Company of Heroes: Eastern Front
Other discussions (Read-Only) => Eastern Front => Topic started by: leo.civil.uefs on January 17, 2010, 04:27:35 AM
-
I was playing Men of War: Red Tide, and I saw the registers of Alexander Zorich...
Looks like we in west know only a little or nothing about WW2... I mean... majority of people are too retarded by Hollywood and American/British propaganda.
Most people dont know much about the participation of USSR in WW2... specially in USA (Americans really think they were the winners of WW2 and defeated Hitler, ;D)
There is some facts that cannot be denied..
85% of the nazi army was defeated in USSR.
The imense majority of the german army was used to exterminate USSR. (Read Mein Kampf, by Hitler). Hitler was obcecated in destroying USSR and kill every people in.
Im not underestimating the participation of British and Americans (That last fought in 2 front at the same time!) in WW2, you also were Heroes but, lets be honest, WW2 was 70% about HItler x Stalin.
America was waching two of his enemies destroying each other.
All that shit about D day... the war was already over in D day, Stalingrad was before D day, Kursk was before D day...
D day has only one objective, prevent the soviets from advancing in europe until Portugal, D day was the first day of cold war.
Ok, thats too much to be discussed and I bet there is a lot of opinios around.
One thing is true, the Soviets Defeated Hitler, I say Soviets and not only Russians because there is a lot of other folks who did a big sacrifice in WW2 (25 million people dead in all USSR)
Lets also not forget the Chinese exterminaiton by the Japaneses (16 million death).
Its a pity that there is all that propaganda trying to dirty the image of the Russian leaders and people.
Today we are about to play a Game mod created by Germans, Americans, British and other people... thats freedom, and today there is freedom because million of Soviets died in the past fighting for this freedom ,they deserve respect.
-
A lot of what you say is true, however I'm not sure what propaganda you are talking about that dirtys the image of Russian people?
The leaders yes, but then again the Communist regime in the USSR wasn't exactly a shining beacon of humanity. Not the majority of peoples fault, just the bastards who ruled it.
-
Yes, there is a lot of bad things about communist regimes and all... but there is even more lies about it... Just watch ENEMY AT THE GATES.
Or Rambo 3, or 1 million movies made in USA about the "TERRIBLE Leaders of USSR"... all bullshit.
Stalin is the third more admirated man in Russia (the first one is Putin and the second I dont remember) so... the russians are idiots for admiring he?
Im not trying to start any discussion.
Just thanks, Thank you USSR.
-
the USSR won those battles because Hitler pulled something like 400,000 of his men. which were mainly in Russia to the western front to watch the Atlantic for the UK and the US.
the USSR could not have won the war by themselves.
the United States could not have won the war by themselves
the United Kingdoms could not have won the war by themselves.
i will not thank the USSR, but i will thank the Russian soldiers and conscripts who fought against the third reich.
And honostly, the idea that the west believes they won the war because of movies is sort of an absurd idea. If people dont care enough to read up and find the truth about history, let them stay in their ignorance or educate them, but dont rope all those idiots with the people who actually care to know the truth.
-
There was a lack of quality officers in the USSR bc of the officer purge that stalin so that is less hollywood than you suggest not really propaganda more of stalins fault though its true that (im poor with names so i cannot quote off the top of my head who) there were some very talented officers in command they were spread rather thin and subject to stalins paranoia.
The soviets did do alot of the fighting and deserve plenty of credit in history for their role in ww2 but this post sounds more like you wish to rant about stupid americans than really educate anyone. I can tell you personally that in the stupid US schools they do teach that russia fought and we learn about the numbers killed as well. A better statement about a majority of americans is that they dont give a shit about who did what or why. Most people take more of an interest in information that can be applied. Obviously i take a bit of an interest in it so your generalization of americans is rather offensive as well as ignorant.
Im sure the lack of focus on the USSRs role is most likely an after affect of the cold war in some cases. I'll respect any vet but im not going to pay homage to the dead of a whole country not my own bc they im sure wouldnt
A. care about some guy from another country saying thanks.
B. Have fought for me in any way.
C. For all i really care america could have let the war go on without it. Your country could have lost and we would still have freedom.
-
While I in no way support the statement "The Americans won the war" - I've got to say, the Russians were only essential in the war in Europe, without American help the war in the Pacific would have gone much differently.
-
Thank you USSR for bringing the light of freedom to the easter Europe! Thanks for getting rid of nazis from our countries! Thank you uncle Stalin...
Also...
Thanks for helping Hitler invading Poland in 1939.
Thanks for killing 25 000 polish officers in Katyn, Miednoje, Charkov
KATYN film italiano 12 di 12 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_XFweY22Jw&feature=related#normal) - unfortunately italian version
Thanks for murdering our musicians, actors, writers and many other in Gulags.
Thanks for the 7 milions deaths of hunger in Ukraine in 1932 - 1933.
Thanks for arresting and killing soldiers of polish Home Army, who helped you to defeat Nazis in Lwow, Vilnius, Warsaw.
Thanks for not aiding polish army during the Warsaw Uprising
Thanks for the years of repressions during the communism in Poland.
Thanks for killing hundreds of polish officers and heroes of the II WW, after you brought us freedom from nazis - 1945 - 1960
----------------------------------------------------------
It's kinda sad when, all we can see in video games are the battles of American, British or Soviet armies.
It it sad that nobody remembers that Poles fought on almost all fronts of the II WW. But who cares about:
Polish, Bialorussian, Poland in 1939 against Germany and the Soviet Union
Polish soldiers who fought in defence of France
Polish soldiers who fought Germans in Norway
Polish soldiers who fought in Tobruk
Polish soldiers who fought in Italy, who remember successful heroic charge of polish soldiers in Monte Cassino
Who remember the no. 303 ("Kościuszko") Polish Fighter Squadron or other 15 squadrons, who fought in defence of Great Britain
Who remember gen. Maczek's tank division in France, he fought from Falaise to Wilhelmshaven.
Who remember polish soldiers who fought alongside with Soviet Union in Lenino, Studzianki, Berlin? Who remember polsih flag at Siegessaule?
I'm not an enemy of russian people. I'm thankfull for their sacrafice during the II World War. Unfortunately for Poland...Soviet Union during II WW was as bad as Nazis.
Also - I don't feel any bad feeling for Russians for that. All nations during their history had some shamefull moments - Poland too...you can ask ukrainians how they felt about us before the II WW.
-
good point im sure few people remember the fighting in greece and a dozen other obscure fronts or minor countries im not saying they had less of a role just that they tend to be forgotten because they had less to work with.
Wasnt most of those polish soldiers that fought with the soviets pretty much drafted? Just a question bc I remember something to that effect but I dont really know that much about it.
-
After Nazis invaded Russia, some of the officers who were not killed and many Poles from Gulags created the polish army in USSR.
A group of polish soldiers with gen. Anders went through Iran to the Western Armies. The rest fought on the Eastern front.
There are many fronts of II WW which are forgotten - but interesting. As you said - defence of Greece against Italians and Germans.
Defence of Finland against Soviet Union and many, many more...
-
You are right about American lack of knowledge about what happened during WW2. American people feed off of Hollywood.
If you go to this page you can see statistics for casualties of WW2. As you can see only 400,000 total American and British dead where 25,000,000 total Soviet Union dead.
So yeah, not many Americans know that or give a crap.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ww2_casualties (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ww2_casualties)
-
Yes, there is a lot of bad things about communist regimes and all... but there is even more lies about it... Just watch ENEMY AT THE GATES.
Or Rambo 3, or 1 million movies made in USA about the "TERRIBLE Leaders of USSR"... all bullshit.
Stalin is the third more admirated man in Russia (the first one is Putin and the second I dont remember) so... the russians are idiots for admiring he?
Im not trying to start any discussion.
Just thanks, Thank you USSR.
Just look at what Spanishfly said. If Hitler was voted the 3rd most admired person in German history there would be outrage, especially in Russia. But Stalin, who arguable caused the deaths of more people than Hitler is seen as a Hero of some kind, and he wasn't, just a murderous tyrant. His generals won him the war, but he took the credit.
This isn't meant to offend anyone but I really dont understand the Hitler = Bad, Stalin = Good argument.
But then again I'm not Russian, so clearly don't have the cultural attachment or understand the national significance of certain things that others might.
Cheers
-
Thank you USSR for bringing the light of freedom to the easter Europe! Thanks for getting rid of nazis from our countries! Thank you uncle Stalin...
Also...
Thanks for helping Hitler invading Poland in 1939.
Thanks for killing 25 000 polish officers in Katyn, Miednoje, Charkov
KATYN film italiano 12 di 12 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_XFweY22Jw&feature=related#normal) - unfortunately italian version
Thanks for murdering our musicians, actors, writers and many other in Gulags.
Thanks for the 7 milions deaths of hunger in Ukraine in 1932 - 1933.
Thanks for arresting and killing soldiers of polish Home Army, who helped you to defeat Nazis in Lwow, Vilnius, Warsaw.
Thanks for not aiding polish army during the Warsaw Uprising
Thanks for the years of repressions during the communism in Poland.
Thanks for killing hundreds of polish officers and heroes of the II WW, after you brought us freedom from nazis - 1945 - 1960
----------------------------------------------------------
It's kinda sad when, all we can see in video games are the battles of American, British or Soviet armies.
It it sad that nobody remembers that Poles fought on almost all fronts of the II WW. But who cares about:
Polish, Bialorussian, Poland in 1939 against Germany and the Soviet Union
Polish soldiers who fought in defence of France
Polish soldiers who fought Germans in Norway
Polish soldiers who fought in Tobruk
Polish soldiers who fought in Italy, who remember successful heroic charge of polish soldiers in Monte Cassino
Who remember the no. 303 ("Kościuszko") Polish Fighter Squadron or other 15 squadrons, who fought in defence of Great Britain
Who remember gen. Maczek's tank division in France, he fought from Falaise to Wilhelmshaven.
Who remember polish soldiers who fought alongside with Soviet Union in Lenino, Studzianki, Berlin? Who remember polsih flag at Siegessaule?
I'm not an enemy of russian people. I'm thankfull for their sacrafice during the II World War. Unfortunately for Poland...Soviet Union during II WW was as bad as Nazis.
Also - I don't feel any bad feeling for Russians for that. All nations during their history had some shamefull moments - Poland too...you can ask ukrainians how they felt about us before the II WW.
Thats true.
Seems like every country have a % of participation in WW2 and the great ones hide the small ones in his shadows.
Poland suffered a lot because was in the middle of the two potencies.
-
This isn't meant to offend anyone but I really dont understand the Hitler = Bad, Stalin = Good argument.
That's simply because history is written by the winners.
-
Looks like the americans are always trying to defend theyselves against offenses. Im not here to offend anyone. I like america and i like his participation in WW2. Except the atomic bomb, pherhaps...
I dont inted to say, Stalin was good. Just as a great leader, not as a great human.
Anyway, its like i said, there is a lot of lies about he.
Hitler killed 25 million people and Stalin more than this? Who the hell stayed in USSR after this two mass murdering?
25 + 25 (or more) = 50
50 million people?
Some russian here can aswer that for us?
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalin#Calculating_the_number_of_victims (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalin#Calculating_the_number_of_victims)
-
Hitler killed 25 million people and Stalin more than this? Who the hell stayed in USSR after this two mass murdering?
Sorry, but I doubt that Hitler killed 25 million people in the Soviet Union. The total loss was 23,954,000.
About 10 million soldiers, thus the rest were civilians.
That includes of course maybe over 10 million who died because of Stalin.
Also, the total population of the USSR in these times was 168,500,000 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ww2_casualties)
-
I myself from the Ukraine. And read the raving, about the hunger of an alien to me a shame! And if someone does not like Stalin, it is his personal opinion (even if he keeps with him)!
And about the repressions it was the power in our countries and do not you discuss it! And to compare the USSR with the Nazis is to be schizophrenia, I ask the moderators to close these threads that would not translate the forum su framework of the political game!
-
Im from Ireland , so neutrality during the war means I have a non biased outlook , except for the fact that I dont like the british.
In my opinion , Stalin was a mass murderer and no better than hitler.
In this day and age you might think the purges, or death marches etc , "IT COULD NEVER HAPPEN NOW". Well the fact that russian people voted stalin the 3rd most admired man... it just shows how far russia has come from those days.
The misery that was spread by stalin and the communist regime for half a century cannot be brushed under the carpet , yes this is ww2 but what about the millions of people opressed , afraid to speak out , murdered by secret police for the next 40 years after?
Someone said earlier, are the russian people stupid to admire stalin?
I cant judge someone for their beliefs but , to admire the man who orchestrated the murder of your grandfathers , its dispicable.
-
@Gouldan: Why should the thread be closed? Nobody is flaming each other, just a discussion, if anything is to happen to this thread, maybe move it to the offtopic section.
Why is it so-called Schizophrenia to compare the USSR to the Nazis, look at something called the politcal compass and you'll see how the Extreme Right (Nazis) and Extreme Left (Stalinism) practically converge with each other. The only difference (more or less) is economic policy.
I've not bought into any kind of McCarthyist cold-war propaganda about the USSR and Communism in general. But when your having to bump off people left right and centre, whether thats because of their race, class or just the fact they disagree or pose a threat to you I'd say you've pretty much failed as a politician and leader of a country.
Just my opinion though, I'm sure people will disagree, thats what forums are for though, sharing views :)
@Batteries: Aww, I'm British, y u no liek mee? :P
Cheers
-
@Batteries: Aww, I'm British, y u no liek mee? :P
Cheers
Because ye were a bunch of wankers to us for about 800 years , but I think we have put that behind ourselves. ::)
-
Aye to be honest I agree with ya.
Bloody Henry VIII...grumble grumble
-
I really dislike this idea that because your country lost more people in a war your country was somehow more involved in it, or deserve more credit for it. Its like giving somebody the first place trophy for being last place in a race. Its not really an acheivment of any sort, and its sort of disrespectul to those who did sacrifice themselves for their cause.
-
In my opinion , Stalin was a mass murderer and no better than hitler.
Not better than Gitle! What kind of expression. luz777 you do not understand for the peoples of the Soviet Union during World War II was, it was part of survival! Because of Hitler's plans for all Slavs must be destroyed! And mass murder is compared with your crusade to the glory of the Lord baby talk!
Im from Ireland , so neutrality during the war means I have a non biased outlook , except for the fact that I dont like the british.
In my opinion , Stalin was a mass murderer and no better than hitler.
BATTERIES You write that you are not biased - but not impartial (even dead because they were still alive when they were biased). A statement better than Stalin, Hitler, Nazism is, delivered from it! I'm not communists, and not to the hen they will not. But Nazism is evil in its purest form.
In Kiev, the Museum of World are stored the results of Nazism - a glove made of human skin, soap from human bone.
-
"And mass murder is compared with your crusade to the glory of the Lord baby talk!" I've no idea what your getting at here but I'm not American...or even religious, so... ::)
Yes, I would argue that I do understand, I know full well the horrors that went on in the USSR during world war two. Just because I'm not from the former soviet union doesn't mean I'm wrong. It was about survival your right, Hitler wanted to wipe out Western Russia and settle Germans there, Lebensraum and all that. But Stalin would probably have moved against Germany if Barbarossa had not happened.
There were atrocities commited by both sides because they were two authoritarian states striving to become superpowers, each one preached the destruction of the other. It was bound to happen. And tragic for the millions of people who happened to be caught between the two.
By saying this were not belittling what happened in Russia and Eastern Europe, you just can't justify the whole of the wrongs of the Soviet Union because of what happened in WWII.
The Revolution and establishment of the USSR could have been a chance to genuinely create a better society, instead it replaced one old order with another just as bad. It was the Bolsheviks who were the first to legitimize the sort of political violence used by many axis nations in the 30's and 40's.
Rant rant rant :)
-
Once again - where is the difference?
Hitler was killing jews - just because they were jewish
Stalin was killing polish officers -just because they were polish officers
..............................................................................
Both were brutal murderers - and that's the fact
-
Looks like the americans are always trying to defend theyselves against offenses. Im not here to offend anyone. I like america and i like his participation in WW2. Except the atomic bomb, pherhaps...
I dont inted to say, Stalin was good. Just as a great leader, not as a great human.
Anyway, its like i said, there is a lot of lies about he.
Hitler killed 25 million people and Stalin more than this? Who the hell stayed in USSR after this two mass murdering?
25 + 25 (or more) = 50
50 million people?
Some russian here can aswer that for us?
... I don't usually use the quote thing, and I'm busy
talking on the phone, and I haven't finished reading
this whole thread. But I... arrg...
*Spanish Fly* Awesome man :) Couldn't have said it
better :) xcept I'll even add more to it. Stalin BANKERED
Hitler, gave him money, ressources, and places to TRAIN
his tank tactics. Guderian became a god, THERE!.
Stalin made lots of deals/co joined attacks, etc
Attack on Poland was simultaneous two side affair.
Finland, and (Lituania? forgot name of 3 countries)
- Stalin helped CREATE Hitler, banking on idea Hitler
would soften up Europe, and when he would be busy,
rush in and retake Europe in one fell swoop, saving
Europe from 'his' Hitler, as a hero... xcept not giving any
of it back ;)
Hitler beat him at his own game. Very infuriating to Stalin:)
Churchill couldn't have said it better. 'When we were in
trouble, you sat and did nothing. Now that Hitler is at
YOUR throat, your sit and squeal like piglets wanting to
ward off slaughter'
* Leo :
Looks like the americans are always trying to defend theyselves against offenses ...?
How do you think you started this whole thread?
Hitler killed 25 million people and Stalin more than this? Who the hell stayed in USSR after this two mass murdering?
Actually, Stalin killed more of his own people than Hitler
ever did :)
Stalin a hero? A great leader of men? He was ruthless, yes.
But not a great leader of men. Actually, right as victory
for Soviet Union became clear, he squashed his own
General's powers, before they become too much 'heroes'
(that might threaten his own power). One well known
hero (Zhukov?) quietly went into obscurity about then.
Anyhow, just ranting right now, I'm on the phone and not
making much sense, but @#!(*@$ !!!
I *DO* agree, though, that
1) Soviet Union did help much bringing down Hitler
(Which they helped create in the first place)
(Xcept it blew up in their faces and they screamed for help)
But they could NOT have done it on their own.
American/British D-Day intervention urgency YES was
spurred by Soviet Union starting to win and the resulting
rapid collapse of Nazi Germany - Before Soviet Union got
all of Europe (Remember, Soviet Union did not 'give back'
Territory after 'liberating' it).
I'm fine with Russian people, even German people.
It's their leaders that were power-addicted homicidal
maniacs.
Stalin : A single death is a tragedy, a million death is
a statistic :)
But, yea, I will give Stalin ONE thing.
He truly is the man of Steel. He kept his cool under
pressure more than any OTHER man would have in the
circumstances, and he was able to turn things around.
I don't know of any other man who could take such
a powerful kick in the balls, and could still stand firm
and then turn things around. Woah.
-
Someone has been reading too much positive history I think...http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/the_way_we_live/article6937923.ece (http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/the_way_we_live/article6937923.ece)
America was waching two of his enemies destroying each other
Perhaps you're forgetting the lend lease aid program that saved the UK and Russia pretty much from the start. The material provided by the US that kept both these countries in the war.
Something the soviets never fully paid back either...You might wanna look this up.
And it wasn't really their war to begin with. this was the the usual European conflict that erupts from time to time be it Napoleon, Hitler or whoever
The Soviets didn't win the war and neither did the Americans. It was 'The Allies', meaning everyone (ok maybe not the french...just kidding!) who fought against the Axis won the war.
As for Stalin/Hitler...2 faces of the same coin. It's just hard for the Russians to accept that in those hard years of bitter war, they were being led by someone who was no better than Hitler in reality and was infact just as responsible for what they went through.
What is that line again?
'He may be a dirty son of a bitch....but he is OUR son of a bitch!'
-
I'm just sick of the stupid american comment that is constantly thrown around anymore. I have no problem with someone pointing out how much the eastern front is warped by movies for entertainment or how much the soviets contributed bc the eastern front has always been very interesting to me.
im sure if i came on and posted something about how the west won the war and stupid ruskies just know crap from commie propaganda youd "defend yourself against offences"
And bc i think you might run with it im going to clarify the fact that my example does not mean i think the allies won the war by themselves.
Besides stalin was pretty much gonna attack anyway hitler just started the fight early.
-
we all should say that both allys and soviets defeated the nazis but it's a fact that the russians had payed an higer price the war, we also dont have to forget the british forces who incredibly managed to defend not only the UK but also the colonies in africa, asia and also helping countries like greece by the italian invasion.
The germans had absolutely the most incredible army of the period, great generals a huge firepower, an incredible organization and also a modern concept of war. Probably if operation Barbarossa/ Unternehmen Barbarossa didn't took place Europe will surely be diffrent..
like eating Bratwurst, speaking german, not worring about European elections, and live in one country (EU? no..Germania!) ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
but luckly for us Europeans this is Sci-Fi (with all respect for nowadays germany, my favourite country :) )
-
like eating Bratwurst, speaking german, not worring about European elections, and live in one country (EU? no..Germania!) ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
but luckly for us Europeans this is Sci-Fi
Just give it a couple of years ;)
I'm kidding of course, but what Zerstoerer said is 100% true. There was no one nation that defeated the Axis (which wasn't one nation, either, even though Germany was dominant).
If it hadn't been for Lend/Lease, neither Britain nor Russia would have been able to defeat Germany.
The United States had never been neutral, though, they had just been observing, trying to make the highest profit without having to actually fight, be it WWI or WWII.
However, if it looked like their favorite (Britain in WWII, France & Britain in WWI) was about to lose they joined.
In WWI they joined when Germany defeated Russia and was about to move hundreds of thousands of troops from the East to the West. This would have been the manpower needed to defeat France and Britain. However, it was at this point that the US chose to join - they had invested Millions (if not Billions) of Dollars into the Triple Entente.
Had they lost, there would have been no way the Entente would have ever been able to pay back those debts, so they joined the war on their side to make sure Germany lost.
In WWII, the same thing happened again: Because British men were off fighting the Axis, it was the Americans (and Canadians) who made a fortune lending money and selling supplies to them for just that money.
Then, in December 1941 Pearl Harbour happened and the US joined the war - interestingly enough exactly during the Battle of Moscow, when it looked as if Germany was about to defeat the Soviet Behemoth.
Had they achieved this, there would have been no way Britain could have continued its war effort, even with US supplies, and it would have had to sue for peace.
In conclusion: While it is very true that it was the Soviets, Poles and British who did most of the fighting, killing and dying in WWII (On the Allied side, that is), it was most definitely the United States who chose which side was going to win or lose.
They just took their time because they wanted to make as much of a profit out of the war as possible...
Gotta love the USA ;D
-
I disagree slightly with this. While i agree that the United States was making an enormous profit selling arms to the European nations during both world wars, i was under the impression the US took an isolationist additude, meaning they would not join the war on eithor side simply because it wasnt a war that had anything to do with Americans.
Then, If i may quote wikipedia seeing as i cant word this very well without sounding mentally ill:
"In January 1917, after the Navy pressured the Kaiser, Germany resumed unrestricted submarine warfare. Britain's secret Royal Navy cryptanalytic group, Room 40, had broken the German diplomatic code. They intercepted a proposal from Berlin (the Zimmermann Telegram) to Mexico to join the war as Germany's ally against the United States, should the U.S. join. The proposal suggested that if the U.S. were to enter the war then Mexico should declare war against the United States and enlist Japan as an ally. This would prevent the United States from joining the Allies and deploying troops to Europe, and would give Germany more time for their unrestricted submarine warfare program to strangle Britain's vital war supplies. In return, the Germans would promise Mexico support in reclaiming Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona.
U.S. declaration of war on Germany
President Wilson before Congress, announcing the break in official relations with Germany on 3 February 1917After the British revealed the telegram to the United States, President Wilson, who had won reelection on his keeping the country out of the war, released the captured telegram as a way of building support for U.S. entry into the war. He had previously claimed neutrality, while calling for the arming of U.S. merchant ships delivering munitions to combatant Britain and quietly supporting the British blockading of German ports and mining of international waters, preventing the shipment of food from America and elsewhere to combatant Germany. After submarines sank seven U.S. merchant ships and the publication of the Zimmerman telegram, Wilson called for war on Germany, which the U.S. Congress declared on 6 April 1917"
And in WW2 we were bombed by the Japanese at Pearl Harbor (Which i can see from almost any hill near my house) which was reason enough to declare war on them, and in turn Germany declared war on the US. While profiteering and debts 'may' have been incentive for joining the war on the side of the people they were selling the arms to, i believe there were alternative and more prominat reasons closer to home, which threatened the land that they lived for the joining of the war.
-
This thread is blah IMO. Just epic trash lol
England, US, Russia, Poland, France, the Dutch, etc etc all helped to topple the Axis powers.
Did Hitler need to be stopped? Absolutely no question.
Did Stalin need to be stopped? Absolutely no question.
They were both maniacs. There was a small book written by an Englishmen called "Animal Farm" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_Farm (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_Farm)) I suggest people read it. He was an Englishmen who supported communism and participated in the Spanish Civil War when Russia and Germany were testing out all their new toys and killing people in the '30s. Russians tried to assassinate him because even though he was a communist follower, he supported Mikhail Tukhachevsky, Stalin's arch rival. Tukhachevsky was also widely considered the best Russian military mind. Of course Stalin killed him (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tukhachevsky (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tukhachevsky)). Anyhow, go read the book. It says alot about Totalitarianism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Totalitarism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Totalitarism)) and shows the evil not only of the system but the actual men like Stalin who ran the government.
Stalin was a scumbag, and since I haven't seen anyone else take a hard line stance on this, I will. Stalin was (only marginally) worse than Hitler. He was evil, a nut job and a murderer, MORE so than Hitler.
People talked about the "propaganda" that the US has against Russia...are you serious? The US (as far as WWII) always kissed Russia's ass. They completely ignored the mass murders of Stalin just to get help against Hitler! We supported Stalin, worked with him, gave him money, supplies, material, information and never once said..."Hey wtf are you doing to your people?!" How is THAT propaganda against Russia?
During the invasion of '41 Russia got so desperate they strapped mines to the back of DOGS and trained them to run under German tanks and explode the tank. I mean...are you serious?!
Russians pillaged and sacked Poland and Finland raping along the way. All the while Stalin was the leader. Don't hand me this BS about he was a great man or times were hard so bad things were done. I'm pretty anti religion, but in the case of men like Stalin and Hitler I almost hope I am wrong and there really is a GOD. Because those two deserve to live an eternal life of pain for the horrors and atrocities they committed.
I salute every single soldier of WWII who made the supreme sacrifice, no matter how big or small, from every country. Not all Germans were Nazis. Not all Russians were Communists. Not all Japanese were Imperialists. But it will be a cold day in hell that I ever condone what the leaders of certain countries did and Russia is right at the heart of the terrible deeds.
I just can't believe people have the nerve to say Stalin was a great man. Also I love how someone mentioned greatest Russians ever and didn't even mention Trotsky or Vladimir Lenin!!! I mean holy cow, Lenin was the epitome of what Russians were supposed to be and now people don't even remember him? Wow....just wow.
-
Thank you USSR...
when i read this i had to stop for a while, because as a german i have to ask myself: for what?
ok they have "liberated" us from Hitler.
i write "liberated" because in eastern Germany they build up just a new totalitarian regime.
And if somebody tells me now something like "the allies wouldn´t have the war without russia " I tell him: " Look waht happened in WWI". The point is that the USA could build their ships, planes, and tanks faster than the germans could destroy them- russia just throw waves and waves against the german front till it collapsed.
And again i ask my question: for what should I thank USSR?
Shuold I say "thank you" to the russian soldiers for:
-raping 2 Million german woman and girls ( some of them were younger than 6 years)- 240.000 died after the rape
-banishing 12-14 Million Germans from their homes
-bringing german POW´s to Siberian Gulags which were mostly like the German KZ´s (just without the Gas-chambers)
These are the reasons why i´ll never say "Thank you USSR"
-
If you go to this page you can see statistics for casualties of WW2. As you can see only 400,000 total American and British dead where 25,000,000 total Soviet Union dead.
So yeah, not many Americans know that or give a crap.
You dont know real things man... USSR lost >45.000.000....
2 Der Deutsche: with full respect to germnas (I have many good friends in Germany), I can say:
After all that GERMANS did on Ostfront, GERMAN NATION MUST BE ELEMINATED! Hitler and all his nation and army wanted TOTAL WAR on Ostfront? War to the last man? WAS GOING TO ELEMINATE ALL POLES, BELORUSIANS, UKRAINIANS, RUSSIANS? Okey, HE GOT IT! IN 1945 GERMANY and AUSTRIA MUST BE INFLAMED AND BURNED, MAUREDERING (WITH FULL RIGHTS FOR THIS SACRED REVENGE!!!) ALL POPULATION, INCLUDING YOUNG CHILDREN AND WOMEN AND OLDMEN!!!
BUT WHAT WAS THAT???
THAT DID NOT HAPPENED!!! "Bad SOVIETS" WERE MERCYFULL ENOUGH TO THE MOST UNHUMAN ENEMY, AND LEAVED GERMANS THEIR LIVESTO LIVE.
YES, WE, WHO LOST MORE THAT 45 MILLIONS OF POPULATION, WHOS WONDERFULL AND BEAUTIFULL MOTHERLAND WAS BURNED, RAPED AND WIPED - WE WERE MERCYFULL AND LEFT THEM THEIR LIVES!!!
AND HOW DARE YOU NOW TALKING ABOUT ...RAPING, BANISHING,BRINMGING...??? wHO DIDNT SAW WHAT THAT MEAN!!! ASK PEOPLE FROM BELARUS',WONDERFULL COUNTRY WITH VERY HEARTFULL AND KIND PEOPLE - ABOURT WWII TIME! BELARUS' LOST 1/3 of its population - 3.000.000, burning till last house over 9 000 Belarusian villages killing all it population, deporting some 380,000 people for slave labour, and killing hundreds of thousands of civilians more.
LAST WORD: GERMANY STARTED THAT WAR, MADE APALEPTIC DAMAGE TO HUMANITY, AND NOW SOME BUSTARDS DARE TO SAY SOME THING ABOUT "POOR GERMANS IN 1945"????
-
Just look at what Spanishfly said. If Hitler was voted the 3rd most admired person in German history there would be outrage, especially in Russia. But Stalin, who arguable caused the deaths of more people than Hitler is seen as a Hero of some kind, and he wasn't, just a murderous tyrant. His generals won him the war, but he took the credit.
The main difference between them is that Stalin was smart and knew how to make friends. While Hitler went for the "badass massmurderer" image with skulls, death and black uniforms, Stalin was sweetmouthing about solidarity and socialism.
Both were fascists, both were killers, both were bad. But one of them realized that it ain't smart to walk around and talk about how "bad" he is and played it nice instead. That's why Stalin not only killed more people than Hitler, but also got the support from most of the world while doing it!
At the same time, I understand why the Russians admire him. If I was Russian I would place him at the top spot. He killed alot of his own people, sure, but to be honest; would the USSR have been able to stop the Nazi onslaught without a leader like him? He had that "strong fist" that was necessary to unite the Russians against this the greatest threat they had ever faced (saying alot, considering that they suffered under both the Mongols and Napoleon)... He was a necessary evil.
Onto the topic... Yes, when you start to really read about WW2 you realize pretty fast that the most important part of the war was "Hitler vs. Stalin". More people fought and died on the Eastern Front than on all other fronts combined. IIRC, the top 5 bloodiest battles in human history were all fought on the Russian front of WW2. Stalingrad, Leningrad, Kursk and Berlin are just some of the more famous battles, but there are numerous others that we barely know anything about in the west, but make the most ferocious fighting in Western Europe look like afternoon tea.
It was the culmination of a conflict that had defined post-WW1 Europe; that between fascism and communism. The nazis dubbed it a "War of Extermination" - which is a nice way of summing it up.
In the end, it meant the end of traditional European militarism.
This is, imo, a very good documentary about the war in the East; "The War of the Century"
"War of The Century": 1 of 20 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVo-2jfeoMM#normal)
-
Just look at what Spanishfly said. If Hitler was voted the 3rd most admired person in German history there would be outrage, especially in Russia. But Stalin, who arguable caused the deaths of more people than Hitler is seen as a Hero of some kind, and he wasn't, just a murderous tyrant. His generals won him the war, but he took the credit.
The main difference between them is that Stalin was smart and knew how to make friends. While Hitler went for the "badass massmurderer" image with skulls, death and black uniforms, Stalin was sweetmouthing about solidarity and socialism.
Both were fascists, both were killers, both were bad. But one of them realized that it ain't smart to walk around and talk about how "bad" he is and played it nice instead. That's why Stalin not only killed more people than Hitler, but also got the support from most of the world while doing it!
At the same time, I understand why the Russians admire him. If I was Russian I would place him at the top spot. He killed alot of his own people, sure, but to be honest; would the USSR have been able to stop the Nazi onslaught without a leader like him? He had that "strong fist" that was necessary to unite the Russians against this the greatest threat they had ever faced (saying alot, considering that they suffered under both the Mongols and Napoleon)... He was a necessary evil.
Onto the topic... Yes, when you start to really read about WW2 you realize pretty fast that the most important part of the war was "Hitler vs. Stalin". More people fought and died on the Eastern Front than on all other fronts combined. IIRC, the top 5 bloodiest battles in human history were all fought on the Russian front of WW2. Stalingrad, Leningrad, Kursk and Berlin are just some of the more famous battles, but there are numerous others that we barely know anything about in the west, but make the most ferocious fighting in Western Europe look like afternoon tea.
It was the culmination of a conflict that had defined post-WW1 Europe; that between fascism and communism. The nazis dubbed it a "War of Extermination" - which is a nice way of summing it up.
In the end, it meant the end of traditional European militarism.
This is, imo, a very good documentary about the war in the East; "The War of the Century"
"War of The Century": 1 of 20 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVo-2jfeoMM#normal)
Looks like a great video, i'm gonna check them out. Thanks for sharing!
For the supporters of Stalin and his actions, you can try to justify what he did and how he did it all you want. You can accuses Germany of all the evils you want (and most of them, rightfully so) but you can NEVER exempt Stalin from the SAME exact evils that Hitler committed.
And as far as Russia "needing" Stalin, to lead the army, no. The man the world (and Germany) respected most and considered Russia's greatest general was Tukhachevsky. He was so feared that Germany went out of it's way to plant fake evidence about him being a spy for them, just because they KNEW Stalin was a crackhead and would instantly react by killing him. And sure enough. He did just that.
Tukhachevsky was a great military mind that was a Field Marshal by age 42! Stalin hated him because during the Russian war with Poland, Stalin directly disobeyed orders from Tukhachevsky and the Russian army was beaten up outside of Warsaw because of it.
Also another note about Stalin. For the first 2 weeks after Germany invaded. He was no where to be found. No one knew where Stalin was. Not even the top ministers could find him to see what he wanted to do about the German invasion. Ya.....he was a GREAT leader of men :-\
-
Hitler and all his nation and army wanted TOTAL WAR on Ostfront? War to the last man? WAS GOING TO ELEMINATE ALL POLES, BELORUSIANS, UKRAINIANS, RUSSIANS?
Actually, he didn't. He intended to create a de-industrialized agricultural zone all around Germany, which would supply Germany with food and the resources needed for its industry - kinda like the Soviet Union did it with the Ukrainians.
In the meantime, ethnic Germans would focus on industry, soldiering and making babies.
As crass as it might sound, he basically wanted to create a new Sparta, including eugenics and all.
He only called out "Total War" when the Wehrmacht was getting into trouble in the East, and he needed to mobilize the people. Until then, he tried to keep the war as noninvasive on German everyday life as possible.
THAT DID NOT HAPPENED!!! "Bad SOVIETS" WERE MERCYFULL ENOUGH TO THE MOST UNHUMAN ENEMY, AND LEAVED GERMANS THEIR LIVESTO LIVE.
You might want to also mention the part where Russians de-industrialized Germany and put the Germans to work in its factories and on its fields to feed the Russia, nevermind the complete expulsion of any Germans living East of the Oder/Neisse (after all ca. 30% of Germans) either into the GDR or Siberia, Kazakhstan, etc, where they would work as slaves to allow for the Soviet Economy to continue working despite Communist mismanagement.
YES, WE, WHO LOST MORE THAT 45 MILLIONS OF POPULATION, WHOS WONDERFULL AND BEAUTIFULL MOTHERLAND WAS BURNED, RAPED AND WIPED - WE WERE MERCYFULL AND LEFT THEM THEIR LIVES!!!
Not so much at your own discretion. Stalin very much wanted to go Old Testament on Germany's ass, but the Western Allies wouldn't allow it (Moral Superiority and all). And Russia was too weakened to risk a confrontation with them.
PS: Casualty estimates for the Soviet Union gravitate more around 24 Million. (Human lives make for wonderful statistics, don't they?)
AND HOW DARE YOU NOW TALKING ABOUT ...RAPING, BANISHING,BRINMGING...???
Because when both sides are equally bad, neither has the right to complain about the other.
LAST WORD: GERMANY STARTED THAT WAR, MADE APALEPTIC DAMAGE TO HUMANITY, AND NOW SOME BUSTARDS DARE TO SAY SOME THING ABOUT "POOR GERMANS IN 1945"????
Look at my previous comment. He was basically arguing that, because the Soviet Union was in no way morally superior, he has no real reason to be grateful towards it as a German.
They didn't bring liberty, they didn't bring safety and they didn't bring justice.
The Eastern Germans basically jumped out of the frying pan and into the fire - nothing to be grateful about, really.
-
http://gplanost.x-berg.de/gplanost.html (http://gplanost.x-berg.de/gplanost.html)
Generalplan Ost
Rechtliche, wirtschaftliche und räumliche Grundlagen des Ostaufbaus
Vorgelegt von SS-Oberführer Professor Dr. XX, Berlin-Dahlem, 28.Mai 1942
When You talk about "Bad Stalin", "equal evil" and other crap - You must "forget" about this:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d6/Konzentrazionslager.png)
Soviet soldiers didnt made shoes from human skin. And didnt murder whole sities to the last one survivor. German "heroes" did that. German wonderfull soldiers found good way to discound ammunition - they tied two little child one to another, laughuing and calling it butter-n-broad, and shoot two little heads with one bullet. Yep, very brave and VERY HUMAN.
-
Zerstorerflieger your acting like a child. No one is saying that Germany didn't commit war crimes. Everyone knows that. What you and others don't seem to admit or know though is that Russians ALSO did these things.
Subutai posted a video earlier on this page about the Eastern Front and imagine this: Ukranian partisans admitted that Germans killed people by shooting them, but that Russian partisans cut off ears, noses, genitals, and mutilated the bodies of not only German soldiers but also Ukranian CIVILIANS! OMG...people who LIVED through the war seem to disagree with your sentiment that Germans were the worst offenders.
The reality is Russians were doing the same things Germans were doing, just going about it differently. Germans thought they had a sick sense of "European Honor" and simply shot people, Russians used, as quoted in the documentary "Asian tactics" of torture and mutilation. You can prance around all you want and act like a child but if you seriously think Russia had the "Morale High Ground" against Germany, then I want some of the drugs you are on because you are dead wrong.
-
USA is rich thanks to european wars :/ this is indeed the reality.
But nowadys are the USA who are asking Europeans to help em angainst terrorism, but as long as we are allys we cannot ask you money for our help xD bloody yankees! And i wish Europe could make a little more efforts to help USA
-
None denied the atrocities commited by the nazis(in particular the ss death squads not the WH)
However you're in denial with regards to the atrocities by Stalin's regime against millions of people even before WW2.
What the nazis did doesn't somehow 'cleanse' the crimes of Stalin's regime even against his own people (not to mention his purges of other minorities including Jews etc). And the murder of thousands of Poles?? They weren't even fighting against the soviets! You can't try to justify Stalin's crimes by simply pointing to the nazi crimes, that's not how it works.
It's a bit of a double standard to call one mass murderer a hero and the other mass murderer an evil crazy maniac don't ya think?
War is a dirty business and it was at it's worse form in the Eastern front. What you need to remember and to realize is that the regimes don't always reflect the actual majority people who where simply fighting for their life.
Accepting what Stalin was isn't throwing dirt on the memory of those russians who gave their life in defense of their country.
Denying Stalin's evil however IS throwing dirt on the millions of his dead victims
-
Precisely, nobodys saying the Nazis didn't commit atrocities, of course they did. But people also did on Stalins command. If Stalin was so opposed to the Nazis, what do you think the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact was all about?
And as for defending oneself, I suppose that was why Poland and Finland were invaded?
Like Zerstorer said, this isn't ignoring and glossing over the immense sacrifices made by the Russian people, just accepting that what the leaders of their country was doing was wrong.
Whats so bad about that?
-
Denying Stalin's evil however IS throwing dirt on the millions of his dead victims
I dont deny Stalins madness. I know about REVENGE actions os soviet soldiers with germans and other axis. And I dont like Stalin personally, as more than 10 of my ansectors died from hunger in 30th...
My two grangrandfathers fought that war.
A.Konstantinov was anti-tank artillery man, fought 41-44 and MiA in Belorussia. Had 12 tanks on score, 2 Tigers include.
F.Bubnov, fought only from summer42 to oct.42, on Don encorclements, and finally in the flame of Stalingrad... Heavy shellshocked during closecombat, luckyly survived and dismissed.
They fought against nazis, and I get crazy when somebody is talking about my grandfathers, liberating my motherland from that f*cking nazis were doing bad thing!
And about cruelty of war - eaurope never suffered so much from "bad soviets" as soviets suffered from "blonde heroes"... Maguar, Croats, Yougoslavian partizans, British - all of them were extremly cruel to both soldiers and sivillians. Not only "bad soviets".
Post Merge: January 18, 2010, 02:35:45 PM
What you and others don't seem to admit or know though is that Russians ALSO did these things.
Ok, tell me please about Soviet Konzlags. I want to hear. And how many millions (not thouthands, but millions - as nazis did) people were burned alive or died because of gas camera... Telll me... Russian "Arbeit macht frei"...
Our "big brother" from the other side of planet just want to place Russia on the same level with nazis. And You now, pumpheads, are just zombied :) Good buy...
-
And about cruelty of war - eaurope never suffered so much from "bad soviets" as soviets suffered from "blonde heroes"... Maguar, Croats, Yougoslavian partizans, British - all of them were extremly cruel to both soldiers and sivillians. Not only "bad soviets".
I think everyone is saying that ALL countries had some war crimes in WWII. The US, Germany, Russia, England etc etc. Now you can certainly say some more then others but in the end, war is war and soldiers do things sometimes that they aren't proud of later.
Ok, tell me please about Soviet Konzlags. I want to hear. And how many millions (not thouthands, but millions - as nazis did) people were burned alive or died because of gas camera... Telll me... Russian "Arbeit macht frei"...
Our "big brother" from the other side of planet just want to place Russia on the same level with nazis. And You now, pumpheads, are just zombied :) Good buy...
I'm not being an ass here at all, but I literally don't understand anything you meant by this. I don't know what you mean about burning people alive, what a gas cameras is. I don't know what you mean by big brother placing you with Nazis and I have NO clue what pumpheads that are zombied means. Feel free to clarify, in a NON insulting way, if you wish.
-
Haha, "Zombied Pumphead"...I like it ;D
-
First - we must understand that both - Germany and the Soviet Union are both responsible for the II World War.
Why cannot we place Soviets and Nazis on the same line? What is the difference? A different way of killing people - different ideology? Does killing people with gas (and not by the shot in the back of the head like NKWD) makes Germans a worse murderers?
Should we show you the "Arbeit macht frei" in Soviet Union. Ask all the people who were in russian gulag. Ask them, what is it like to die out of hunger on Siberia and is it better than dying by gas in Auschiwtz.
Or maybe ask civilian prisoners who were tortured to death by NKWD in Wilno or Lwow - is it worse to die being tortured by the SS?
And ask polish officers, lawyers, policeman, artists - if it's better to be imprisoned by Germans, or be killed by Russians?
If it were not for Russian intervention, maybe the II WW would end in Poland. Of course polish army was much weaker in numbers of tanks and planes, but untill 17th september, polish defence was strong enough to hold Germans a lot longer.
What I am trying to say, is that USSR brought Germans to their land by themselves by helping them in 1939. And every Russian, who cannot forgive Germans for what they did in Russia, should think about what the Red Army did later in Poland, Eastern Prussia and Germany. Thousands of german and polish woman were raped, whole towns were set on fire - people were more afraid of Russians than Germans when the front was getting close to their homes.
Also Great Britain and France were partly responsible for the II WW, as they were the main powers in Europe after the I WW. Passive reaction of France and Brits after Hitler invaded Poland was the main reason why Hitler was successful.
Military tragedy of polish army in september 1939, were mainly caused by british and french decision. First they forced polish goverment to stop mobilisation of polish troops in august 1939 - because they believed that such move would piss off Hitler (lol?). Thanks to that the war started when 30-40% of polish troops were in trains heading to the border.
Then they stated that if the polish defence will be strong enough - they will help us in 2 weeks. Well - they didn't react at all.
And after 5 years of polish tragedy on all fronts of II WW, allied didn't have enough guts to stop spreading communism to Poland. They betrayed friendly to them polish goverment in London.
In conclusion - the main reason of the II WW in Europe was brutal invasion of Germans and Soviets in Poland. Also the passive reaction of France and GB helped Hitler to gain such military power. And Soviets should be placed on the same line as Nazis - because it is not the numbers of deaths what is important, the REASON of murdering is what is really vital - and I cannot see the difference if it goes to that - I really can't.
-
First - we must understand that both - Germany and the Soviet Union are both responsible for the II World War.
there u wrong ww2 is started by the french and the brittish they putted all the costs they had from ww1 and they trew em on the krauts (poor krauts) and the brits claimed the rurh area (bigges industreal area of germany) for them selves (CORRECT ME IF IM WRONG) so the germans had no way to pay them back so the ppl where broke and lisened to ppl like hitler an beleved him thats how i got to power and that how ww2 started
-
I'm talking about direct reasons - not the historical ones - of course we can say, that there are a lot of factors that influenced politics in 1918 - 1939, mainly stupid, brainless mistakes in the core of the Versailles treaty after the I WW. For example status of Gdansk (Danzig) as a free city and the new borders of Germany after the II WW.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4c/Rzeczpospolita_1939.svg (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4c/Rzeczpospolita_1939.svg)
Who was such an idiot to think, that eventually Poland and Germany wo'nt have a conflict about access to the Eastern Prussia? And imagine, that this treaty was meant to keep peace after the horrible I WW.
-
We are talking about 2 different wars. USSR won the Great Patriotic War II. Allies won the WW2.
Allies... Even Churchill says: "If German will begin to win, we will start to help USSR. If USSR will begin to win - we will help to German" We have fought two different wars
Childrens of USA, or Uk haven't died at their homes. British haven't saw how fascist burn whole villages to the ashes. USA haven't saw how peoples just dies because there is nothing to eat. Only USSR have saw this. Only the USSR fought on their motherland. And that why they are heroes.
Stalin = Hitler. That was most powerful propaganda ever. Clear your minds from cold war information.
My grandmother have lived in USSR. And when she talks with me - she never complaint about their life. "Life in USSR was great" - she says. And my mother thinks so too. So where is the problem? My relatives and relatives of my friends have never complaint about communism.
That means, that problem in your feeling of socialism. Communism is not just killing and red flag. Think differently.
Sorry, if I made some mistakes. I'm just learning english.
Thank you for you attention. Have a nice day.
P.S I can give you a link, but it's on russian.
http://historic.ru/books/item/f00/s00/z0000074/st032.shtml (http://historic.ru/books/item/f00/s00/z0000074/st032.shtml)
There is lot of intersting things. With links on sources.
-
roxxell, some people had a great time living in Nazi Germany. And I would like to see a source for this Churchill quote you mention.
-
spanishfly:
all now crying about "poor Poland" in 1939, when coward soviets "hit with knife in back", together with germans they finished already discouraged and totally retreating polish army.
But now nobody will remember, WHAT Poland did when Hitler occupied Czech in 1938 - it cut off a territory pieses like a vulture, and did 100% EQUALLY as USSR did in 1939. And Polish have no moral rights to complain.
Of course, now no one polish historyan will remember that, because history is a politic now.
-
The Irony of Russians claiming US 'Propoganda' against the USSR is so thick i could smear it on toast and sell it.
-
Poor Poland was a losers. They lose attack on Czechs. They lose diplomatic war and became a target for a German and USSR, they lose real war.
If you really think that Poland was so cute - read some WWI and WWII history books already. USSR attacks them not for fun.
-
Lol - when did I say that Poland did not make mistakes?
The difference is that Poles did not murdered 6 mil people while Germans and Russian did in Poland. Of course - Poland is to blame if it goes to the case of "Zaolzie", but don't compare the polish ocupation of Zaolzie and Soviet ocupation of Poland.
Roxxell - if you really think that the Soviet Union was so "cute" than I'm not even going to argue with you. You're living in the world full of M&Ms and I'm not going to drag you out of there.
"Only USSR have saw this. Only the USSR fought on their motherland. And that why they are heroes."
And Poles, Ukrainians, Bielarussians, French, Germans etc. fought where? In space? In other dimensions? I know that for some Russians the "motherland" is from Wladivostok to Berlin, but it's not true ;)
"
But now nobody will remember, WHAT Poland did when Hitler occupied Czech in 1938 - it cut off a territory pieses like a vulture, and did 100% EQUALLY as USSR did in 1939. And Polish have no moral rights to complain."
You cannot compare this form the political point of view though. Zaolzie in the International Law was part of Poland (treaty from 1919 or 1921 i think), but it was occupied by Chech Army during the polish war with russians in 1920.
On the other hand - eastern territory of Poland (Kresy) in International Law belonged to Poland (treaty with Russia in 1921) so it makes a difference.
In International Law:
Anexion of Zaolzie was LEGAL (but wrong from the moral point of view)
Attack of Soviets in 1939 was ILLEGAL.
Easy...
"We are talking about 2 different wars. USSR won the Great Patriotic War II. Allies won the WW2."
That was the dumbest argument that I ever seen. So maybe the II World War did not ever exist? Maybe that was just few wars? Aggression of Soviet Russia in 1939 was a participation in the II WW. Agression on japan in 1945 WAS a part of the II WW.
-
Wtf is happening here? You are discussing about you ever dont understand.
Topic starter tried to say that "soviet people had the most severest situation and played one of main part in this war, but nowadays many people dont know that"
And what are you doing now? You are finding who is good and who is the most bad?
Nobody from the ex-Ussr will tell you that Stalin was good or a hero. A leader, a man of strong will, but not a hero. The second enemy after the Nazis was the government
Even in ussr was not ever said that Stalin won the war. It is said that soviet people won Great Patriotic War.
творится какаято ересь.
-
Even in ussr was not ever said that Stalin won the war. It is said that soviet people won Great Patriotic War.
творится какаято ересь.
Yes directly, all veterans say - "We fought for our motherland, for our families - not for Stalin and goverment".
Точно :)
-
spanishfly
I haven't told you that USSR was so cute.
Yes, Poland actions was LEGAL, and USSR actions was ILLEGAL. Very funny opinion.
This is the real diplomacy. There is no legal or illegal. War is just another way of dipliomacy. Have you heard it?
And you are tell me that I live in the world full of M&M? ^_^
I'm don't tell you that USSR was a World Cutest Country. No, of course it's not. There are a lot of bad things have been made. But they have made a great contribution for a victory.
You are think that WWII and Great Patriotic War is the same?
In Russia we think other way. We have books about WWII. There is about USA, UK etc. And books about GPW - it's about USSR vs. German.
We can find thousands bad things about any country. But is this really needed? We just should respect their contribution to this wars. No matter how big this was.
bsk is absolutely right, though.
И не говорите. Просто некоторые вещи неприятно слышать.
-
As I wrote on the forum of the Relic about Poland:
Since the rebirth of Poland after the WWI and until the WWII, Poles dreamed about the Great Poland, what would include Lithuania, Belarus and Ukraine. If in 1939 the USSR didn't unite western lands of Ukraine and Belarus with eastern lands, it still would be a part of Poland. Lands of "Eastern Poland", as it is known in the West, don't return to Poland, because it is not Polish lands.
I do not want to hear about "poor Poles".
Do the Polish–Ukrainian War (1918-1919) and the Polish–Soviet War (1919-1921) say you nothing? So called "Eastern Poland" was concurred lands of the (Western) UNR and should become a part of UkrSSR after falling of the all UNR.
Do you know have many wars was between Poles and Ruthenian nations?
The intervention in the Kiev of 1015—1019
The Battle of Zawichost (1205)
The Galicia–Volhynia Wars (1340–1392)
The Lithuanian Civil War of 1389–1392
The Lithuanian Civil War of 1432–1438
Cossack rebellions and wars of 1591—1593, 1594—1596, 1625, 1630, 1637, 1638, 1648 — 1657, 1655 — 1658, 1654 — 1667, 1666 — 1671, 1672 — 1676, 1702 — 1704, 1734, 1750, 1768, 1768;
The Polish–Ukrainian War (1918-1919) was the last. And also was many Russo-Polish Wars.
Poland grew and absorbed the neighbours: the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, lands of Ruthenian principalities. These Ruthenian lands all time rebelled and tried to be free, until they became free and founded a state what called as "the Hetmanate". Do not forget that Poland tried to capture even the Duchy of Moscow.
Ruthenians demanded autonomy in Rzeczpospolita, but did not receive it. So do not tell me now about the Commonwealth of nations. Belarusians were lucky to be part of the liberal Lithuanian autonomy in the Commonwealth and they were not harassed, but the Ukrainian lands, which became part of Poland, were Catholicized and polonized. How was created the Greek-Catholic Church? It was a compromise between the Orthodox faith and the pressure of the Catholics.
Ukraine had disappeared from the map, when the Ruthenian principalities, especially Galicia, which the Poles consider as their own, were conquered. Ukraine had disappeared from the map when Hetmanate was broken on the right-bank part and left-bank part, and then absorbed by the Empire Russia, Ukraine had disappeared from the map, when Poland invaded in our lands in the last war between our nations. And only in the USSR, Ukraine saved some sovereignty and was and still is a founder-member of the UN.
You say these lands were not conquered? Who did ask Ukrainians, when Lithuanians created an union with Poles? Why the UPA fought against the friends-Poles before WWII? If a country is big, must it forget its historical ethnic lands and give this lands to neighbours? Ukraine is big, but it has never been an empire, like Russia or Poland. And Poland still have not polish East Prussia. Empires are always breaking down and their inhabitants are always complaining that they lost "their" territories.
Since ancient times, Russia, Belarus and Ukraine already have their own "Commonwealth", as they were born from one Rus (Ruthenia).
Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was a "very" liberal country, especially in the Polish part... As a result, most of Ruthenian Orthodox nobility went to the Zaporozhian Host and became commanders of cossacks. Many hetmans were Ruthenian nobles. And there "wasn't" a sectarian strife. Yes, there was colonization/Polonization. In the end, the Poles lived in cities, while native nations lived in villages.
And so on.
P.S. After WWI on the map of the world were many new and not so new states, which have militaristic leader who dreamed about glory for his country and about the Great [write his country]: Piłsudski, Mannerheim, Mussolini, Hitler, Atatürk... and other militarists. Some of them were fanatics and had the bad end Some not. The liberation of Western Belarus and Ukraine finally killed the imperialist dreams of this country and unite the nations. Nothing to complain about it.
Let's forget about the commiphobia now.
My view is this: in 1939 was a natural rematch of the USSR and the Red Army liberated the Ruthenian lands from Polish rule. Do not forget that the OUN/UPA fought against Poland in Ukrainian lands before the war. So Poles can be regarded as occupiers in the "Eastern Poland".
I hope you can read in Russian:
11 ноября 1918 независимость Польши восстановлена в результате распада Российской и Австро-Венгерской империй.
В 1919 разгорается Советско-польская война, которая идёт с переменным успехом. В начале поляки захватывают Минск и Киев и продвигаются вглубь Украины и Белоруссии, Красная армия переходит в контрнаступление и доходит до Вислы, но ей не удается взять хорошо укреплённые Львов и Варшаву. Происходит «чудо на Висле» — Красная армия терпит поражение, множество солдат попадает в плен к полякам, где в плену намеренно уничтожается по различным оценкам до 40 тысяч красноармейцев. Война фактически проигрывается Советской Россией, и по Рижскому мирному договору 1921 года западная часть украинских и белорусских земель отходит к Польше. В октябре 1920 г. польские войска захватывают часть Литвы с городом Вильно. В 1926 в Польше установлен националистический санационный режим во главе с Юзефом Пилсудским.
4 ноября 1935 Польша и Германия подписывают Соглашение об экономическом сотрудничестве. Для подавления «диссидентов» во второй Речи Посполитой по инициативе министра внутренних дел при непосредственном консультировании немецких «специалистов» была создана сеть концлагерей. Эта сеть является примером типичного польско-нацистского сотрудничества. Один из первых таких лагерей был построен 12 июля в пяти километрах от городка Берёза-Картузская (нынешняя Брестская область ) как точная копия нацистского концлагеря Ориенбург: пять защитных рядов изгороди из колючей проволоки, широкий ров с водой, затем проволочная изгородь под высоковольтным напряжением, по углам ограды (высотой около 7 м ) сторожевые вышки с пулемётами, охраны с немецкими овчарками. Непосредственно за организацию лагеря отвечал польский воевода Костик Бернацкий.
В 1938 Польша отобрала у Чехословакии Тешинскую область.
21 марта 1939 Германия требует от Польши передать ей вольный город Данциг, вступить в Антикоминтерновский пакт и открыть для неё «польский коридор» (создан после Первой мировой войны для обеспечения выхода Польши к Балтийскому морю ). Польша отвергает все требования Германии.
So in some ways, the war formally was caused by Poland itself. In fact, of course, the war would be, even if Poland fulfilled the requirements of Germany.
But now I have focused on conquests of Poland
I think in Poland under a rule of Nazis was worse than under a rule of Socialists. Besides, Stalin died in 1953 ... Soviet regime was "softer" after that.
What would happen to Poland, if it is not "liberated" by the Red Army?
-
Even Churchill says: "If German will begin to win, we will start to help USSR. If USSR will begin to win - we will help to German"
Yes, I´m sure Churchill really looked forward to getting friendly with the Germans while they bombed London.
Childrens of USA, or Uk haven't died at their homes. British haven't saw how fascist burn whole villages to the ashes.
I wonder what country you are from to be so ignorant of the Blitz.
-
Even Churchill says: "If German will begin to win, we will start to help USSR. If USSR will begin to win - we will help to German"
Yes, I´m sure Churchill really looked forward to getting friendly with the Germans while they bombed London.
Childrens of USA, or Uk haven't died at their homes. British haven't saw how fascist burn whole villages to the ashes.
I wonder what country you are from to be so ignorant of the Blitz.
Churchill was a greatest diplomat. And he is follows his own targets - for example kill two rabbits by one shot. He was succesfull. We still suffer from this war.
If Churchill wants to stop the war, he can just attack Germans earlier.
You call me ignorant? You really think that I don't know anything about blitzkrieg? So, it's better for you to know, that I am from Russia. And I'm know better, what was going on there. 'Cause I have information not only from books, but from facts that my grandfathers told me. Nobody knows the war better then soldiers, yeah?
UEArtemis - you're quite right. Good post.
-
No not Blitzkrieg :P so yeah you do seem quite ignorant of it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Blitz (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Blitz)
Before the Americans came over to take part in Overlord I doubt Britain Launching an attack on Fortress Europe would have been very succesful at all.
Besides Britain was fighting in Africa and Asia right from the beggining of the War. Whilst Stalin and Hitler were busy buying time and making friends.
Cheers
-
"I hope you can read in Russian"
Nie - nie czytam po rosyjsku i nie widzę powodu, dla którego miałbym znać ten język.
First to roxxell:
Of course war is just another way of diplomacy. I don't see a problem with the fact that USSR attacked Poland. But murdering thousands of war prisoners, civilians just because the system say so - it's not diplomacy.
"You are think that WWII and Great Patriotic War is the same? In Russia we think other way. We have books about WWII. "
Such thing is only stated in russian sources...so I will stick with all the other countries in the world with the opinion that USSR fought in II WW.
And once again - I'm not talking about soldiers of the Soviet Union - I know that they paid for freedom with blood. I have respect for Soviet soldiers - Ukrainians, Russians, Bielarussians, Poles, people of Georgia, Mongolia etc..
I'm only refering to the system of the USSR.
"We can find thousands bad things about any country."
Are British, French, Italian or American famous of their bloody masacres all over the front lines? And if it goes to prisoners of war - even in German POV camps there was more humanity than in the Soviet Union ones.
To UeArtemis:
Am I saying that Poland should recieve it's eastern territory back? No - I'm not. I am aware that on these territories there were mostly Ukrainians, Bielarussians etc.
I am glad that novadays we have free Lithuania, Bielarussia and Ukraine. And once again I'm not talking about the military aspects of our history - I cannot blame Ukraine for it's battle for independence - I realise that those nations may see in Poland the same threat as we saw in Russia.
Maybe Poland deserved to be conquered by Hitler and Stalin. But we didn't deserved all those mass masacres which came after Soviet Union and Germany invaded our country.
AND THE LAST THING - I hope that everyone will agree with this opinion:
Glory for all the heroes of the II World War who sacraficed their lives for the sake of their motherlands. No matter of the nationality or army they fought in.
Rest in peace - for all who died and was murdered during the II World War.
-
I simply copied my quote. Words about the Russian language skills were not to the people of this forum.
Yes, I can understand Polish, if I read slowly. Slavic languages are very similar. I can understand even Bulgarian.
-
Spanishfly
Thanks for your opinion. I will read about russian-poland conflict more. Your point of view quite interesting.
Luz -
We cannot figure out now - if british attacks german in europe earlier. So, arguing in that is just a waste of time.
Buying time? Yes, it's wise choice. USSR have no even ammunition. So, there is no other way, in my opinion
-
The Irony of Russians claiming US 'Propoganda' against the USSR is so thick i could smear it on toast and sell it.
Exactly! It's funny as hell. Funny how Russians forget, after the war was dying down and Hitler committed suicide, Stalin accused the Western Allies of harboring Hitler and hiding him away so that he didn't have to face Russia's wrath.
I mean, if that isn't laughable, what is?!
Then later they claimed they had found his body in his bunker and burned it. But Hitler's own guards claim THEY burned it.
lol Clearly this whole thing is US propaganda..... 8) :o ;D
-
[quote author=leo.civil.uefs Today we are about to play a Game mod created by Germans, Americans, British and other people... thats freedom, and today there is freedom because million of Soviets died in the past fighting for this freedom ,they deserve respect.
[/quote]
Im from Poland - a country occupied by the soviets untill 1989.
Thanks to soviets there was no freedom for Central Europe.
-
Well, this might be completely off-topic, but a question to that Polish user:
It's interesting that Poland seems to consider itself Central Europe - everywhere else it is considered Eastern Europe, with Germany/Austria/Switzerland being considered the Center - everything West of it is Western Europe, South is Southern, North is Northern and East is Eastern Europe.
I wonder why Poland calls itself Central Europe - is it because of the Stigma attached to being "Eastern European"?
-
Technically, the centre of Europe is in Ukraine :)
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/60/Center_of_Europe1.JPG)
-
Wiki says that its pretty much open to debate.
"The understanding of the concept of Central Europe is an ongoing source of controversy[12], though the Visegrád Group constituents are generally included as de facto C.E. countries.[1] The region is usually considered to include:
* Austria
* Czech Republic
* Germany
* Hungary
* Liechtenstein
* Poland
* Slovakia
* Slovenia
* Switzerland"
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Europe (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Europe)
-
I guess this depends on a number of factors.
Purely geographically speaking (that is, including the European Russian territories), the Center would be among the axis of Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary.
Politically speaking (that is only including EU countries), Germany would be the dead center of Europe.
Another factor could be ethnicity/ancient tribes: Latin Europe being the West and South, Germanic Europe the Center and North, and Slavic Europe the East.
The Iron Curtain obviously also did its part in classifying Center, East and West quite profoundly.
Germany became the Center, split in two between the Capitalist West and Communist East, and therefore, everything East of it was Eastern (aka Communist) Europe.
This, of course, explains the preference of many former USSR countries to consider themselves Central instead of Eastern - 'Eastern European' has become associated with Soviet Communism, Backwardness and Economic weakness, while 'Central European' is relatively neutral.
-
so from what i get from this its japan's fault that germany lost the war. If germany didnt have that pact with japan and pearl harbor didnt happen, germany would have beat USSR.
-
you could also call it Hitlers fault for starting a war and trying to commit genocide?
-
You could also call it the Ally's fault for defending themselves.
As Von Clausewitz said so nicely 200 years ago:
"A war doesn't start until the defender resists."
-
No offence, but thats the most pathetic thing i'v ever read. Its an interesting quote, and an interesting point of view, but the quote applied to World War 2 is just pathetic.
If resisting mass genocide is wrong, i dont want to be right.
-
The Soviets didn't fight against 3 Super powers supported by 50 other countries...
USSR could win because they were supported by USA and the other nations, 3. Reich couldnt use their full power against USSR. Stalin hadnt even enough boots for his soldiers.
At the beginning of the war the USA supplied the Russians with THOUSANDS of tanks, trucks, jeeps, planes, trains, boots, weapons and food!... It were the american half-trucks that mobilized soviet forces. without them russian soldiers would have walked by foot. Russians used horses to drag artilleries because they had no own trucks... Who designed the T34's suspension system? The American Walter Christie.
The forces of The UK took out the Cream of the Luftwaffe during 1940, defeated the Afrika Corps while the US was "getting ready" and in the Western European Theatre made sure of Victory so the US could take the Glory! the R.A.F. was pivotal in the defeat of Nazi Germany...
And again, America was England's life line against Nazi Germany and sent tons and tons and tons of, "guns and butter', to England, with thousands of American Merchant Marine sailors....
When you command unlimited suplies of men and material , and outnumber ur enemy 4,5,10 :1 ..its extremelly hard to lose , specially in that stage of the war. the Germans fought with what they had , they faced HUGE logistical and suply problems .... the Soviets had plenty of suplies , plenty of tanks , plenty of everything . German reinforcements were depleted and exhausted , outnumbered and without suplies . They were short on EVERYTHING all throughout the war
The Allies defeating Germany was only a matter of time . If you look at the force/suplly situation you can clearlly see that it was a miracle that the germans got that far as they did .
btw Russia was very well prepeared for WW2. Their armies were larger and their tanks were better (only at the beginning).
Germans wre totally outnumbered + they hadnt enough support, the enemies ALWAYS had supplies by their allies etc etc. USSR couldn't fight the nazis alone thats why the germans are fighting a two fronts the russians in the east usa in the west, if only the germans fighting a east front the nazis would have won.
-
you could also call it Hitlers fault for starting a war and trying to commit genocide?
I don't seem to have put fine enough of a point on it, but I was being sarcastic.
While it is technically correct, you obviously can never blame a defender for resisting.
-
"I wonder why Poland calls itself Central Europe - is it because of the Stigma attached to being "Eastern European"?"
To be honest - I have no idea...I think that we're quite in centre with Czech, Germany and Slovakia, but who cares. Actually I don't feel any bad feelings about Poland being called an eastern country. The most important thing that Poland lost after the II World War was that "eastern" element of it's culture - which was spread on territories taken by the Soviet Union. Of course I realise that huge part of those territories should belong to Ukrainians and Bialorussians - without Lwow, Grodno and Vilnus (actually Vilnus and territories around it are still rather polish than Lithuanian - if it goes to ethnics of course).
"Im from Poland - a country occupied by the soviets untill 1989.
Thanks to soviets there was no freedom for Central Europe."
Well - not everything was bad during the Soviet occupation.
For the first few years after the end of the II WW we created many good, patriotic movies about the war:
Westerplatte (1967)
Westerplatte (1967) part03 [English Subtitles] Polish war movie (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mz6iysn6Gpg&feature=related#normal)
It's part 3 of the movie, presenting the defence of Westerplatte in 1939. If someone wants to see the start o the II WW from the polish point of view - you can watch that :).The whole movie is on youtube with english subs.
Of course those movies were full of anti German and western allies propaganda...but who cares - at least it was patriotic :) Today we are a free country. But who knows why - there are few as patriotic movies as this one.
If it goes to the II World War - it's natural that every country has an individual point of view about that conflict. For Poles it is mainly tragedy and later soviet ocupation, for Ukraine it's the time of it's fight for independecne, for Soviets it's the Great Patriotic War etc.
The truth is that none of those countries could win the war without the help of others. As well as Germans couldn't fight the war without tons of equipment gained in Czechoslovakia ,Poland and France.
-
Im from Poland - a country occupied by the soviets untill 1989.
Thanks to soviets there was no freedom for Central Europe.
Technically, this was not an occupation.
-
"Technically, this was not an occupation."
He meant Poland under Soviet domination. And technically Soviet Union occupied polish teritorries east of the Curzon Line :) After that free Lithuania, and semi democratic Ukraine and Bialorussia were created.
As I said returning those territories to Ukraine and Bielarussia was the right thing to do (not counting Lwów and Grodno in 1945), but the biggest mistake, was that polish government did not fight for territories around Vilnus after 1989 - where still there are mostly Poles
-
Technically, Republic of Ukraine, Belarus and Lithuania existed before 1991. Moreover, they are ones of the founders of the UN. And calling someone's country semi-democratic is an insult.
Areas that are located east of the line were "incorporated" in these republics, and not occupied. Examples of occupation: Northern France, Poland during World War II. And do not confuse puppet governments and territories under the direct control of the conquerors.
Vilnius is the capital of Lithuania. It is foolish to claim territory near the capital of the neighboring state. Such lands are an integral part of the country.
Lviv... You can read all on the Internet. It's a long story.
-
If it goes to Lviv (Lwów) the case is rather clear - it has beautiful history connected with Poland, it was one of the polish culture centers in the eastern territories - but in 100% it belongs to Ukraine now.
But the status of territories near Vilnus were not as clear in 1990. I'm not saying that NOW Poland should rip off that part out of Lithuania just because in that region, almost 65% of population are Poles. But in 1990 Poland had such a chance - and i think that for our country it would be a smart move.
Well, at least Lithuanians are happy ;p As i said it's always about the point of view ;p
-
Read about Kingdom of Galicia–Volhynia. The fall of this kingdom may be called the first partition of Ukraine.
Lviv was part of many empires, but always was one of the centres of Ukrainian culture and the struggle for independence.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/aa/Ukrainians_en.svg (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/aa/Ukrainians_en.svg) - Ukrainian ethnic lands.
I think we seriously deviated from the topic :(
-
So we're clear on one thing - Lviv was always polish - ukrainian center of culture.
"I think we seriously deviated from the topic :("
Yea - we did ;p Let us end it there, ok? :) And maybe continue via priv :) Cheers :)
-
you could also call it Hitlers fault for starting a war and trying to commit genocide?
I don't seem to have put fine enough of a point on it, but I was being sarcastic.
While it is technically correct, you obviously can never blame a defender for resisting.
Ah, i should not have taken you so seriously, i apologize.
-
Soviet soldiers didnt made shoes from human skin. And didnt murder whole sities to the last one survivor. German "heroes" did that. German wonderfull soldiers found good way to discound ammunition - they tied two little child one to another, laughuing and calling it butter-n-broad, and shoot two little heads with one bullet. Yep, very brave and VERY HUMAN.[/b]
Never seen any German wear shoes from human skin.
What "sities" were murdered to the last survivor?
How many willages were hungered to death when the red revolution came?
Youre too much into russian propaganda.
Nobody knows how many mass graves are there in the Soviet Union. We would know if Stalin lost the war.
-
Soviet soldiers didnt made shoes from human skin. And didnt murder whole sities to the last one survivor. German "heroes" did that. German wonderfull soldiers found good way to discound ammunition - they tied two little child one to another, laughuing and calling it butter-n-broad, and shoot two little heads with one bullet. Yep, very brave and VERY HUMAN.[/b]
Never seen any German wear shoes from human skin.
What "sities" were murdered to the last survivor?
How many willages were hungered to death when the red revolution came?
Youre too much into russian propaganda.
Nobody knows how many mass graves are there in the Soviet Union. We would know if Stalin lost the war.
"Hunchback only isprivit tomb ..." And now for a couple of other sites and photos:
(http://photos.lifeisphoto.ru/25/3/256483.jpg)
http://www.warmuseum.kiev.ua/eng/z6.shtml (http://www.warmuseum.kiev.ua/eng/z6.shtml)
-
Soviet soldiers didnt made shoes from human skin. And didnt murder whole sities to the last one survivor. German "heroes" did that. German wonderfull soldiers found good way to discound ammunition - they tied two little child one to another, laughuing and calling it butter-n-broad, and shoot two little heads with one bullet. Yep, very brave and VERY HUMAN.[/b]
Never seen any German wear shoes from human skin.
What "sities" were murdered to the last survivor?
How many willages were hungered to death when the red revolution came?
Youre too much into russian propaganda.
Nobody knows how many mass graves are there in the Soviet Union. We would know if Stalin lost the war.
"Hunchback only isprivit tomb ..." And now for a couple of other sites and photos:
(http://photos.lifeisphoto.ru/25/3/256483.jpg)
http://www.warmuseum.kiev.ua/eng/z6.shtml (http://www.warmuseum.kiev.ua/eng/z6.shtml)
Still cant see any Germans wear shoes from human skin or
whole "sities" murdered to the last survivor.
But I know an army that raped everything on their way. The red army. Many of them didnt know what a toilet is.
-
Red Army in Przyszowice, 27.I.1945, Poland.
Memories of Jan Rzymelka:
"My mother and grandmother escaped deep into tje villiage. Grandfather was too sick to leave their house so he stayed. After the Russians stole everything what could be sold, they decided to burn the house down with my Granfather inside.
Later my friend Franciszek with a white flag went to talk with Russians - they shot him right away."
Memories of Eufemia Swoboda:
"Russians forced me to watch how they execute my grandson and my neighbours. Each of them was on the ground and two Soviet soldiers were standing on their hands. The third one was shooting the victims in the neck."
Russians burned down 70 houses in the village. And killed many survivors who escaped from Auschwitz and decided to hide in Przyszowice.
Later Soviets claimed that they thought that this was a German villiage. But somewhat they didn't heard how the victims were begging for life in polish.
-
Russians burned down 70 houses in the village. And killed many survivors who escaped from Auschwitz and decided to hide in Przyszowice.
Later Soviets claimed that they thought that this was a German villiage. But somewhat they didn't heard how the victims were begging for life in polish.
When the Communists and Soviet Russia did this to Polish People, you could imagine what unbelievable crimes Red Army commited in Germany.
@guldan: Is there also at least one room in this museum which honors the resistance against Soviet Regime?
Those, who made things like shoes out of jewish skin were never real Nazis. :o In fact they were mad scientiest who "took the chance", worked for the Nazis and made the most cruel experiments mankind ever saw.
But don't think that this didn't happen in USSR, too. Germany lost the war and Allies found out what they did and now everybody knows it, so this could (hopefully) never happen again. USSR never "lost" the cold war, so noone dug out what they did.
-
The true about Soviets in Germany. (http://translate.google.com.ua/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=ru&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fru.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2F%25D0%259D%25D0%25B0%25D1%2581%25D0%25B8%25D0%25BB%25D0%25B8%25D0%25B5_%25D0%25B2_%25D0%25BE%25D1%2582%25D0%25BD%25D0%25BE%25D1%2588%25D0%25B5%25D0%25BD%25D0%25B8%25D0%25B8_%25D0%25BC%25D0%25B8%25D1%2580%25D0%25BD%25D0%25BE%25D0%25B3%25D0%25BE_%25D0%25BD%25D0%25B0%25D1%2581%25D0%25B5%25D0%25BB%25D0%25B5%25D0%25BD%25D0%25B8%25D1%258F_%25D0%2593%25D0%25B5%25D1%2580%25D0%25BC%25D0%25B0%25D0%25BD%25D0%25B8%25D0%25B8_%25281945%2529&sl=ru&tl=en)
-
And now, let's contrast that to what non-Russian sources say... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_crimes)
-
It's true, the Soviet state was an awful regime. Not only did the psychos in power target the residents of Eastern Europe but they even treated their own people in a horrible way. Kind of sick really, that the heroes of that part of the war, the Soviet soldiers fighting the Germans, fell victim to their own government and were treated so poorly. It's interesting how a group of people can take an idea like communism and warp it into some crazy, genocidal government under the command of a select few.
-
And now, let's contrast that to what non-Russian sources say... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_crimes)
There is no a disinterested and objective side. There were the Cold War and the World War II. Everyone benefits lie: the USSR, the West. Read all the sources and compare. The West has reason to distort the subject and lie. Not only the Soviet Union has.
-
"There is no a disinterested and objective side. There were the Cold War and the World War II. Everyone benefits lie: the USSR, the West. Read all the sources and compare. The West has reason to distort the subject and lie. Not only the Soviet Union has."
Yep - all those women in Poland and Germany just raped themselves. Also those Ukrainian soldiers who are buried in the forest near my house also commited massive suicide. Damn "western" propaganda
-
For example, in Nazi Germany abortions were banned. After an arrival of our own and allied forces, many German women made abortions. As a reason for doctors was indicated that they were raped. Abortions for raped were free. Contraceptives were not sold in Nazi Germany, were distributed only among Ostarbeiters. Rapists were described as Chinese or Mongols. It seems that many raped girls did not even see Russian soldiers and do not know how they look. Or the Red Army consisted of only Asians. ^_^
It is an info from an western professor and woman - ATINA GROSSMANN (http://www.cooper.edu/humanities/bio_grossmann.html)
Girls, use condoms then the RedArmyMan does not come to you. :)
My formula is simple: if someone says bad things about self - believe. If someone says bad things about someone else - doubt and check.
So I do not trust western tales about hordes of rapists. If Stalin said no rape, will be no rape. Everyone feared Stalin enough.
-
Some time ago you wrote about the "poor Poland" and how Poles are trying to blame everyone for their own problems. Maybe it's true.
But it seems that you're the same if it goes to the Soviet Union. No matter how many examples of crimes we will show you, you always see that as a western propaganda war.
For Russians, and countries close to them the Red Army is a organisation of pure peace, happiness and love. But unfortunately for the most centre-eastern countries - the Red Army is just another aggressor - same as Nazi Germany - and often far more brutal.
The proof lies in the memories of people who remeber those times. If you want to believe that German girls just wanted to get free abortions - so they decided to lie about being raped - ok I don't care.
So I do not trust western tales about hordes rapist. If Stalin said no rape, will be no rape. Everyone feared Stalin enough.
:) And so we're back to the good old times :)
----------------------------------------------------------
-
Why have you singled out Stalin? Stalin, of course, is a tyrant. And people prefer long life than short sex.
Do not think that I am a fanatic. Yes, we shot the Polish officers, shot own people, but Communists were not idiots. Read carefully the article. Being brutal to German population were not profitable for us and we suppress any cruelty of our soldiers.
If you think that Stalin ordered to silent cruelty, you're mistaken. We are not afraid of notoriety. We did not want to give to Germans cause to fight to the end. We did not want the resistance of the civilian population and a fear of surrender to us. Do not forget, we had to distribute the idea of communism, and angry people would not accept them.
If you want, you can believe feminists, who say that raped in Berlin were not 20 000 or 100 000, but 2 millions. Russians did not fight, and made love. ^_^ Similar stories exist about Russian Cossacks and Hussars in France after Napoleon.
-
We're not talking about communists being idiots or not. We're talking about if Europe should be thankful to the USSR. And in my opinion - it should not. Because Soviets did not bring freedom to the eastern Europe - but as you said, they brought a new regime.
Russians did not fight, and made love. ^_^
I'm not talking about Russians - I'm talking about Soviets. If it doesn't make a difference for you - that's bad.
You were laughing about asians in Soviet Army. But the truth is that there were HELL A LOT asians in this army. There were so many eastern nations in the Red Army that probably those "less civilised" people from Mongolia etc. were mainly the ones who were raping women in Poland and Germany.
-
I personally do not ask for thanks to my great-grandfather, who served in the occupation forces in Germany. Just compare what is better: a life ruled by the Nazis when Nazis make gloves from human skin, or life ruled by the Soviet regime, when the shot is not for national identity, but for real ideals and views of man what he chooses.
I laughed about QUANTITY of Asians in one place and their predominance. This character in minds of German girls was circulated by German propaganda - Eastern Hordes of Russians. It sounds as rapists were only Tajiks, Kazakhs and other Central Asian peoples. And where are Russian, Ukrainians and Belarusians?
And let's really talk about the Soviets, distinguish between Russian and other nations. What is the fault of the Soviet regime? They ordered to rape? No. Do you believe that rapists were Asians, as has been said? Well, then blame to the Asian republics and their people, and Slavs are not guilty. But this is silly.
-
Replacing one regime with another is not a freedom. Freedom was brought to the western countries - they could choose their own way.
and where are Russian, Ukrainians and Belarusians?
They were too busy fighting in the Red Army, SS Galizien, UPA, RONA etc. ;) Normal stuff - killing some soldiers, some civilians ;) Burn a villiage or two ;)
-
In fact, freedom is strange thing. You do not have enough of its usually only when you rebel.
SS Galizien, UPA, RONA etc.
Yes, I admit, it was stupid to fight against all, or to cooperate with the Germans, as well as denying a huge part of own history and exploits of ancestors from the Army Ludowa. Who did liberate Gdansk?
-
It's fascinating how the old War propaganda is still in circulation today.
After all, people still speak about "Liberation" rather than "Conquest", despite it being just that...
-
Who did liberate Gdansk?
Actually Gdańsk WAS a German city. So it's hard to say that it was liberated :)
-
I think so too, but thought that Poles have an opposite point of view. Ok, Poles from the First Polish Army captured Danzig. ^_^
-
British haven't saw how fascist burn whole villages to the ashes. USA haven't saw how peoples just dies because there is nothing to eat. Only USSR have saw this. Only the USSR fought on their motherland. And that why they are heroes.
Stalin = Hitler. That was most powerful propaganda ever. Clear your minds from cold war information.
My grandmother have lived in USSR. And when she talks with me - she never complaint about their life. "Life in USSR was great" - she says. And my mother thinks so too. So where is the problem? My relatives and relatives of my friends have never complaint about communism.
P.S I can give you a link, but it's on russian.
http://historic.ru/books/item/f00/s00/z0000074/st032.shtml (http://historic.ru/books/item/f00/s00/z0000074/st032.shtml)
There is lot of intersting things. With links on sources.
http://czolg.blox.pl/2009/02/Mark-Solonin-22-czerwca-1941-czyli-jak-zaczela.html (http://czolg.blox.pl/2009/02/Mark-Solonin-22-czerwca-1941-czyli-jak-zaczela.html)
Heres a link to a book that is in Polish (translated from Russian) "22 june 1941 - how the great patriotic war started".
Its about the first 3 months of axis-USRR fighting.
It explanes why russians lost (surrendered or deserted) more
man and equipment than all allied armies in France in 1940.
Sołomin sais that soviets dindnt want to fight for Stalin becouse of what happened in the early 30s (backing it up with 500 pages of facts).
Millions! of people died in hunger while Stalin exported food outside USRR (to buy technology and build heavy industry).
In 1933 cannibalism was a fact in Ukraine - granary of Europe!
All of that to show the soviets how cruel will the Stalin be to any of his enemies (political or military).
Old people will allways tell you that their life was better when they were young. Even if they had no free speech, there was not enough toilet paper produced and you needed to wait for 5 years to buy a car.
(Im from a post communist state, so I know how it was)
-
you needed to wait for 5 years to buy a car
Optimistic point of view if it goes to Poland ;) But who cares about cars! At least we were happy and free thanks to the Soviets!
Cheers!
-
:o
I'm shocked about the pure mass of soviet propaganda still being in the heads of an unbelievable amount of people, even today.
Is this really Wikipedia.org? (http://translate.google.com.ua/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=ru&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fru.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2F%25D0%259D%25D0%25B0%25D1%2581%25D0%25B8%25D0%25BB%25D0%25B8%25D0%25B5_%25D0%25B2_%25D0%25BE%25D1%2582%25D0%25BD%25D0%25BE%25D1%2588%25D0%25B5%25D0%25BD%25D0%25B8%25D0%25B8_%25D0%25BC%25D0%25B8%25D1%2580%25D0%25BD%25D0%25BE%25D0%25B3%25D0%25BE_%25D0%25BD%25D0%25B0%25D1%2581%25D0%25B5%25D0%25BB%25D0%25B5%25D0%25BD%25D0%25B8%25D1%258F_%25D0%2593%25D0%25B5%25D1%2580%25D0%25BC%25D0%25B0%25D0%25BD%25D0%25B8%25D0%25B8_%25281945%2529&sl=ru&tl=en) :o
We're talking about if Europe should be thankful to the USSR. And in my opinion - it should not. Because Soviets did not bring freedom to the eastern Europe - but as you said, they brought a new regime.
Nothing to add.
-
:o
I'm shocked about the pure mass of soviet propaganda still being in the heads of an unbelievable amount of people, even today.
Is this really Wikipedia.org? (http://translate.google.com.ua/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=ru&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fru.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2F%25D0%259D%25D0%25B0%25D1%2581%25D0%25B8%25D0%25BB%25D0%25B8%25D0%25B5_%25D0%25B2_%25D0%25BE%25D1%2582%25D0%25BD%25D0%25BE%25D1%2588%25D0%25B5%25D0%25BD%25D0%25B8%25D0%25B8_%25D0%25BC%25D0%25B8%25D1%2580%25D0%25BD%25D0%25BE%25D0%25B3%25D0%25BE_%25D0%25BD%25D0%25B0%25D1%2581%25D0%25B5%25D0%25BB%25D0%25B5%25D0%25BD%25D0%25B8%25D1%258F_%25D0%2593%25D0%25B5%25D1%2580%25D0%25BC%25D0%25B0%25D0%25BD%25D0%25B8%25D0%25B8_%25281945%2529&sl=ru&tl=en) :o
This is really Wikipedia.org.
http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Насилие_в_отношении_мирного_населения_Германии_(1945) (http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9D%D0%B0%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%B5_%D0%B2_%D0%BE%D1%82%D0%BD%D0%BE%D1%88%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B8_%D0%BC%D0%B8%D1%80%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%BE_%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%81%D0%B5%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%8F_%D0%93%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%BC%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B8_%281945%29)
I'm shocked about the pure mass of the Cold War and the new post-soviet eastern propaganda being in the heads of an unbelievable amount of people. ::)
The Famine was (although it is not genocide against a particular nation). The Great Purge was. I'm not saying that the USSR was holy/saint, but I deny some exaggerations, that are beneficial to young post-Soviet states, and were beneficial to the West during the Cold War.
-
I'm not saying that the USSR was holy/saint,
Sure - it's just like calling mass murderer a holy person.
I'm shocked about the pure mass of the Cold War and the new post-soviet eastern propaganda being in the heads of an unbelievable amount of people.
I think that that all those people in the mass graves scattered all around the former Soviet Union are shocked as well.
Once again:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katy%C5%84_massacre (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katy%C5%84_massacre)
-
Once again:
Yes, we shot the Polish officers, shot own people, but Communists were not idiots.
And:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khatyn_massacre (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khatyn_massacre)
We too have suffered in those times.
-
We too have suffered in those times.
I've never said that Ukrainians and Russians did not suffered.
As I said - I respect all victims of the II World War - no matter what was their nationality.
What we must agree UeArtemis - that Poland, Ukraine, Bielarus and eastern Germany saw the REAL II World War. The things that French or Americans saw was nothing to the cruelty of the war in the eastern Europe.
We were the nations who fought Germans from the very begining of the II World War (many Ukrainians and Belarussians were in the polish army - often as officers).
In Poland you can still find the effects of the II WW. You can find destroyed buildings in Warsaw:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/50/Uprising_bank_polski.jpg (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/50/Uprising_bank_polski.jpg)
You can meet people who saw how Germans were burining down enitre villiges.
-
Joseph Stalin Pure Evil (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ajqk875Xu0&feature=rec-rn-1r-7-HM#normal)
The end of the video is interesting. A map of slave labor camps in USRR.
Post Merge: February 11, 2010, 11:09:59 AM
Who did liberate Gdansk?
Actually Gdańsk WAS a German city. So it's hard to say that it was liberated :)
Im a Pole.
Gdańsk is a Polish name, Danzig is in German.
Before 1939 it was a free city. Not Polish not German. Before the partition of poland in 1795 it was Polish (Polond didnt exist in 1795-1918). Till 1918 too many germans were living in Gdańsk (and too many Poles to) to make it a territory of 1 country.
Since 1945 when Stalin moved all of Eastern Europes borders ~200km west. Its now considered a Polish city (like most of East Prussia). But Konigsberg (olso Eats Prussia) is now Russian a naval and army base.
-
Yes, Konigsberg=Kaliningrad was a part of Eastern Prussia.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e7/Prussiamap.gif)As far as I know, all borders after the war were made along ethnic lines, except German. East Prussia was donated to Poland.
-
Yes, Konigsberg=Kaliningrad was a part of Eastern Prussia.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e7/Prussiamap.gif)As far as I know, all borders after the war were made along ethnic lines, except German. East Prussia was donated to Poland.
Where do you think all the Poles that are now living on German land came from?
Allmost half of Poland was donated to Ukraine, Bielorussia, Lithuania - soviet states.
-
In fact, it were not Polish lands, but territories what were conquered in the Soviet-Polish and Ukrainian-Polish wars.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9f/Caricature_for_Riga_Peace_1921.png)
In the picture are Belarus torn between Polish and Russian.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ru/3/32/UNR_1917.jpg)the map of all UNR. The red lines show parts and borders.
I'm not saying that all territory on the map should be German, but all Prussia is not Polish for me.
As far as I know, after the war was a great migration of nations. For example, all Qirims ("Crimean Tatars") were taken from the Crimea. Germans from Prussia were taken too.
(http://pics.livejournal.com/licvin_belarus/pic/0001f40z)
It is good ethnic map. Here you can see real ethnic polish lands.
P.S. I am not an anti-polish fanatic. For example, I do not think that Crimea is an Ukrainian land. Just would be good if countries had borders corresponding ethnic lines.
-
For me, even if not 2 but 20 millions of german females were raped to death by our soldiers in 45 - that was not enough to revenge for all that axis done with my country.
We left germans theyr lifes AFTER ALL THAT THEY DONE WITH US - and they must thank us. SAme as Western Allyes, because we had most of Wehrmacht fighting against us, not them.
-
Look at the current state of all easter european states that have been under the iron curtain of the USSR.
They r u a bunch of crap shitholes (i live in one of them ) thanks to the USSR..go fu*k yourselves all USSR acolytes . It is people that think like you who made these atrocities.
-
It is good ethnic map. Here you can see real ethnic polish lands.
It's a language map not an ethnic map. And it's a huge difference.
P.S. I am not an anti-polish fanatic. For example, I do not think that Crimea is an Ukrainian land. Just would be good if countries had borders corresponding ethnic lines
As there are no ukrainians there novadays ;) Only Russian fleet...and Russian propaganda.
---------------------------------------------------------
You had your vision of polish borders few years ago and it looked like that:
http://www.culls-page.de/WW%20II%20Karten/Second_world_war_europe_1940_map_de.png (http://www.culls-page.de/WW%20II%20Karten/Second_world_war_europe_1940_map_de.png)
That would be perfect, nah? :)
It's a shame that Soviets and Germans broke their alliance...they were such a nice couple.
Atak Sowiecki 1939 (German and Soviet friends 1939) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lS-SY6ZZLoU&feature=channel#normal)
-
There was no alliance and they certainly weren't "friends". Since the Western powers refused to commit to a real fight against Nazi Germany, Stalin wasn't going to let Hitler take all of Poland and be 100s of KM closer to Soviet borders. It sucks for Poland but they were in the wrong place at the wrong time so to speak.
Some people parade that Nazi-Soviet pact around as if both powers had some sort of hard-on for Poland but in reality neither the Nazis or Soviets really cared about Poland itself, they just wanted a buffer zone while each of them did their thing (Hitler got to focus on France and Stalin got to focus on modernizing his army).
-
That would be perfect, nah? :)
It's a shame that Soviets and Germans broke their alliance...they were such a nice couple.
Its a shame that Germans and Poles broke that alliance after Poland got a meatloaf from Chechoslovakia. They were such a good couple. BTW Poles asked to Hitler to have military alliance, to attack USSR together.
-
BTW Poles asked to Hitler to have military alliance, to attack USSR together.
Lol - proof please. Who asked? When? Because I heard that Stalin asked Martians to have such alliance as well. Here is the proof:
http://www.busygamer.com/blog1/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/stalinvsmartians_icon2.jpg (http://www.busygamer.com/blog1/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/stalinvsmartians_icon2.jpg)
(Unfortunately Martians broke the negotiations).
Everyone - let's give our friend Artillerist a big "bravo" for his idea of polish-german pact - the greatest political fiction of all time! Bravo!
Its a shame that Germans and Poles broke that alliance after Poland got a meatloaf from Chechoslovakia
Show me all those Polish-German military parades in Chechoslovakia.
There was no alliance and they certainly weren't "friends".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pact (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pact)
Say "cheese":
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a5/Armia_Czerwona%2CWehrmacht_23.09.1939_wsp%C3%B3lna_parada.jpg (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a5/Armia_Czerwona%2CWehrmacht_23.09.1939_wsp%C3%B3lna_parada.jpg)
:D
1940 - http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8d/Bundesarchiv_Bild_183-1984-1206-523%2C_Berlin%2C_Verabschiedung_Molotows.jpg (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8d/Bundesarchiv_Bild_183-1984-1206-523%2C_Berlin%2C_Verabschiedung_Molotows.jpg)
Once again - Big thanks for the II World War to Germans and Soviets ;)
-
The fact that Soviet and German military officials conducted a joint parade while giving each other reach-arounds doesn't mean anything. The pact was a way for both leaders to buy time before they inevitably come to each others' throats.
Also, Stalin approached the Western powers first in the hope of making a formal deal with them to stop Hitler. But after Poland refused Soviet troops and Belgium refused French troops, Stalin took his business elsewhere because the Western powers weren't serious about stopping Hitler - so he made the pact with Hitler to buy himself some time. He didn't have a choice..otherwise like I said he'd be sharing a border with Germany a few hundred kilometers closer to Moscow.
In any event the two systems were far too opposed ideologically (they were on opposite ends of the spectrum) so it's pretty obvious that there could be no friendship.
-
That would be perfect, nah? :)
It's a shame that Soviets and Germans broke their alliance...they were such a nice couple.
Its a shame that Germans and Poles broke that alliance after Poland got a meatloaf from Chechoslovakia. They were such a good couple. BTW Poles asked to Hitler to have military alliance, to attack USSR together.
Yes, I read about a Polish-German cooperation.
It's a language map not an ethnic map. And it's a huge difference.
In fact, not huge. It coincides with the ethnic maps in the 85-99%
-
Stalin approached the Western powers first in the hope of making a formal deal with them to stop Hitler. But after Poland refused Soviet troops and Belgium refused French troops, Stalin took his business elsewhere because the Western powers weren't serious about stopping Hitler
Because for Poland or other Western countries Soviets were just the same threat as Hitler. The moment Polish government would allow the Soviet Army to enter Poland - it would be the end of freedom in Poland.
Yes, I read about a Polish-German cooperation.
Lol - so read more ;) There were no such cooperation from the polish side. Both Japanese and German suggestions were declined by the polish foreign minister. There were no plans of invasion on USSR in Poland.
And when you're trying to compare polish actions in Czechoslovakia and Soviet invasion of Poland in 1939, try to compare the results of both those actions. Try to count the victims of polish rule in Cieszyn (mainly inhabited by Poles) and the Soviet aggression on "Kresy" in 1939.
In fact, not huge. It coincides with the ethnic maps in the 85-99%
Source? If novadays, most of Belarussians speaks Russian....than it means that the nation do not exist?
-
The map of the times of the 19th century. In that time villagers speak their native language, and most of lower classes in towns. In those days there were many illiterates, who were not teach from childhood to speak the language of the metropolis and there was no mass media. So this is the correct map.
More detailed answer I am going to give you later. Now is night. Good night.
-
For me, even if not 2 but 20 millions of german females were raped to death by our soldiers in 45 - that was not enough to revenge for all that axis done with my country.
We left germans theyr lifes AFTER ALL THAT THEY DONE WITH US -
artillerist,remember there was a war before ww2, called ww1?
in this war the RUSSIANS came first over the borders to germany in 1914. Germans hadn´t done ANY warcrimes to russians before but when your army came to eastern prussia you started rapping and killing our women. some of your artillery-battalions run out of ammunition while shooting into fleeing civilians.
so after all- you make me say something i´ve never said before: it was good from Hitler to attack Russia and killing all those people, because Russians deserve nothing else like that
and now tell me what do you think of mine now? i know it: " this fucking fritz is talking bullsh*t , he´s a fucking Nazi , my opinion is the only one which is right." don´t you?
because i thought nearly the same when i read your comment. ( just exchange fritz with Ivan and Nazi with communist). but very soon i calmed down and asked myself why do you hate us Germans so much? the times that Russians and Germans were enemys are long gone- and we Germans don´t feel much hate against Russia. By the way: the only reason why i´ve written:it was good from Hitler to attack Russia and killing all those people, because Russians deserve nothing else like that
was that i wanted you to feel the way i feel when i read your posts.
Couse every time i read your comments i feel a big hate against communism, Russia , the red army and all the things you stand for.
-
Ok, lets calm down.
1. I dont hate GERMANS. I really have lots of exellent friends from Germany. Grandfather of Steffan,m one of my best friends, flew from here, from Stalingrad without legs in january 1943, on the last Ju52 escaped from Stalingrad. And My grangrandfather fought directly here, and was heavy wounded in october. MAY BE by fire of Steffan's grandfather. But we are still very good friends.
I hate nazists and NEO NAZISts. By "neo nazists" I mean not only all those who hail now "we were fight for the hitler and we proud of that" (like lots of traitors of Estonia, Lithuania, UNA/UPa nd Vlasov division), but all thouse who claim USSR as a "equal evil as hitleer's Germany"!
2. Yes, I remember that war, wich was started by germans, and I know abiut retreat of russians all the tuime, and I know that the only success was a Brusilov's attack raid just before russian capitulation just before revolution. I dont know about any russian actions in Eastern Prussia, because all Polish lands and Baltic land were occupied by germans extremly soon after war started. And hundreds of officers, originally with german roots, traited russian army, and surrendered with all their regiments.
3. My opinion is not "the last truth" here. Its just my opinion, nothing more.
4. I am not a communist at all. I know about crimes of communists against my OWN NATION not from propaganda books, but from my grandies. I think, if You in the West will hear about "death-deserve crime" if somebody will JUST stole several grains to feed his family and be shot for it by commisars - You will laugh or wont beleive. But it was truth. Mother of my grandfather, together with 3/4 of his village in southern siberia - died from hunger in late 30'th, because commisars took all the food (some of that food were sold to germany too, in exchange to factory equipment and other technology). People had to boil grass and even boots to eat it, just to survive! Dont tell me what is communism!
"Когда я слышал их (комиссаров) призывы: «За Сталина!», то мне было трудно сдерживать мат. Никто не воевал лично за Сталина! Народ воевал против Гитлера! Люди воевали за свою землю! И мстили за своих убитых братьев, повешенных матерей, расстрелянных детей и изнасилованных жён!"
That was a words of one artillery officer, who recalled his WWII actions. And he was not the only who think that way.
Hitler was not going only to take our land and our houses. He was going to eleminate slavians as a nation, with last few people as a slaves. Read "Fall Ost" carefully. He declared a total war, annihilation war. Hitler declared it, not Stalin, note that! He failed to do that, and what do You waiting from Soviet soldiers who killed their hatred enemy in Berlin? And even in That situation, Stalin ORDERED not to rape and maradeur, and there were hundreds of soviet soldiers were judged and shot because of ignoring that order. Stalin KNEW how to rule.
During WWII, communism was a biggest enemy for SOVIET Army itself.
After WWII, communism became an evil for eastern Europe.
Dont exchange that in your mind.
Post Merge: February 13, 2010, 07:46:21 PM
And few words about soviet "invasion" into Poland in 1939.
Soviet attack was totally unwaited to Hitler. He didnt knew about Stalins plans over eastern Poland (very strange for "good allies", isnt it?). Only after two days passed, Stalin and Hitler had a discussion about new border between Germany and USSR. And only on 20th, when Stalin PRESSED Htiler to move new border as Stalin wants (with Brest on Soviet side), border was stated by both leaders. Under soviet press, on sept.20 Hitler ordered to retreat his troops from positions they gained in fight with poles with much blood, and evaquate all tropheys or destroy them not only to be captured by soviets. When after actions ceased, Hitler asked to give him Belostok and Augustov because Germany have lack of wood, and it extremly need with forrested territory, Stalin answerred in the way as "F*ck off, Its now Ukrainian SSR". An "exellent friendlyship", isnt it?
But during actions on sept. 17 several RedArmy VVS bomb attacks followed on german troops, in wich were killed up to 10 german soldiers.
On sept. 19, near Lvov recoon armed cars of 24 light tank brigade met german troops of 137 Inf.Division, and after following COMBAT RedArmy lost 3 BA-10, 5 soldiers killed and 3 injured. Germans lost 2 AT guns and several soldiers killed.
Stalin played his own game, as master of puppets, and Hitler was a puppet in 1939 in front of the RedArmy fiorce.
-
Ok, lets calm down.
good idea ;)
I dont hate GERMANS.
and i don´t hate russians, one of my best friends is a semi-russian
Yes, I remember that war, wich was started by germans, and I know abiut retreat of russians all the tuime, and I know that the only success was a Brusilov's attack raid just before russian capitulation just before revolution. I dont know about any russian actions in Eastern Prussia, because all Polish lands and Baltic land were occupied by germans extremly soon after war started. And hundreds of officers, originally with german roots, traited russian army, and surrendered with all their regiments.
Reasons for ww1 were a little bit more complex.
If you say you just know about russian retreats until the Brusilow offensive then google " Battle of Tannenberg" or something like that.
And could you explain why whole regiments surrendered just because their officers had german roots?
I am not a communist at all. I know about crimes of communists against my OWN NATION not from propaganda books, but from my grandies. I think, if You in the West will hear about "death-deserve crime" if somebody will JUST stole several grains to feed his family and be shot for it by commisars - You will laugh or wont beleive. But it was truth. Mother of my grandfather, together with 3/4 of his village in southern siberia - died from hunger in late 30'th, because commisars took all the food (some of that food were sold to germany too, in exchange to factory equipment and other technology). People had to boil grass and even boots to eat it, just to survive! Dont tell me what is communism!
First of all: i feel sorry for your mother´s grandmother and her village. In western Europe we don´t laugh about such stories and we believe them.
"Когда я слышал их (комиссаров) призывы: «За Сталина!», то мне было трудно сдерживать мат. Никто не воевал лично за Сталина! Народ воевал против Гитлера! Люди воевали за свою землю! И мстили за своих убитых братьев, повешенных матерей, расстрелянных детей и изнасилованных жён!"
Excuse me, but i neither understand the russian language nor can i read Cyril
Soviet attack was totally unwaited to Hitler. He didnt knew about Stalins plans over eastern Poland (very strange for "good allies", isnt it?). Only after two days passed, Stalin and Hitler had a discussion about new border between Germany and USSR. And only on 20th, when Stalin PRESSED Htiler to move new border as Stalin wants (with Brest on Soviet side), border was stated by both leaders. Under soviet press, on sept.20 Hitler ordered to retreat his troops from positions they gained in fight with poles with much blood, and evaquate all tropheys or destroy them not only to be captured by soviets. When after actions ceased, Hitler asked to give him Belostok and Augustov because Germany have lack of wood, and it extremly need with forrested territory, Stalin answerred in the way as "F*ck off, Its now Ukrainian SSR". An "exellent friendlyship", isnt it?
search in googel for Hilter-Stalin-pact or Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact. You say Stalin didn´t gave Hitler wood? ok... Hilter attcked Russia with Stalin´s oil. Which takes me to the last point:
Stalin played his own game, as master of puppets, and Hitler was a puppet in 1939 in front of the RedArmy fiorce.
There is something you maybe don´t know: Hitler wanted the war with russia a very long time ago. you can find proofs for this in his book "Mein Kampf". And if Hitler was a puppet of Stalin than i have to ask: why couldn´t Stalin´s army stop the Whermacht until the winter came?
-
Soviet attack was totally unwaited to Hitler. He didnt knew about Stalins plans over eastern Poland
Just as Der Deutsche said - Ribbentrop - Molotov Pact. I'm not suggesting that Hitler and Stalin were "pals". I'm just saying that Hitler and Stalin worked together for a long time ;)
Napaść na Polskę (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YyGLeRaMeEw#normal)
-----------------------------------------------------------
And once again - I don't understand WHY should we think, that Hitler was worse than Stalin. They were just the same - the only difference is that one of them won the war. That's all.
-
Excuse me, but i neither understand the russian language nor can i read Cyril
"When I've heard commisars calling "For the Stalin!", it was extremly hard for me to stop "f*ck" words from my mouth. Nobody fought for Stalin! People fought against Hitler! They fought for their land! And vengeaged for their killed brothers, hanged mothers, shot children and raped wifes!"
" Battle of Tannenberg"
Yes, as I've sayd - another stupid attack without any success, resulting losing thousands of soldiers and huge retreat.
"Mein Kampf"
I know what it is about :) And Stalin knew that Hitler is going to attack him. But he didnt knew that attack will start so soon, in june 41.
why couldn´t Stalin´s army stop the Whermacht until the winter came?
Actually, the first defeat of Wehrmacht, when it was stopped, was in november at Rostov. And at Moskow, Wehrmacht was stopped all over the front by first time from the beginning of the war.
-
I was playing Men of War: Red Tide, and I saw the registers of Alexander Zorich...
Looks like we in west know only a little or nothing about WW2... I mean... majority of people are too retarded by Hollywood and American/British propaganda.
Most people dont know much about the participation of USSR in WW2... specially in USA (Americans really think they were the winners of WW2 and defeated Hitler, ;D)
Thanks. Screw you, too. Most of us don't think that at all.
There is some facts that cannot be denied..
85% of the nazi army was defeated in USSR.
The imense majority of the german army was used to exterminate USSR. (Read Mein Kampf, by Hitler). Hitler was obcecated in destroying USSR and kill every people in.
Most of that 85% was defeated by the Russian winter combined with Hitler's incompetence as a commander.
Im not underestimating the participation of British and Americans (That last fought in 2 front at the same time!) in WW2, you also were Heroes but, lets be honest, WW2 was 70% about HItler x Stalin.
More random percentages that you pulled out of your ass?
America was waching two of his enemies destroying each other.
The Cold War wasn't on the horizon until 1944/1945.
All that shit about D day... the war was already over in D day, Stalingrad was before D day, Kursk was before D day...
D day has only one objective, prevent the soviets from advancing in europe until Portugal, D day was the first day of cold war.
It wasn't about liberating France and preventing Germany from conquering the British Empire (the only thing standing between Hitler and the United States)? Like I said, the Cold War didn't start until '45.
Ok, thats too much to be discussed and I bet there is a lot of opinios around.
One thing is true, the Soviets Defeated Hitler, I say Soviets and not only Russians because there is a lot of other folks who did a big sacrifice in WW2 (25 million people dead in all USSR)
True.
Lets also not forget the Chinese exterminaiton by the Japaneses (16 million death).
How exactly is this relevant?
Its a pity that there is all that propaganda trying to dirty the image of the Russian leaders and people.
Today we are about to play a Game mod created by Germans, Americans, British and other people... thats freedom, and today there is freedom because million of Soviets died in the past fighting for this freedom ,they deserve respect.
I guess that's why, when the war was over, the Soviets established dozens of oppressive satellite communist states.
You really made my jaw drop here.
Millions of Soviets certainly died... but it sure wasn't for freedom. It was for two incredibly obvious reasons. They had no choice. They were invaded by Nazi Germany.
Once the war was over they went back to being oppressed by Stalin.
-
Most of that 85% was defeated by the Russian winter combined with Hitler's incompetence as a commander.
Right...I didn't know Russian winters lasted twelve months. Must be those damn commie weather changing machines!
Anyway, saying that the Soviets defeated the Wehrmacht because of weather or Hitler's incompetence is a grossly ignorant statement. There were thousands of factors that played a role, one of which was the competence and professionalism of the Soviet army. The fact that the RKKA went from a disorganized mess to the world's most powerful army is no accident - it was achieved by beating the top dog at the time - the German army.
The Cold War wasn't on the horizon until 1944/1945.
How is the Cold War relevant to this discussion? The fact that the Cold War did not start until after the war doesn't exclude the fact that the Western powers wanted the USSR bled to death.
It wasn't about liberating France and preventing Germany from conquering the British Empire (the only thing standing between Hitler and the United States)? Like I said, the Cold War didn't start until '45.
If the US really wanted to stop Germany from conquering the British Empire then they would have done so when Britain was weakest..in 1939/40/41 not when the war was pretty much over.
I guess that's why, when the war was over, the Soviets established dozens of oppressive satellite communist states.
The Russian Empire and the Soviet Union were attacked twice in a span of two decades by the same people losing over fifty MILLION people. No one, especially Stalin, is going to be dumb enough to let that happen again. It sucks for Eastern Europe but Stalin wasn't going to risk ANOTHER invasion. That is why a buffer zone and satellite states were established. Stalin wasn't even a fan of the international communism idea - that was more Lenin and Trotsky's thing.
Millions of Soviets certainly died... but it sure wasn't for freedom. It was for two incredibly obvious reasons. They had no choice. They were invaded by Nazi Germany.
The Soviets were fighting for existence. I know this is a hard concept for some people to understand (especially in the West, which never had to fight for it) but once you start fighting for your very existence things like communism, Stalin and The Worker's Party go out the window. The Soviets were truly fighting for something of value - just like the Poles, Ukrainians, Belorussians and any other slavic people in Eastern Europe.
In any event, whatever reason the Soviets had for fighting was way more justifiable than the reason Americans had for fighting. Fighting for your very existence is something a simple farmhand will understand. Fighting for "democracy" in Europe is a much more exotic and abstract concept which probably wasn't high on any GI's priority list.
-
There were thousands of factors that played a role, one of which was the competence and professionalism of the Soviet army.
Lol? What was professional in Soviet Army? O_O I may agree that this was the biggest army...but professional...man...just no ;p
Just because Soviets were winning battles by numbers, it doesn't mean that the whole organisation was professional.
-
Most of that 85% was defeated by the Russian winter combined with Hitler's incompetence as a commander.
Right...I didn't know Russian winters lasted twelve months. Must be those damn commie weather changing machines!
I believe you've exposed a gap in your historical knowledge here :D
Have you ever heard of Hitler's summer pause? Basically, during Operation Barbarossa in 1941, Hitler and his generals had trouble agreeing. This caused their summer advance to be delayed long enough for the warm months to pass. This pause is widely considered to be a major reason the Germans (relatively ill-equipped for harsh winter warfare) were not able to take Moscow. This served as a great moral victory for the Russians.
Anyway, saying that the Soviets defeated the Wehrmacht because of weather or Hitler's incompetence is a grossly ignorant statement.
No more ignorant than saying the Soviets didn't need allies to win the war. Without lend-lease and the Battle of Britain added on top of Hitler's incompetence, the Soviets lose Moscow, a defeat so demoralizing it would have been hard for the Soviets to recover.
There were thousands of factors that played a role, one of which was the competence and professionalism of the Soviet army. The fact that the RKKA went from a disorganized mess to the world's most powerful army is no accident - it was achieved by beating the top dog at the time - the German army.
Actually, the fact that the Red Army was a disorganized mess suggests something entirely different. It suggests that they must have had some "help" in defeating Germany.
The Cold War wasn't on the horizon until 1944/1945.
How is the Cold War relevant to this discussion? The fact that the Cold War did not start until after the war doesn't exclude the fact that the Western powers wanted the USSR bled to death.
Because the OP stated that the western powers viewed Russia as an enemy... which was not the case until 1945 (the start of the Cold War) at the earliest. And the western powers (other than Nazi Germany and Italy) wanted Russia bled to death? Where are you getting that from? Russia had been an ally of the western powers since WWI, and westerners didn't really start fearing socialism until the whole State Department fiasco and McCarthy.
It wasn't about liberating France and preventing Germany from conquering the British Empire (the only thing standing between Hitler and the United States)? Like I said, the Cold War didn't start until '45.
If the US really wanted to stop Germany from conquering the British Empire then they would have done so when Britain was weakest..in 1939/40/41 not when the war was pretty much over.
So we waited until June 1941? The Soviets initiated their invasion of Poland and the Baltic states in 1939. If the United States was trying to stop the Soviets from advancing, why on Earth would they HELP them by opening up a second front with Germany?! I have no doubt that had the Soviets advanced to Iberia, the western powers would have been scared, but at the time, Nazi Germany was the by far the primary threat to the US and Britain.
I guess that's why, when the war was over, the Soviets established dozens of oppressive satellite communist states.
The Russian Empire and the Soviet Union were attacked twice in a span of two decades by the same people losing over fifty MILLION people. No one, especially Stalin, is going to be dumb enough to let that happen again. It sucks for Eastern Europe but Stalin wasn't going to risk ANOTHER invasion. That is why a buffer zone and satellite states were established. Stalin wasn't even a fan of the international communism idea - that was more Lenin and Trotsky's thing.
The important part of what I wrote is not the satellite buffer zone part - it's the oppressive regime part. The OP said the Soviets were fighting for freedom. Sorry, just not the case. They were fighting for oppression, because it's better to be oppressed than dead.
Millions of Soviets certainly died... but it sure wasn't for freedom. It was for two incredibly obvious reasons. They had no choice. They were invaded by Nazi Germany.
The Soviets were fighting for existence. I know this is a hard concept for some people to understand (especially in the West, which never had to fight for it) but once you start fighting for your very existence things like communism, Stalin and The Worker's Party go out the window. The Soviets were truly fighting for something of value - just like the Poles, Ukrainians, Belorussians and any other slavic people in Eastern Europe.
Exactly! They weren't fighting for freedom... that's the only point I'm trying to make. The Soviets weren't fighting for freedom at all. In fact, they made a pact with Hitler agreeing not to fight just so they could get a little piece of Poland. The OP is full of it.
The United States was fighting for freedom. The Soviets were fighting for their lives.
In any event, whatever reason the Soviets had for fighting was way more justifiable than the reason Americans had for fighting. Fighting for your very existence is something a simple farmhand will understand. Fighting for "democracy" in Europe is a much more exotic and abstract concept which probably wasn't high on any GI's priority list.
So the US should have waited for German boots to hit American soil? Then they would have been justified?
-
Fighting for freedom and fighting for existance is very very different things.
You will never understand that, pnoozi.
P.S. USSR was not the only who made a pact with Hitler. Baltic countries signed same pacts (defencive pacts, to-not-attack-each-other-pact) BEFORE USSR.
P.P.S. WWII started not on 1.9.1939. It was started when Westernies treated Czechoslovakia and let Hitler occupy Austria. 1938, do You remember? And now they cry about "evil soviet unian, huh? ;) Niiiceee
-
WWII started not on 1.9.1939. It was started when Westernies treated Czechoslovakia and let Hitler occupy Austria. 1938
Says who? Do you recall any battle in Czechoslovakia od Austria? Or maybe you're talking about the political situation? Than maybe the II WW starded in 1919 after the I WW? Or maybe in 1795 when Russia, Prussia and Austria had divided Poland? Or maybe it starded in 1410 in Tannenberg?
Artillerist - once again you do not understand what you're saying. You cannot see the difference between military conflict and annexation. I suggest that you should read more or at least say smth which has any sense.
P.S. USSR was not the only who made a pact with Hitler. Baltic countries signed same pacts (defencive pacts, to-not-attack-each-other-pact) BEFORE USSR.
Once again - It's not even worth to explain you over and over again the same problem. If you do not see the difference between non aggression pacts and a plan of military conquest of another country...than I think that you really should read some books man...
Fighting for freedom and fighting for existance is very very different things.
You will never understand that, pnoozi.
Yea- because in his country people never had to fight for their freedom against those damn Soviets, ne? :)
-
Fighting for freedom and fighting for existance is very very different things.
You will never understand that, pnoozi.
Actually, that's almost exactly what I said.
-
Lol? What was professional in Soviet Army? O_O I may agree that this was the biggest army...but professional...man...just no ;p
Just because Soviets were winning battles by numbers, it doesn't mean that the whole organisation was professional.
I don't know what to tell you, the results speak for themselves.
The Soviet army subscribed to the most advanced military doctrine and theory at the time. The Soviets had a developed and focused body of knowledge and an analytical process that allowed them to quickly and effectively learn from their mistakes. For example, the failure of their attacks outside Moscow in 1941 were analyzed in detail. After they learned from their mistakes they conducted a successful operation outside Stalingrad encircling the 6th Army - one of the biggest defeats for the Germans in WWII.
The fact that the Soviet army adhered to these military principles and through trial by fire learned how to apply them enabled them to destroy the German armed forces. This shows just how much the Soviet army matured into a professional fighting force.
The fact that the Soviets had to deal with huge numbers of material and men showed how great their logistics forces were. The Soviets used all branches of their military successfully, a testament to combined arms tactics. Their tank forces were highly developed and allowed them to achieve unbelievable gains during Operation Bagration for example.
All of these results are indicative of a professional and modern fighting force. To be honest there was no other way the Soviets could have won.
Have you ever heard of Hitler's summer pause? Basically, during Operation Barbarossa in 1941, Hitler and his generals had trouble agreeing. This caused their summer advance to be delayed long enough for the warm months to pass. This pause is widely considered to be a major reason the Germans (relatively ill-equipped for harsh winter warfare) were not able to take Moscow. This served as a great moral victory for the Russians.
When the gloves are off and you're at war with someone - you do your best. Whether you made mistakes or had problems with your generals, no one cares about that. They are simply excuses. I'm sure the Soviets had plenty of problems with their generals too, or Stalin's meddling but no one uses those reasons as an excuse for their poor performance. The Germans were simply a better fighting force at that point in the war.
And your point about the summer pause...the reason there was a pause was because Hitler diverted Army Group Center to the south in order to encircle the Soviet forces at Kiev. He didn't just "pause" and sit on his thumbs - he made a decision that he thought would bring about a major loss for the Soviet army. The fact that it did not change the outcome of the war in his favor is his fault and in no way excuses the defeats that were brought about by the Soviets.
No more ignorant than saying the Soviets didn't need allies to win the war. Without lend-lease and the Battle of Britain added on top of Hitler's incompetence, the Soviets lose Moscow, a defeat so demoralizing it would have been hard for the Soviets to recover.
No one said that the Soviets didn't need the Western powers. What you replied to was a statement that the Soviets did the majority of the fighting in the European theater...which is true. If ifs and ands were pots and pans, there'd be no work for tinkers' hands. I don't deal in "what-if" scenarios.
Actually, the fact that the Red Army was a disorganized mess suggests something entirely different. It suggests that they must have had some "help" in defeating Germany.
They were a disorganized mess...in 1941. In 1945 they were the most powerful army in the world. This leap was achieved through four years of fighting the most powerful army at the time.
Because the OP stated that the western powers viewed Russia as an enemy... which was not the case until 1945 (the start of the Cold War) at the earliest. And the western powers (other than Nazi Germany and Italy) wanted Russia bled to death? Where are you getting that from? Russia had been an ally of the western powers since WWI, and westerners didn't really start fearing socialism until the whole State Department fiasco and McCarthy.
You have a very naive view of the world. The Western powers were not a fan of the Soviet Union since it was simply another competitor. Not only that but the Soviet Union advertised a socio-economic system which empowered the worker. This was greatly feared by the ruling class in the Western world and they didn't want that propagated either in post war Europe or before then (see the First Red Scare).
So we waited until June 1941? The Soviets initiated their invasion of Poland and the Baltic states in 1939. If the United States was trying to stop the Soviets from advancing, why on Earth would they HELP them by opening up a second front with Germany?!
In 1941, the US did not know who was going to win the war. German victory was possible. In order to make sure that whoever wins will be at their weakest, they supported the losing side in order to bleed the other. That is why they provided help to the Soviets.
The important part of what I wrote is not the satellite buffer zone part - it's the oppressive regime part. The OP said the Soviets were fighting for freedom. Sorry, just not the case. They were fighting for oppression, because it's better to be oppressed than dead.
The Soviets were fighting for freedom from German oppression. If Stalin twisted that after the war it does not change the fact that the Soviets were still fighting for freedom at the time. Yes, from a retrospective point of view a weak argument could be made that the Soviets were somehow fighting for "oppression" but again, no one thought like that at the time except maybe Stalin.
Exactly! They weren't fighting for freedom... that's the only point I'm trying to make. The Soviets weren't fighting for freedom at all. In fact, they made a pact with Hitler agreeing not to fight just so they could get a little piece of Poland. The OP is full of it.
The Soviets made a pact with Hitler after coming back from discussions with the Western powers and realizing that they were completely disinterested in actually stopping Hitler. Stalin wasn't going to dick around, his country's security was at stake and if that meant taking half of Poland to act as a buffer state...so be it.
So the US should have waited for German boots to hit American soil? Then they would have been justified?
Uhh no..I was just explaining to you that it's much easier for a soldier to understand a concept such as fighting for your existence than it is for one to understand interventionism.
-
Have you ever heard of Hitler's summer pause? Basically, during Operation Barbarossa in 1941, Hitler and his generals had trouble agreeing. This caused their summer advance to be delayed long enough for the warm months to pass. This pause is widely considered to be a major reason the Germans (relatively ill-equipped for harsh winter warfare) were not able to take Moscow. This served as a great moral victory for the Russians.
When the gloves are off and you're at war with someone - you do your best. Whether you made mistakes or had problems with your generals, no one cares about that. They are simply excuses. I'm sure the Soviets had plenty of problems with their generals too, or Stalin's meddling but no one uses those reasons as an excuse for their poor performance. The Germans were simply a better fighting force at that point in the war.
And your point about the summer pause...the reason there was a pause was because Hitler diverted Army Group Center to the south in order to encircle the Soviet forces at Kiev. He didn't just "pause" and sit on his thumbs - he made a decision that he thought would bring about a major loss for the Soviet army. The fact that it did not change the outcome of the war in his favor is his fault and in no way excuses the defeats that were brought about by the Soviets.
Well, Hitler's decision didn't bring about a major loss for the Soviet army, and considering he went against the strong advice of his generals, I'd consider that his fault. Hitler is notorious for his shortcomings as a military commander. Not Stalin...
Actually, the fact that the Red Army was a disorganized mess suggests something entirely different. It suggests that they must have had some "help" in defeating Germany.
They were a disorganized mess...in 1941. In 1945 they were the most powerful army in the world. This leap was achieved through four years of fighting the most powerful army at the time.
They were a disorganized mess in 1941 and the Battle of Stalingrad, the turning point of the war, was in 1942. So they went from disorganized mess to elite fighting force in one year?
Because the OP stated that the western powers viewed Russia as an enemy... which was not the case until 1945 (the start of the Cold War) at the earliest. And the western powers (other than Nazi Germany and Italy) wanted Russia bled to death? Where are you getting that from? Russia had been an ally of the western powers since WWI, and westerners didn't really start fearing socialism until the whole State Department fiasco and McCarthy.
You have a very naive view of the world. The Western powers were not a fan of the Soviet Union since it was simply another competitor. Not only that but the Soviet Union advertised a socio-economic system which empowered the worker. This was greatly feared by the ruling class in the Western world and they didn't want that propagated either in post war Europe or before then (see the First Red Scare).
The deep-seeded fear of communism in the United States didn't take hold until after World War II. Americans wouldn't have elected Roosevelt (see the New Deal) otherwise.
http://www.ushistory.org/us/49e.asp (http://www.ushistory.org/us/49e.asp)
"The Great Depression created an environment where the federal government accepted responsibility for curing a wide array of society's ills previously left to individuals, states, and local governments. This amount of regulation and involvement requires a vast upgrading of the government bureaucracy. An armada of government bureaus and regulatory agencies was erected to service the programs of the New Deal."
So we waited until June 1941? The Soviets initiated their invasion of Poland and the Baltic states in 1939. If the United States was trying to stop the Soviets from advancing, why on Earth would they HELP them by opening up a second front with Germany?!
In 1941, the US did not know who was going to win the war. German victory was possible. In order to make sure that whoever wins will be at their weakest, they supported the losing side in order to bleed the other. That is why they provided help to the Soviets.
While this makes sense in theory, reality is that in 1941 the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor and the Germans declared war on the US shortly after. At that point, the US could only join the war on one side.
The important part of what I wrote is not the satellite buffer zone part - it's the oppressive regime part. The OP said the Soviets were fighting for freedom. Sorry, just not the case. They were fighting for oppression, because it's better to be oppressed than dead.
The Soviets were fighting for freedom from German oppression. If Stalin twisted that after the war it does not change the fact that the Soviets were still fighting for freedom at the time. Yes, from a retrospective point of view a weak argument could be made that the Soviets were somehow fighting for "oppression" but again, no one thought like that at the time except maybe Stalin.
Exactly! They weren't fighting for freedom... that's the only point I'm trying to make. The Soviets weren't fighting for freedom at all. In fact, they made a pact with Hitler agreeing not to fight just so they could get a little piece of Poland. The OP is full of it.
The Soviets made a pact with Hitler after coming back from discussions with the Western powers and realizing that they were completely disinterested in actually stopping Hitler. Stalin wasn't going to dick around, his country's security was at stake and if that meant taking half of Poland to act as a buffer state...so be it.
I don't deny that a buffer state was very useful for the USSR, but here's the thing - the OP is making the Soviets out to have fought valiantly for freedom.
"Today we are about to play a Game mod created by Germans, Americans, British and other people... thats freedom, and today there is freedom because million of Soviets died in the past fighting for this freedom ,they deserve respect."
The facts are that they didn't want to fight, and they didn't give a shit about freedom.
So the US should have waited for German boots to hit American soil? Then they would have been justified?
Uhh no..I was just explaining to you that it's much easier for a soldier to understand a concept such as fighting for your existence than it is for one to understand interventionism.
Actually, here's what you said.
"In any event, whatever reason the Soviets had for fighting was way more justifiable than the reason Americans had for fighting."
What I'm saying is that eventually the US would have had to fight for its existence as well. The British were the last major power standing between Nazi Germany and the United States, and London was in bad shape.
Every time the Allies would appease Hitler, he would take a little more, and a little more, and a little more... the US wasn't going to sit around and wait for Hitler to set his sights on North America. He'd already crippled all the US's major western trading partners and U-boats were in the Atlantic. That's more than enough justification.
The Soviet Union was "way more justified" than the US in the sense that Bill Gates is "way richer" than Warren Buffet.
-
I don't know what to tell you, the results speak for themselves.
Yep, the result - over 20 mil soviets dead - once again, Soviets won by numbers; Sorry, but I will never say anything good about soviet officers. For me they're just scum.
------------------------------------------------------------
The Soviets were fighting for freedom from German oppression.
Unfortunately, you brought "your" freedom to Poland as well.
-
Well, Hitler's decision didn't bring about a major loss for the Soviet army, and considering he went against the strong advice of his generals, I'd consider that his fault. Hitler is notorious for his shortcomings as a military commander. Not Stalin...
I think we both agree that it was Hitler's fault. You however are implying that it was pretty much because of this fault that enabled the Soviets to win - which is obviously wrong.
My point still stands. If Hitler was such a bad tactician, maybe Germany shouldn't have attacked the Soviet Union. You can't half-ass an attack against the Soviets, fail, then say "But it was Hitler's fault that the Soviets won!". If Hitler wanted to play hard ball with Stalin then he should have been better prepared.
They were a disorganized mess in 1941 and the Battle of Stalingrad, the turning point of the war, was in 1942. So they went from disorganized mess to elite fighting force in one year?
No, they matured into a professional army during the four years they fought the Germans. Winning one battle, even if it was the turning point, doesn't mean you have a professional army.
The deep-seeded fear of communism in the United States didn't take hold until after World War II. Americans wouldn't have elected Roosevelt (see the New Deal) otherwise.
http://www.ushistory.org/us/49e.asp (http://www.ushistory.org/us/49e.asp)
"The Great Depression created an environment where the federal government accepted responsibility for curing a wide array of society's ills previously left to individuals, states, and local governments. This amount of regulation and involvement requires a vast upgrading of the government bureaucracy. An armada of government bureaus and regulatory agencies was erected to service the programs of the New Deal."
What Americans thought about the Soviet Union didn't mean anything. Whoever was in power called the shots, not the American people, and if those in power decide that the Soviets are a potential threat to their interests then they will do whatever it takes to weaken them.
This isn't some weird theory that I thought of..I'm surprised you're taken aback by this. This kind of political dancing has been going on throughout history - it's just the way the world works at the nation state level.
While this makes sense in theory, reality is that in 1941 the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor and the Germans declared war on the US shortly after. At that point, the US could only join the war on one side.
That's right. However being on the side of the Allies doesn't mean you can't weaken the Soviets. I'm not saying the Americans, British or anyone else had a priority in making sure that the Soviet Union was destroyed - they just wanted to be the top dog standing after the war was over. This is normal, so don't be surprised if you find out that the Americans were secretly undermining Soviet efforts...the Soviets were doing the same, and so were the British - it's just the nature of the game.
I don't deny that a buffer state was very useful for the USSR, but here's the thing - the OP is making the Soviets out to have fought valiantly for freedom.
"Today we are about to play a Game mod created by Germans, Americans, British and other people... thats freedom, and today there is freedom because million of Soviets died in the past fighting for this freedom ,they deserve respect."
The facts are that they didn't want to fight, and they didn't give a shit about freedom.
Putting aside the fact that what you said is incredibly disrespectful and you are by no means an authority of any kind regarding what Soviet soldiers fought for - the OP's statement is true...Just like it is true that the Americans fought valiantly for freedom and anyone else fighting on the Allied side. Soviet soldiers fought for freedom from Nazi oppression. Let me reiterate - the fact that Stalin turned Eastern Europe into a series of oppressed states does not in any way diminish the valiant cause for which Soviet soldiers fought for. The United States fought in Korea and established a brutal dictatorship in the south - does that diminish the bravery and sacrifice of US soldiers that fought there? No. So you see how your argument falls flat on its face.
What I'm saying is that eventually the US would have had to fight for its existence as well. The British were the last major power standing between Nazi Germany and the United States, and London was in bad shape.
Every time the Allies would appease Hitler, he would take a little more, and a little more, and a little more... the US wasn't going to sit around and wait for Hitler to set his sights on North America. He'd already crippled all the US's major western trading partners and U-boats were in the Gulf of Mexico. That's more than enough justification.
The Soviet Union was "way more justified" than the US in the sense that Bill Gates is "way richer" than Warren Buffet.
Fighting for your people's existence right now is a lot more tangible than fighting a perceived threat at some point in the future. Besides, Hitler wasn't going to starve Americans to death and submerge Washington D.C. under a lake - my point still stands.
Post Merge: February 16, 2010, 03:51:21 AM
I don't know what to tell you, the results speak for themselves.
Yep, the result - over 20 mil soviets dead - once again, Soviets won by numbers; Sorry, but I will never say anything good about soviet officers. For me they're just scum.
Fair enough - I'm not going to bend over backwards to convince you, I've already written enough responses to your one-liners. I have plenty of Polish friends who aren't as close-minded as you so whatever.
-
Fair enough - I'm not going to bend over backwards to convince you, I've already written enough responses to your one-liners. I have plenty of Polish friends who aren't as close-minded as you so whatever.
Man really? Sorry but you're opinion matters so much for me, that I cannot stand your rejection...
You know what? And I have many Russian friends who do not ask me to glorify their heroes. If for you it was a well-organised bunch of superheroes and so be it. Do I force you to pay your respect to the polish heroes who defeated Russian Army in 1920? No I don't.
So tell me, why am I close-minded? Because I disagree with you? You said that Soviet Army was a professional army. But still - sorry it wasn't. It was well organised - I must agree, victories did not come from nothing. But man - calling Soviet soldiers professionals, just because they knew how to kill is a mistake. For me the meaning of "professional army" is something more than just effectivness on the battlefield.
People - from now on, we can say only good things about the Soviet Army, because "thebomb" said so.
I'll start - thank you, Soviet Army, for bringing never-ending peace to my country. I'm glad that you saved me from the German oppression.
And now for serious - thanks to all Soviet soldiers who fought, believing that they are bringing freedom.
-
I don't deny that a buffer state was very useful for the USSR, but here's the thing - the OP is making the Soviets out to have fought valiantly for freedom.
"Today we are about to play a Game mod created by Germans, Americans, British and other people... thats freedom, and today there is freedom because million of Soviets died in the past fighting for this freedom ,they deserve respect."
The facts are that they didn't want to fight, and they didn't give a shit about freedom.
Putting aside the fact that what you said is incredibly disrespectful and you are by no means an authority of any kind regarding what Soviet soldiers fought for - the OP's statement is true...Just like it is true that the Americans fought valiantly for freedom and anyone else fighting on the Allied side. Soviet soldiers fought for freedom from Nazi oppression. Let me reiterate - the fact that Stalin turned Eastern Europe into a series of oppressed states does not in any way diminish the valiant cause for which Soviet soldiers fought for. The United States fought in Korea and established a brutal dictatorship in the south - does that diminish the bravery and sacrifice of US soldiers that fought there? No. So you see how your argument falls flat on its face.
I don't mean to disrespect the men who fought and died defending their country from the Nazis. That's certainly respectable.
But if the commander for whom you're fighting doesn't believe in freedom, I'm sorry - you're just not fighting for freedom.
-
But if the commander for whom you're fighting doesn't believe in freedom, I'm sorry - you're just not fighting for freedom.
That doesn't make any sense - what does one's commander have to do with anything?
-
But if the commander for whom you're fighting doesn't believe in freedom, I'm sorry - you're just not fighting for freedom.
That doesn't make any sense - what does one's commander have to do with anything?
Replace the word commander with the word entity. That might make more sense.
If the entity for which you're fighting doesn't believe in freedom, I'm sorry - you're just not fighting for freedom.
-
But if the commander for whom you're fighting doesn't believe in freedom, I'm sorry - you're just not fighting for freedom.
That doesn't make any sense - what does one's commander have to do with anything?
Replace the word commander with the word entity. That might make more sense.
If the entity for which you're fighting doesn't believe in freedom, I'm sorry - you're just not fighting for freedom.
If what you say is true then the United States wasn't fighting for freedom either, nor the French nor Great Britain - right? The United States still held sovereignty over the Philippines, the British and French had various colonies all over Africa and the Middle East. You certainly don't believe in freedom if you're a colonial empire.
By your standard of what qualifies as "fighting for freedom", soldiers fighting for these "entities" wouldn't make the cut. If you do a thorough examination, you'll discover that no soldiers fighting for any state genuinely fought for freedom. Yet people would still say that US, British, and Soviet soldiers fought for a form of freedom because what matters isn't whether the state that they served believed in freedom but the actions of the soldiers as a whole.
Soldiers from the Western powers liberated Western Europe from Nazi oppression. Soldiers from the Soviet Union liberated Eastern Europe from Nazi oppression. The fact that each of those powers turned parts of the world into brutal and oppressive regimes after the war does not diminish the quest for freedom that each soldier sought after on the battlefield. That is why US, British, French and Soviet soldiers all fought for freedom.
-
But if the commander for whom you're fighting doesn't believe in freedom, I'm sorry - you're just not fighting for freedom.
That doesn't make any sense - what does one's commander have to do with anything?
Replace the word commander with the word entity. That might make more sense.
If the entity for which you're fighting doesn't believe in freedom, I'm sorry - you're just not fighting for freedom.
If what you say is true then the United States wasn't fighting for freedom either, nor the French nor Great Britain - right? The United States still held sovereignty over the Philippines, the British and French had various colonies all over Africa and the Middle East. You certainly don't believe in freedom if you're a colonial empire.
By your standard of what qualifies as "fighting for freedom", soldiers fighting for these "entities" wouldn't make the cut. If you do a thorough examination, you'll discover that no soldiers fighting for any state genuinely fought for freedom. Yet people would still say that US, British, and Soviet soldiers fought for a form of freedom because what matters isn't whether the state that they served believed in freedom but the actions of the soldiers as a whole.
Soldiers from the Western powers liberated Western Europe from Nazi oppression. Soldiers from the Soviet Union liberated Eastern Europe from Nazi oppression. The fact that each of those powers turned parts of the world into brutal and oppressive regimes after the war does not diminish the quest for freedom that each soldier sought after on the battlefield. That is why US, British, French and Soviet soldiers all fought for freedom.
The Americans and British were absolutely fighting for freedom within the context of Europe, and the Soviets were definitely not fighting for any kind of freedom. Whatever their personal feelings, the facts are that they were fighting off one horrific dictatorship in support of another, even if they didn't support Stalin.
And before you say "they had no means of standing up to Stalin" - fine, I agree. But consider this. I don't have the means to win a gold medal at the Olympics. It's not my fault, but I don't go around claiming I deserve a gold medal.
I'm just saying, don't make stuff up because the truth hurts too much. Accept it. The Soviets fought for Stalin. Whether they had a choice or not, reality is that they did. If the Germans had collectively stood up to Hitler and the Russians had collectively stood up to Stalin, that would have been fighting for freedom.
If I ship off tomorrow to Afghanistan or Iraq, I can say I'm fighting for green energy or universal health care or purple teletubbies... the fact remains that I'm not fighting for any of those things. I'm fighting for the REAL purpose of the mission. My own feelings are inconsequential if they're not a part of the big picture.
-
The Americans and British were absolutely fighting for freedom within the context of Europe, and the Soviets were definitely not fighting for any kind of freedom. Whatever their personal feelings, the facts are that they were fighting off one horrific dictatorship in support of another, even if they didn't support Stalin.
What do you mean "in the context of Europe"? Either the Soviets, Americans and British all fought for freedom or they did not. You can't fight for freedom in Europe while oppressing the Filipino people in Asia. Either you fight for freedom everywhere or you aren't fighting for freedom. And you're right, Soviet soldiers did not support Stalin because they hated him.
And before you say "they had no means of standing up to Stalin" - fine, I agree. But consider this. I don't have the means to win a gold medal at the Olympics. It's not my fault, but I don't go around claiming I deserve a gold medal.
What you say would be true if "standing up to Stalin" was the only measure that determined whether you fought for freedom or not. Soviet soldiers did more than enough to qualify for fighting for freedom in the same way (if not more) than American or British soldiers. It would be an extreme act of hypocrisy if the Americans and British qualified as freedom fighters while having colonies all over the world but not Soviet soldiers.
I'm just saying, don't make stuff up because the truth hurts too much. Accept it. The Soviets fought for Stalin. Whether they had a choice or not, reality is that they did. If the Germans had collectively stood up to Hitler and the Russians had collectively stood up to Stalin, that would have been fighting for freedom.
Soviet soldiers certainly did not fight for Stalin. Ask any WWII vet and they will tell you that Stalin wasn't even on the radar. On the contrary, Stalin didn't WANT Soviet soldiers to fight for him because he knew that most of them hated him. That's why he went with what his soldiers wanted to fight for which was patriotism and freedom from Nazi oppression.
If I ship off tomorrow to Afghanistan or Iraq, I can say I'm fighting for green energy or universal health care or purple teletubbies... the fact remains that I'm not fighting for any of those things. I'm fighting for the REAL purpose of the mission. My own feelings are inconsequential if they're not a part of the big picture.
I'd argue that a soldier's feelings and reasons for fighting are the only ones that matter. The "big picture" is set by people like Bush, Blair, Stalin and Hitler who have a vested interest in the war but aren't willing to fight it themselves or send their children to fight it. You've got to understand that all soldiers are human beings, whether they are American, British or Soviet - and under the right circumstances (like those of WII) they all can fight for the same kind of freedom.
-
The moment Polish government would allow the Soviet Army to enter Poland - it would be the end of freedom in Poland.
This is it. But a question can be: was it good for Poland to have freedom? or was it health-giving for the entire Europe?
Buffer countries (no offense) sometimes play dubious roles.
this guy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Suvorov (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Suvorov)
has some genuine ideas regarding the beginning of the WWII. though those ideas cannot be either proved or disputed as we have NO trustworthy info on what was really going on back then. and not only the ex-iron curtain will declassify the least important doc's in 10-20 years only (if they ever will...) but the same applies to the Allies. so the number of assumption may go up to the clouds, easily.
As for me, I think that nobody should thank the USSR. But they made 80% of the deal in Europe. But that's not a matter of thanking or not thanking. Just poor buffer countries left in ruins...
P.S.
Today I saw a "demotivator" and even saved a copy. Stalin's portrait). "He took over a country with ploughs and left it having A-bombs. But he is mentioned in respect of mass repressions mainly."
Should "the 1/6 of dry land" thank him? that is the question. whether 'tis nobler. in the mind. to suffer.
-
(http://punditkitchen.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/political-pictures-joseph-stalin-worst-leader.jpg)
-
The thread's name made me laugh very hard. Why should i thank the Russians for bringing ~50 years of communism to half of Europe? Sure the russian front was the front where the war was won or lost. But the western allies helped the russians with lend and lease, a good number of soldiers that germany had to keep in the west as safety against landing operations or on the Africa Front, the Allied bombings of Industry and terror bombings against the civillains. If the allies wouldn't have done this the russians wouold have been lost. So it's more the achievment of a community of many states than the achievment of a country alone.
-
We bring peace in Europe.... if you stupid enough to disagree.... it's your point
Over ten of my family lay dead in Poland, Czech, Germany... YOU THINK THEY LIFE SACRIFICE IN VAIN?
Вторая мировая (1/11) «Хотят ли русские войны» + Lyrics (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UbLSS3lGsWw&feature=related#normal)
-
The thread's name made me laugh very hard. Why should i thank the Russians for bringing ~50 years of communism to half of Europe? Sure the russian front was the front where the war was won or lost. But the western allies helped the russians with lend and lease, a good number of soldiers that germany had to keep in the west as safety against landing operations or on the Africa Front, the Allied bombings of Industry and terror bombings against the civillains. If the allies wouldn't have done this the russians wouold have been lost. So it's more the achievment of a community of many states than the achievment of a country alone.
Pfff, you have no idea what you're talking about. The USSR fought for freedom!
-
Soviet soldiers fought for freedom from Nazi oppression just like American, British, and French soldiers. You should be blaming the governments that sent these soldiers into battle for turning most of the world into either military camps or oppressed countries.
-
The thread's name made me laugh very hard. Why should i thank the Russians for bringing ~50 years of communism to half of Europe? Sure the russian front was the front where the war was won or lost. But the western allies helped the russians with lend and lease, a good number of soldiers that germany had to keep in the west as safety against landing operations or on the Africa Front, the Allied bombings of Industry and terror bombings against the civillains. If the allies wouldn't have done this the russians wouold have been lost. So it's more the achievment of a community of many states than the achievment of a country alone.
Pfff, you have no idea what you're talking about. The USSR fought for freedom!
Soviet soldiers fought for freedom from Nazi oppression just like American, British, and French soldiers. You should be blaming the governments that sent these soldiers into battle for turning most of the world into either military camps or oppressed countries.
Well i may admit that the normal Soviet Soldier may have fought because he wanted freedom. But the Soviet leadership wanted soviet oppression all over europe and was no better than the nazis themselves.
-
Watch this and make comments
WARNING!!!
this video show cruelty without censorship
http://www.jurnaltv.ro/video/The_Soviet_Story_Povestea_sovietelor_incredibil (http://www.jurnaltv.ro/video/The_Soviet_Story_Povestea_sovietelor_incredibil)
-
Yes the simple soldiers fight for freedom but that's all i live in country which was a Communist satelite republic and i can say it change the face of the country a lot, i cant say thanks USSR i can say Communism was one of the black side of the history of my country and i think others agree too (which live in the post Communist country) for example how big different is betwen east and west Berlin one under allied control and one under Communist one city but so big differences in the style of living and the whole situation...
-
Well i may admit that the normal Soviet Soldier may have fought because he wanted freedom. But the Soviet leadership wanted soviet oppression all over europe and was no better than the nazis themselves.
Agreed. I think we've finally found common ground :)
-
You fail to see the difference between "wanting" freedom and fighting for freedom.
-
You fail to see the difference between "wanting" freedom and fighting for freedom.
pnoozi, I agree with you that in purely abstract terms there is a distinction between wanting freedom and fighting for it. The point I made was that if American and British soldiers fought for freedom (which is commonly stated by people in the West) then so did Soviet soldiers.
-
the different is that Americans and British government fight to crush enemy so the war will end and soviets fight for freedom too but not the government, later when they go to Berlin they advance so fast because of capturing (deliverance) the cities so and the puppet politician was in every country, the American marshall plan was made and used to help from the war aftermath for the Europe but the soviets ordain to their satelite states to reject this help so the soviets fight more for war trophy's at the end...
-
Give me a brake with UK or US bringers of law and lovers of peace.
US has used atomic bomb and has killed millions of people in his short history.He have the record on wars,and all are made for interest.This crap with liberation is a pure bulsh*** for idiots
Also UK was an aggressive nation and is hard for me to believe about they to loose their habit.
Stalin and Hitler are both like brothers.Psycho mass killers.
All who admire them deserve all insults.I consider them trash or animals, because or are blind,or have no soul and follow primary instincts,and want to make the history to be repeated.
watch again who are this "humans"
http://www.jurnaltv.ro/video/The_Soviet_Story_Povestea_sovietelor_incredibil (http://www.jurnaltv.ro/video/The_Soviet_Story_Povestea_sovietelor_incredibil)
All their pictures,statues and everything who represent them deserve to be destroyed or locked.This leaders always had,and unfortunately have,the power to corrupt souls.Their black aura foolish our childrens and will risk again a new "comedy" with unimaginable consequences.If the WW3 will be started is possible to be the last for humanity.
-
the different is that Americans and British government fight to crush enemy so the war will end and soviets fight for freedom too but not the government, later when they go to Berlin they advance so fast because of capturing (deliverance) the cities so and the puppet politician was in every country, the American marshall plan was made and used to help from the war aftermath for the Europe but the soviets ordain to their satelite states to reject this help so the soviets fight more for war trophy's at the end...
The Marshall Plan was a very successful public relations move that makes people, to this day, think that it was used to help "rebuild" Europe. Its primary purpose was to prevent communist or even independent worker's factions from springing up in war-torn Western Europe. The plan itself was not effective at all and only marginally helped actual people in Western Europe.
After the war Stalin was not seeking a confrontation with the Western powers because he knew that the Soviet Union was much weaker militarily and in terms of industrial power compared to the United States. Unfortunately due to misplaced American fears the Marshall Plan came in and put Stalin on the defensive. The reason he rejected it was because he saw it as an open move to undermine his power in Eastern Europe if the plan were to be implemented there. He simply did not want the Western powers to penetrate the economies of Eastern Europe.
In short, there was no government during WWII that genuinely fought for freedom. Each of them pursued their interests at the expense of the people of Europe.
If you are interested in the reasons why the Soviets rejected the Marshall Plan, read this essay by the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars:
http://wilsoncenter.org/topics/pubs/ACFB73.pdf (http://wilsoncenter.org/topics/pubs/ACFB73.pdf)
Post Merge: February 28, 2010, 05:52:34 PM
Give me a brake with UK or US bringers of law and lovers of peace.
US has used atomic bomb and has killed millions of people in his short history.He have the record on wars,and all are made for interest.This crap with liberation is a pure bulsh*** for idiots
Also UK was an aggressive nation and is hard for me to believe about they to loose their habit.
Stalin and Hitler are both like brothers.Psycho mass killers.
All who admire them deserve all insults.I consider them trash or animals, because or are blind,or have no soul and follow primary instincts,and want to make the history to be repeated.
watch again who are this "humans"
http://www.jurnaltv.ro/video/The_Soviet_Story_Povestea_sovietelor_incredibil (http://www.jurnaltv.ro/video/The_Soviet_Story_Povestea_sovietelor_incredibil)
All their pictures,statues and everything who represent them deserve to be destroyed or locked.This leaders always had,and unfortunately have,the power to corrupt souls.Their black aura foolish our childrens and will risk again a new "comedy" with unimaginable consequences.If the WW3 will be started is possible to be the last for humanity.
I completely agree with you PSIHOPAT. Unfortunately from the small bits and pieces of news I hear from Russia, Stalin is still worshiped by some and is used as an idol by ultra nationalist racists back there.
-
The US and UK installed democracies with free elections in their captured territories. They fought for freedom.
-
Yea.
They sent spies to start revolutions where thousand of peoples has died.
They has trained terrorist groups for fighting against some regime and than fight against them as a country with high standard of morality.
They sold allot of weapons to terrorists for making profit.
They invaded countries without any care about anyone.
With their surgical accurate strikes from the bombs or rockets they destroyed hospitals,churches and schools.
They made allot of atrocities torturing people or humiliating them.
They speak about racism when the killed allot of niggers and now consider arabs to be some kind of scum.
The list is too long,but i want to stop here.If you don't know that is bad for you,but you have time to search the truth.
If you don't accept the truth where is clear is a very sad thing,and that confirm something....but i don't want to say what...
@thebomb
You can make something about that man.
This are very serious things who can make our children to have an uncertain future.Think about that.I
f you are agree with what i told,than make something,and inform how many people you can about the real danger who is hidden behind this shiny aura.Many of them don't know.All who know about that are different,and dangerous.You choose what you make with your life.
You choose if you want to make something against that or sit and wait to happen.Make posters man with atrocities.Enter in forums and show the real face of this transformation in a superior society.In both visions of transformations in the perfect society are included massacre of millions of people,and this people can be my brother or your son,or mother of other child,or all families and friend from us or others.
Walk on the street and imagine all people who meet them in one day to be killed in the most horrible ways.Is a very sad thing and i say again => If you can do something against that do it.
If you think about your facts to be with very little importance,i assure you...is not like that...and you have clear example about what was able to do two persons Hitler and Stalin(Hitler was a poor corporal and Stalin peasant).
-
Yea.
They sent spies to start revolutions where thousand of peoples has died.
They has trained terrorist groups for fighting against some regime and than fight against them as a country with high standard of morality.
They sold allot of weapons to terrorists for making profit.
They invaded countries without any care about anyone.
With their surgical accurate strikes from the bombs or rockets they destroyed hospitals,churches and schools.
They made allot of atrocities torturing people or humiliating them.
They speak about racism when the killed allot of niggers and now consider arabs to be some kind of scum.
So?
-
So?
envy, just envy.... ))
-
American, British, French, Poland no one of them was about a fair european order after the war. In WWII there are no shiny heroes that only want justice.
-
I am curious if you two will be glad to have this experience.
Is not a joke with that.
Torture,death,and humiliations are real things,and only a mad man can enjoy having this experiences.
Ignorance is the most dangerous thing for humanity who allow to happen and repeat this horrible things.You don't care until happen to you,but than is too late.Think about that.
-
btw... this game is about death brought by a range of nice means...
-
True.
But is a game.
Death is fun in the games but just there.
Difference between game and admiring one ideology is a completely different thing.
All who admire Stalin or Hitler probably has not seen and listened the sounds when one man is cut at the neck with the knife.
Imagine this things to happen to you
Is a bad joke with this ideologies .
I consider them more dangerous than the worst pestilence.
USSR and Nazy Germany is the worst possible thing who can be repeated if get support leading at the destruction of humanity.Today nuclear weapons are 20-40 times more powerful than bombs dropped at Hiroshima and Nagasaky.
USA has destroyed two cities full with innocents civilians and tend to become worst than what i told above.Is a mass murderer country who get support because say craps posting as liberators of the nations.
Nothing is perfect in this days,and someone,someday,will get a nuclear bomb and put them in american pants.Than,people will become angry,but will ignore the reason why happened that.USA will find a target for revenge and will send two bombs.In all this comedy,another countries will have intervention...and will be the fall of the human existence.
If humanity will survive after that,will live like rats in the underground,because radiations will be to high at the surface.
-
however, combining pacifism and WWII strategy games sounds strange...
-
What i say is about that ideologies and not about world without fights.
I told about nonsense and exaggerations.
-
I see. well, let's sum up. you love driving those graceful Panthers with German crosses on their armor - but you can't stand when the next-door boy wears a shirt with the same symbol. you hate "the liberator of nations" - but happily speak their language and play their computer games. you step forth against violence to human personality - but "there are only two opinions, the first one is yours, the second is wrong".
-
I see. well, let's sum up. you love driving those graceful Panthers with German crosses on their armor - but you can't stand when the next-door boy wears a shirt with the same symbol. you hate "the liberator of nations" - but happily speak their language and play their computer games. you step forth against violence to human personality - but "there are only two opinions, the first one is yours, the second is wrong".
German crosses are apolitical symbols, they have nothing to do with Nazi ideology...
-
German crosses are apolitical symbols, they have nothing to do with Nazi ideology...
can be disputed as the straight cross is inter-connected at least historically - but let is be. however, I bet most players here would recall swastikas not Iron Crosses on the Wehrmacht Headquarters building if suddenly asked). and no embarrassment for them in that.
-
@greyreth
Bill Gates is very thankful to one romanian,and all countries must be....
because....
watch this....
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/161784/world_without_romania/ (http://www.metacafe.com/watch/161784/world_without_romania/)
-
(http://punditkitchen.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/political-pictures-joseph-stalin-worst-leader.jpg)
[/quote
lol
-
In war are always casualties,but killing millions of innocents is another thing.
USSR and Germany are murderous of millions of innocents from their own people and USA from other nations,and continue this even today.
-
@PSIHOPAT
oh dear...
... I bet you are also the guys who invented the wheel?
-
the Captain Obviousness ;D (c)