentioning such an important facts as military operations of the two Great Powers against each other on the territory of Europe and USSR (Russia).
听 And in your research did you also not find anything about a military operation that Great Power the USSR (Russia) started 66 years to this day on 17th September 1939? Yes, the shame of it.
Cheers, Jozef -
Message 22
Posted by Meczeslaw (U2061598) on Saturday, 17th September 2005
Then yopu ahve commisars shooting their own men rather than let them withdraw, men being sent into battle un armed and slaughtered in waves.听
Where did you get the information? Had seen Hollywood movie? "Enemy at the gates"? You know, I have two grandfathers. Both of them were in Stalingrad Battle. When they saw that movie, they told, that there was much lie about GPW (WWII), but the biggest one was in landing operation scene of that movie.
It is sad, that public opinion in the west formed by screen writer's fantasy...
It includes war crimes against German soldiers from the very first day of the German attack.听
1) One more myth. Please, the facts, the facts...
2) What would you do with the man, who killed your wife, shot your parents, burned your son?
And finally the country is lead by the one man who can beat Hitler to the claim of being the biggest mass murderer in history.听
Hitler's men killed 7 mil. soldiers & 20 mil. civilians only in Russia.
Stalin's "repression" concerned about 1 mil. people.
I do not protect Stalin. Indeed he was a scum & coward. But you should realize, that an opinion about Russia (USSR) was (or is) "the evil Empire" is not stand up to criticism. -
Message 23
Posted by SDG (U2050287) on Saturday, 17th September 2005
to my Russian Friend.
Stalin only signed the non agression pact with germany because he knew he needed to buy time to rebuild an Army that his Purges destroyed.
Secondly the russian Army was poorly equiped at the start, and it is from Nazi documents from the time that in the months after the initial assualt many of the surrendering russian soldiers were unarmed and had never even recieved or trained with rifles.
But you are correct in stating that by the time of stalingrad the industrial machine that was russia had rearmed itself.
But there is some truth to the statement that russian soldiers who retreated were killed at leningrad and stalingrad and moscow had been set up similar to this. i think this only at the start to make the men who had been conscripted fight as many had low morale russia had yet to make a desisive victory over the nazis. the Germans had only been beat by "General Winter."
this tactic was used by the russian army at Moscow the men who protected moscow had to choices die at the germans hands a hero or at your fellow country mens hands a coward. it worked. moscow was held. so why not employ the tactics everywhere else?
I would like to take this oportunity to say that the US has effectivly tried to rewrite history:
Saving Private Ryan there is not a single mention of the Britsh Army or the French Resistance or the Russian Front.
U-571 It was actually British seamen not US as the movie would have you believe that captured the boat and the enigma machine.
so if this is what they would do to there closest allies then why should Russia former enemies be different
good luck
Shane -
Message 24
Posted by hadrian33 (U929374) on Saturday, 17th September 2005
It is sad how much peoples perception of Russias role in WWII is formed by fiction, fantasy, prejudice and politics (especially here in America). As a freshman in college I was delighted to see that a class on WWII was offered...i can not tell you the mixture of hilarity and horror I felt when several of my fellow students expressed amazment at the fact that Russia and USA were allies in the war (I still find it hard to believe they didnt know)
Few are aware of the murderous apocalypse which were Wehrmacht operations in the east. We tend to think of the war in Europe as effectively over with our crossing of the Rhine, forgetting that the largest most deadly single battle of the war, namely the taking of Berlin by the Russians, was still in the offing. An excellent discussion overall. -
Message 25
Posted by Mark (U2073932) on Sunday, 18th September 2005
You're quite right, Russia wasn't just a country that fought on our side. It sacrificed approx 20,000,000 people in defeating germany. Which other country would or could have done the same. Not only human sacrifies, but destroying swathes of their country again (Napoleon) to leave the enemy with nothing. No other country in modern times (save France at Verdun) has dug so deep, bled so much to remove an enemy from their country. People say Hitler's biggest mistake was declaring war on Germany, I believe invading Russia lost him the war.
Let's hear it for Russia!
AAM -
Message 26
Posted by Mark (U2073932) on Sunday, 18th September 2005
Obviously I meant Hitler decalring war on America, not Germany, that would be slightly stupid!
-
Message 27
Posted by OUNUPA (U2078829) on Monday, 19th September 2005
Nicolaos,it might have seemed that he has been read many things from the Western History... the Russians were not the victims of their 'revolution' but protagonists in its tragedy.Seventy years of Commies' opression could well be thought to have earned 'em the right to see themselves as victims..But Russia's prospect as a democratic nation depend to a large extent on how far the Russians are able to confront their own recent history,and this must entail the recognition that,however much the people were opressed by it,the Soviet system grew up in Russian soil...but neither in Great Britain nor in USA...It is not enough for 'em just to 'love' their country blindly.
-
Message 28
Posted by OUNUPA (U2078829) on Monday, 19th September 2005
In my turn ,I guess I have the right to ask you,Meczeslav-where did you get the info of 20,ooo,ooo civilians which were killed in the USSR during WWII?And... if the USSR was not to be 'the evil Empire'... what it was then. Very interesting to know really.
-
Message 29
Posted by OUNUPA (U2078829) on Monday, 19th September 2005
....on the territory of Europe,Nothern Africa,Far East and even partly within US' inner waters itself and the USSR[i.e.Ukraine(1939-1956),Belorussia,the Baltic countries(1940-1950)and Russia(1941-1943)].It seems to be more correctly.You're right on the point that we have never ever seen any country in the world during its history to compare the USSR with.Is it good or bad thing,that's the question really.
-
Message 30
Posted by OUNUPA (U2078829) on Monday, 19th September 2005
What does it mean-'non agressive pact'?Stalin was armed to his teeth by the newest(for these times) tanks,stormoviks and many other very useful ,for running his own war, things...But if he wanted to hit the first...well,in this case,he needed a bit of time to concentrate his forces onto the western boder of the USSR....
-
Message 31
Posted by MaksimL (U1987256) on Monday, 19th September 2005
Stalin was armed to his teeth by the newest(for these times) tanks,stormoviks and many other very useful ,for running his own war, things...听
I can鈥檛 agree with you. Stalin didn鈥檛 have the artillery that could withstand against the German鈥檚 one. Russian soldiers weren鈥檛 equipped well. Besides some of them didn鈥檛 have rifles and pistols. As for tanks, their armour was so weak that they caught fire immediately after a single hit.
If our army was armed to its teeth (as you鈥檝e said), why did Russian commanders let Hitler鈥檚 army to come up to the capital of Russia (Moscow), having evacuated the 鈥減eaceful population鈥 to the east?
But if he wanted to hit the first...well,in this case,he needed a bit of time to concentrate his forces onto the western boder of the USSR....听
Some Russian historians suppose that Stalin was preparing to attack Germany. Before the beginning of the Great Patriotic War, lots of maps of European countries and goods wagons full with Russian-German phrase books were found. Furthermore, the great quantities of new leather boots were kept near the border of Russia (USSR).
But nevertheless, our country wasn鈥檛 ready for that war and it is 100% truth. -
Message 32
Posted by Tas (U1753225) on Monday, 19th September 2005
Dear Maksim,
Here is my take on the events of the last years of the 1930s: The Western Powers were afraid of Bolshevism and so some of them did not do much to stop Hitler. They thought he would save them from the Red Manace. That is the reason for their cursory support of the Republic in Spain against outright aggression by Hitler and Mussolini. They thought they could tame Hitler.
Unfortunately when Hitler got more than he expected in 1937 and 1938 he started to growl at the West. This lead to war in 1939. Hitler then invaded Russia in 1941 because he wanted all the resources in that vast hinterland. Initially he was successful. Stalin had decimated the Red Army by purging all the best Russian Generals. There was the siege of Leningrad and the Battle of Moscow in 1941, the battle of Stalingrad in 1942. At this point the Western allies did all they could to help Russia short of opening a second front. After the Battle of Kursk in 1943, when it appeared that Hitler would loose the war to the Russians, the Western Allies opened the second front first in Italy and then in Normandy. The bulk of the action was on the Eastern front where Hitler tried to do everything to stop the Soviet juggernaut.
Stalin's rule had been a disaster for the Soviet Union but Hitler's rule was a much greater disaster for the Germans. The most important battles of the war occurred on the Eastern front and the Russians lost about 25 million people as a result of that war, the Germans lost 4 million the British Empire lost about 650,000 and America about 1 million. 25 million is the size of a country like Canada. Even 4 million is the size of a country like Denmark. Best wishes,
Tas -
Message 33
Posted by OUNUPA (U2078829) on Tuesday, 20th September 2005
They were equipped well...but in the first months of Hitler's invasion into USSR Stalin's troops (i.e.'kolhozniki' without IDs) thought that Hitler was going to bring on 'em a sort of liberty from the Stalin's 'collective farms','coz Bolsheviks' promise of gaining by 'em of their OWN property (i.e.the LAND) that had led many of 'em to support the Bolsheviks in the autumn of 1917 -never had been fulfilled.They were just cheated in a very cheapy way by L&S and nothing more.To the big account it didn't play any matter for 'em....who(Lenin,Hitler or even Devil)was able to do it.THIS IS THE BOTTOM LINE!!!!In June-July 1941 Stalin's army was falling apart.Whole units deserted to Hitler as the retreat brought 'em closer to their native regions.Many of towns Hitler's army took without a fight,capturing vast stories of munitions that Reds had not had time to destroy.
-
Message 34
Posted by OUNUPA (U2078829) on Tuesday, 20th September 2005
I can understand why the modern politicians in US are not to be inclined to talk of the fact that during WWII USA and USSR were 'allies'....especially if we would be mentioned the conference in Yalta(February,1945) which was dedicated to the future for the post-war Europe....(i.e. for Poland,Romania,Hungary,Albania,the Eastern Germany,Bulgaria,Zcech and Slovakia and etc.)These countries were doomed to become the 'victims' of the Victory...for the West and Stalin.....But there was a surprise,deeply hidden inside of this stuff, for both of these Powers....THE 'COLD WAR'!...with its own bill.You know the bills should be paid!
-
Message 35
Posted by Meczeslaw (U2061598) on Thursday, 22nd September 2005
In my turn ,I guess I have the right to ask you,Meczeslav-where did you get the info of 20,ooo,ooo civilians which were killed in the USSR during WWII?听
Simple mathematics. About 27 mil. were killed in Russia during WWII. Among them the Red Army losses - about 7 mil. people. 27-7=... =)
They were equipped well...but in the first months of Hitler's invasion into USSR Stalin's troops (i.e.'kolhozniki' without IDs) thought that Hitler was going to bring on 'em a sort of liberty from the Stalin's 'collective farms','coz Bolsheviks' promise of gaining by 'em of their OWN property (i.e.the LAND) that had led many of 'em to support the Bolsheviks in the autumn of 1917 -never had been fulfilled.听
1)"Collective farms" means that property on the land is COLLECIVE. Not a state ownership! Kolhozniki were the owners of the land in common! No one could take their land, no commisar could move 'em out!
2)There was NO freedom from Nazi forces at all. There were murders, murders, murders... On March 22 1943 the fascists have burnt Byelorussian village of Khatyn' with 149 inhabitants. They were burned. All of them - woman, chidren... Destiny of Khatyn' was shared by 627 villages only in Byelorussia.
July 3, 1944 it is not less severe the chastisers have finished with the inhabitants of the Pirchiliay village in Lithuania. All of them (119 men, in that 69 children) were alive burnt in the houses. And such examples not hundreds, and thousands...
In the Byelorussian city of Mozyr' occupants, alongside with prisons for the old men, the women and 18 years old young men, have created camp for children of six-fifteen years, in which have taken from all republic the girls and boys - twins. Nazi "medics" imparted them viruses of the heaviest infectious illnesses and order supervision. At the approach of the Soviet armies to Mozyr' the fascists evacuated this camp in Osvenzym and continued there terrible experiences. Almost all children who have undergone to such mockeries, were lost behind the walls of this camp...
I'll show you only one of the "fuhrer"'s statement about the Slavs (i.m. the Russians, the Ukrainians & the Byelarus): " We are obliged to exterminate the population is enters into our mission of protection of the German population. We should develop engineering of destruction of the population... I have the right to destroy millions people of the lowest race, which are made multiple copies as worms".
In total during occupation by Hitler's men have plundered and have destroyed 427 museums, including 173 - in territory of Russian Federation, and also 43 thousand libraries, 82 thousand clubs and houses of culture, 67 thousand hospitals and polyclinics, more than 100 thousand schools and other educational institutions.
The list of destructions and robberies could to be continued and continue. 100-th here is given only, and even a thousand part of that damage is possible which have put to the Soviet country by the fascists. For all it's thousand years history the Russian land did not know such destructive ruin... -
Message 36
Posted by Meczeslaw (U2061598) on Thursday, 22nd September 2005
You want to present Russia as the WWII instigator?
Well, have you heard something about The Munich collusion? Between the UK, France & the Third Reich? About partition of Czechoslovakia? And YOU ARE CRYING ABOUT "Molotow-Ribbentropp" pact?
"If the Germans will be winning we should help the Russians. So if we'll see that the Russians are winning we should help the Germans... ...we must let them kill each other as far as possible." Harry Truman, the US senator, some years after that the US president.
Tears of the crockodile...
P.S. The USSR had not dumped the atomic bomb on Japan (more victims then all Stalin's "purges"), on time it was absolutely unnecessary... -
Message 37
Posted by OUNUPA (U2078829) on Thursday, 22nd September 2005
The USSR had not nuked Japan in 1945 for the simple reason -Soviet spies Julius and Ethel Rosenberg just had started to be at the heart of a traitorous network which passed the secrets of America's first atomic bomb to the USSR.I don't like to cry really...To the rest of your questions to me I had dedicated the whole my 'room'...Just have a look at local 'head-lines',so to speak.
-
Message 38
Posted by OUNUPA (U2078829) on Thursday, 22nd September 2005
Simple mathematics doesn't work out in your definite case.None of people in Stalin's state would be dared to run such sort of statistics without his personal permission,though Stalin himself mentioned of these figures 17,ooo,ooo.Hrushchov added to it +3,ooo,ooo=20,ooo,ooo.Then Gorbachov +10,ooo,ooo=30,ooo,ooo. You can make your own conclusions what it is all about.Khatyn was burned by Belorussians themselves...though they were dressed in Hitler's uniform ,I mean they belonged to SS special commands,such things happen ...Listen,Mecheslav,who did narrate you these 'fair-tales' about 'the owners of the land' and etc?Where are you from?
-
Message 39
Posted by Meczeslaw (U2061598) on Friday, 23rd September 2005
Khatyn was burned by Belorussians themselves...though they were dressed in Hitler's uniform ,I mean they belonged to SS special commands,such things happen ...听
Not Byelorussians in fact. The west Ukrainian (Galician) SS forces. But this is not the bottom line. Khatyn' is only one example of THOUSANDS. Thousands of villages in the USSR were burned by fascists. I suppose your point is that all of them were destroyed by the Russian traitors?
...Stalin himself mentioned of these figures 17,ooo,ooo.Hrushchov added to it +3,ooo,ooo=20,ooo,ooo.Then Gorbachov +10,ooo,ooo=30,ooo,ooo.听
Have you ever been to Russia? If not, then visit it. And ask people on the streets. I suppose you'll be surprised to know, that practically every Russian family have relatives who had been lost on GPW.
Nazi destroyed thousands of villages (i.m. with killing all it's inhabits) hundreds of towns... Perhaps the number of Nazi cruelty in Russia is much more than 30,000,000...
Listen,Mecheslav,who did narrate you these 'fair-tales' about 'the owners of the land' and etc?听
Khmm... So if not Kolhozniki were 'the owners of the land', who was? The State wasn't. So who? Stalin? =] -
Message 40
Posted by Meczeslaw (U2061598) on Friday, 23rd September 2005
The USSR had not nuked Japan in 1945 for the simple reason -Soviet spies Julius and Ethel Rosenberg just had started to be at the heart of a traitorous network which passed the secrets of America's first atomic bomb to the USSR.听
I was talking that nuking Japan was absolutely unnecessary. There the total destuction of Hamburg & Dresden by the US forces can be remembered too. That were the acts of the "American democratic" brutality. If you're saying that the USSR was "the Evil Empire", than the USA was (and still is) it too. -
Message 41
Posted by OUNUPA (U2078829) on Saturday, 24th September 2005
Yes,yes...Mechislav,I have no a habit to ask 'people on the streets'. Russian people on the streets (mostly of which are named in 'honour' of Lenin,Dzerdzinski ,Sverdlov and etc.) are to be too busied by their own 'fighting for surviving'.They mention me of those 'kolhozniki' -in the sense that 'kolhozniki' were 'owners of land' at the same degree as people in Orehovo-Zuevo are the 'owners of Russian oil and gas' in the modern Russia ,and Abramovich is equal in rights with 'em to share the dividends of its
selling abroad.It isn't enough of having got the 'land' to anyone,the most important thing is to get the seeds for planting and then when the harvest will grow, not to give it up to the people for free who have no a slightest idea of seeds and its planting into.I'm not a blinder,I see that ordinary people in Russia remain alienated from the political system and feel themselves excluded from the benefits of liberty.Perhaps even more worrying ,authoriarism has begun to fill the vacuum left by the collapse of Communism with its violent rhetoric ,with its calls for discipline(??!!) and order(it just means that laws stand out of everyday's life),and its xenophobic rejection of the West ,is itself adapted from the Bolshevik tradition...Open your eyes,my Russian friend...and never cry. -
Message 42
Posted by expat32 (U2025313) on Saturday, 24th September 2005
Hi MaksimL, Please bear in mind that here in the west we have looked at WW2 thru the prism of the cold war. The Russian contribution in Europe was of course massive. More than the rest of us I would say. It should be mentioned that the United States was fighting on two fronts with significant assets. I sincerely hope the decades long ordeal of the Russian people is improving, between Royalty, Communists, Germans,the economically draining cold war, and now criminals and corruption.Its been a long hard road. Could you enlighten me on this ?
bye for now, Matthew. -
Message 43
Posted by henrylee100 (U536041) on Monday, 26th September 2005
Politics is about manipulating the masses. In order to manipulate them you have to feed them propaganda. An important part of any propaganda campaign is an interpretation of history that supports your goals. You want people to feel proud to be part of their nation, this is necessary to make them go and do stupid things for you on the pretext that they're doing it for their nation, out of patriotism, like go and get killed in a war oversees.
Think abt the way WWII was presented in the USSR. How much were people told about the war in the pacific for example, apart from the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Talk to people on the streets of Moscow, chances are that some, especially kids, might tell you the war with Japan began in 1945 when the Russian forces crossed the border into China and engaged the Quantoong army.
Or maybe you can tell me how many Russians have heard of El Allamain, or even Operation Husky? Even though Operation Husky, the landing in Sicily, coincided with the peak of the battle of Kursk and in an indirect way contributed to the GErman defeat at Kursk by making the Germans divert to Italy reserves that had originally been earmarked for deployement at Kursk. Ultimately when Hitler learned the allies had landed in Sicily he called off Citadel. I'm not saying the soviet army would have lost Kursk had there been no landing in Sicily, but it surely would have had a considerably tougher time securing that victory.
Remember for over forty years there was a cold war between the east and the west. How could the Americans have told the whole truth about the role of the USSR in WWII while their propaganda machine was busy creating the image of an evil empire. If they'd done that, people might have begun asking questions, and what's much more dangerioust, a larger than usual proportion of them might have started thinking and thinking people are much more difficult to manipulate than a bunch of dronez zombified by TV. Pretty mucht he same things have been happening in Russia and continue to happen. biased news reports, they don't tell you out right lies, they just call your attention to certain facts while other facts get barely a mention. History is part of this game. In the west they were taught that D-day was the operation that decided the outcome of the war, which of course is total bull, in the east there was practically total silence about the role of the USSR in the war against Poland in 1939. In some books you might find mention of Russian troops moving into the eastern regions of Pland to prevent them from being occupied by the Germans, but not a single history book from the 80's will have pictures of joint parades by the Wermacht and the Red army which took place then. Same as the Warsaw rebellion. In fact Poland was the country that really had to suffer the consequences of the dirtiest european political games of the era. These days in the west infromation about the so called strange war that started in September 1939 and went on practically until the germans rolled across Benilux and into France, is realy hard to come by unless you really look for it. How Britain and France declared war on German and then didn't lift a finger while Poland got torn apart by the Wermacht and the newly formed Waffen SS. Not a single shot was fired on the western front. When desperate polish reps in London begged their British friends to at least air raid the military factories in the Ruhr area, one British official, I forget his name, replied they couldn't possibly do that because those factories were someone's property.
so I think we might as well relax, as the X-files slogan goes the truth is out there and none of us will ever learn all of it. -
Message 44
Posted by expat32 (U2025313) on Monday, 26th September 2005
This is the best post I have seen in this entire B.B.C. forum.
-
Message 45
Posted by Tas (U1753225) on Monday, 26th September 2005
Dear henrylee 100,
That is a very well thought out message. I think you are right on target with what you say.
Tas -
Message 46
Posted by VoiceFromPoland (U2128884) on Monday, 26th September 2005
Meczylaw, don't tell about 'Kathyn' in such discussion. 'Kathyn' it's a symbol of soviet genocide on 23.000 of Polish officers. NO ONE soviet murder didn't answer for this war crime. Now Putin don't want to talk about handing those murders over to JUSTICE (many of those still live). Now Putin don't want to talk about taking the whole truth from Russion archivum.
The discussion has many aspects. One of the aspects is STUPIDY, e.g. "stupidity of Germans (Hitler's) decisions".
There was too a stupidity of Soviet's (josif dzugshvili ps. Sralin) decisions.
1. The first stupidity of Soviets was the Ribbentrop-Molotov pact to make common agression on Poland. After that agression Soviet Union and III Reich was ally. They was really ally.
During the soviet occupation of East Poland there was cruel terror on Polish people by soviet functionary.
2. The second stupidity of Soviets was big scale of murdering of Polish soldiers (Germans murdered Polish people but, in fact, they didn't murder polish prisoner of war !). If the stupid man Stalin could imagine war with Germans he killed future aid ? The stupid man Sralin was too little beggar to predict evolution of situation.
3. The third stupidity of Soviets was economic helping to Germans during the invasion on Belgia, Holland, France, Norway and fight with UK. Soviet stuff still go to Germans during 1939, during 1940 until 22.06.1941. Last goods train with soviet stuff for Germans left soviet border 15 minutes before german attack on Soviet Union.
For stupidity of soviet goverment (therein Josif Dzugashvili alias Sralin) - Russian and other soviet nation has paid price of 27 mln killed people.
And there are really many other aspects of the disscution.
Russian, don't whish for great splendors of participation in World War II . Your role was similiar to Germans role. Germas don't wish for splendors of participation in World War II. -
Message 47
Posted by OUNUPA (U2078829) on Monday, 26th September 2005
Dear Henry Lee,but other slogan says(I dunno who did say it the first)-the each one of the real politicians knows of how things happen and how to make 'em happen.He knows where the landmines are situated...And about of 'asking people on the streets'...One thing mentions me,in some way, my own dispute with M. and other Russians-in 1917 in the minds of the ordinary Russian people,who had never read their beloved Marx,class divisions were based much more on emotion than objective social criteria.The popular term 'burzhooi',for example,had no set class connotations,despite its obvious derivation from the word 'bourgeois'.It was used as a general form of abuse against employers,officers,students,professionals or anyone else well dressed,foreign looking or seemingly well-to-do.Hungry workers,in their turn,condemned the peasants as 'burzhoois' 'cause they were thought to be hoarding foodstuffs,while peasants -who often confused the word with 'barzhui'(the owners of a barge) and 'birzhye'(from the word for the Stock Exchange,'birzh')-likewise condemned the workers and all townsmen in general,'cause they were thought to be hoarding manufactured goods.The 'burzhoois' ,in other words ,were not so much a class as a set of popular scapegoats,or internal enemies,who could be redefined almost at will to account for the breakdown of the market,the hardships of the war and the general inequalities of society.Villagers often described the 'burzhooi' as a 'hidden' and 'crafty' enemy of the peasants who was to blame for all their problems he could be a townsman,a trader or an official.In urban food queues ,where endless theories of sabotage were spun to explain the shortage of bread,the word 'burzhooi','speculator',and 'Jew' were virtually synonymous.You see,it was(is) a society at war with itself-only everyone thought they were 'fighting' the 'burzhooi'.Such sad picture...
-
Message 48
Posted by OUNUPA (U2078829) on Monday, 26th September 2005
VoiceFromPoland,this guy is hardly to realize the things in general....Although I guess he mentioned the HATYN'.It is in Belorussia.
-
Message 49
Posted by VoiceFromPoland (U2128884) on Tuesday, 27th September 2005
<QUOTE' USER='OUNUPA' USERID='2078829'>VoiceFromPoland,this guy is hardly to realize the things in general....Although I guess he mentioned the HATYN'.It is in Belorussia.</QUOTE><BR /><BR />If you discuss with the proponent of bolshevism you must remember that at best the proponent of bolshevism will repeat lies on trust. Phenomenon of bolshevism can be describe by only three words : lies, lies, lies.<BR /><BR />Hatyn is really Bielorussia village. Mayby there was german war crimes in that village. But german war crimes was happend in may THOUSENDS of villages of Poland and Soviet Union. Why communists created in Hatyn the greatest memorial after war ? Why proponent of communism tell now about german crimes in Hatyn ?<BR />Because bolshevicks wanted erase from people's memory and mind coupling the word 'Katyn' as a symbol of soviet war crimes on 23.000 Polish officers. Katyn was Russian village - one of places of soviet genocide. Much bigger scale of soviet genocide was commited in Lagiers (much known in the world as Gulag from "G鲁awnoje Uprawlenije Isprawitielno-trudowych 拢agieriej") - TENS OF MILIONS killed people (therein about 0.6 -1.5 milion Polish after german-soviet attack in 1939).<BR />So Katyn is not the symbol of the greatest soviet genocide. It's a symbol of murder on prisoners of the war and it's a symbol of soviet stupidity. Primitiv stupidity of bandits governed Soviet Union. Primitiv stupidity of Josif Dzugashvili alias Sralin witch was a failure to predict the evolution of situation.<BR /><BR />
-
Message 50
Posted by OUNUPA (U2078829) on Tuesday, 27th September 2005
VoiceOfPoland,I have no any objections against your right words....It would be better for M. to choose his time to read and reread it not the one time...What is done by night appears by day..I mean that the truth can not be concealed indefinitely,yes.Thruth will be out.
About this Board
The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.
or 听to take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
The message board is closed for posting.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
麻豆约拍 iD
麻豆约拍 navigation
麻豆约拍 links
麻豆约拍 漏 2014 The 麻豆约拍 is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.