Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Boroda on February 17, 2004, 10:33:48 AM
-
Sorry, it's in Russian only, but screenshots and clips are worth watching.
http://www.newsru.com/cinema/12feb2004/pq17.html
Click on a picture with Tirpitz to see more screenshots.
Here are the links to trailers:
http://www.newsru.com/cinema/12feb2004/pq17_v_lo.html
http://www.newsru.com/cinema/12feb2004/pq17_v_hi.html
or:
http://www.newsru.com/video/lo/12Feb2004/cinema/pq17.asf
http://www.newsru.com/video/hi/12Feb2004/cinema/pq17.asf
First clip is a Luftwaffe attack on PQ-17, second looks like bombing of Murmansk, but IIRC Murmansk was burnt down by "blond knights" in Winter...
-
CON-VOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!!!
-
Amazing CGI. Would love to see the movie.
-
Looks very good Boroda :)
-
The stills look like they are from IL2
-
They are bound to at a minimum have subtitles. Looks great.
-
The trailer was kinda ...odd... for a movie about PQ 17.
But I suppose no ww2 movie would be complete without a couple of scenes of Germans killing innocent civilians.
-
Boroda,
The site claims that the total value of the Convoy PQ-17 was estimated $700 million and comprised about 80% of the value of all other convoys before and after. That seems strange.
miko
-
Those clips are historically inaccurate, as neither of them contained footage of Ben Affleck.
-
Diving Ju88 dropping bombs and strafing little children…….that gave me a nice giggle. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by ra
Those clips are historically inaccurate, as neither of them contained footage of Ben Affleck.
The movie is 2 hours long, this is the 5 minutes without him.
Treasure it.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Ju88 was actually used as a divebomber in the anti-ship role.
I know. But I don’t think they were pulling out at 50 meters blasting with forward gun at everything that moved. Also those explosions look…..under modeled. Come-on 250Kg bomb does a lot more damage then that…..
-
damn the Soviets sucked
-
White Russians can't shoot...comon they only got *1* of all those fricken Ju88's
-
Looks like a great movie, too bad I cant speak Russian so I wont be able to understand it.
-
But I suppose no ww2 movie would be complete without a couple of scenes of Germans killing innocent civilians.
Well, the German armed forces did contain high percentage of human garbage.
-
Originally posted by miko2d
Boroda,
The site claims that the total value of the Convoy PQ-17 was estimated $700 million and comprised about 80% of the value of all other convoys before and after. That seems strange.
miko
I found it strange too :rolleyes:
BTW, did you read Valentin Pikul's "Requiem to PQ-17"? I wonder if the film will show all the intrigue with Brits leaving the convoy alone in the way Pikul' presented it...
-
That was cool. Except the explosions were tiny.
-
Originally posted by Dowding
Well, the German armed forces did contain high percentage of human garbage.
Did you say something about sweeping generalizations?
-
Of course, the Germans were wonderful, kind, magnanimous people on the advance and pitiful, undeserved victims on the retreat.
-
Originally posted by Dowding
Of course, the Germans were wonderful, kind, magnanimous people on the advance and pitiful, undeserved victims on the retreat.
No, that would be the Russians...
-
Originally posted by Russian
I know. But I don’t think they were pulling out at 50 meters blasting with forward gun at everything that moved. Also those explosions look…..under modeled. Come-on 250Kg bomb does a lot more damage then that…..
The bomb explosion are too samll and dont do enought damage. However I've seen plenty of real ww2 footage that does indeed show Ju88 or FW200 strafing ships at low level with nothing more than 7.92MG, even single pintle mounted wepons...
-
Originally posted by Dowding
Well, the German armed forces did contain high percentage of human garbage.
I dont like that statemend dowding, while the nazi party were *******s I'd bet most german soldiers were just regual people drafted into fighting for their country, figiting for their buddies and a quick end to the war - prolly like most all soldiers.
If you dont belive that to be true and that all soldiers who did things and killed civians were by nature evil or cruel or "human garbage" I would care to hear your comments about the morality of Lancaster crews who nightly killed thousands, tens of thousands even a hundred thousand German civilans... They were just fighting hard for their country and their buddies...
-
I'm trolling a little Grunherz, but there is a bit of thought behind that simplistic statement. Indulge me for a moment.
Brutality was routine even when the going was good and they were winning. Just take a look at how they treated Russian civilians in 1941 during Barbarossa. I'd say that was a good measure of how far the poison of Nazism or at least the concept of race supremacy had seeped through the German armed forces. Their smug self-righteousness as they machine gunned refugee columns in France, obliterated towns and cities in Poland speak volumes, frankly. The 'bad apples in every bunch' maxim doesn't quite ring true; there's something more there, something appallingly routine and mundane about much of their conduct. While the Japanese were practically professional civilian abusers, the Germans were promising amateurs.
Now of course, there were honourable men in those ranks, good men, and it's sad they they have to be tarred with the same brush. They were unwilling spectators to it all, which is a terrible situation to be in. I'm sure it has been a burden to carry around all these years.
But having said this, the Nazi party was an insidious influence within the German armed forces; with all it's perverted agenda, this must have lead to higher proportion of people capable, willing and ready to commit acts of gross indecency against anyone deemed undesirable in the eyes of the Nazi leadership.
Oh yeah, the Russians acted disgracefully as well. No doubt about that. I've read Beevor's books about Berlin and Stalingrad. The Alliance with them came out expediency (like the Finland-German one, and that between the Swedish appeasers and the Germans). But the Western powers were always terrified of Red Europe as much as they were determined to prevent a Nazi Europe. Yalta was an effort to define an end to the hostilities, rather than having one war rolling into another. And that war would have been disastrous for the West.
-
The Nazis/Russians/Japanese did institute systems that encouraged and condoned outrages no doubt. No sane person can dispute that.
However we still have to fact that US/UK did kill hundersds of thousands of civilans in the bombings, of course there is dresden too so late in the war when things were going great for the allies and it was mosttly full of refugeees etc..
My point is war is nasty busniss which makes normal people kill other people in large numbers and that doesnt neccesarly mean they are evil or human garbage across the board othewise ther would never be hope to restore combat veterns back into their normal lives after a war..
-
Dresden was a staging post for sending troops to the Russian Front - it had strategic importance. I know a Lancaster veteran. I've been round to his house to help with computer problems, and he showed me a few things he has from his time on the Lancs. A picture of Dresden taken from the air after the war, target maps etc. By your logic of equivalence, he's the equal of an SS soldier tasked with liquidating an entire village, for instance. Do you believe that?
This revisionist equivalence theory is unbalanced. To say "The Germans killed millions of people in an ochestrated, organised endeavour, BUT the Allies killed civilians as well" does not recognise the scale or the motivation behind the events. You're in danger of equating the Nazis to the Allies. In which case, why did we bother going to war in the first place? Why didn't Britain sue for peace, install a mirror fascist government and invite Hitler for tea and biscuits in Buckingham Palace? :) And why did Britain and the US make every effort to give Germany a fresh start and produce a democratic autonomous country after the war?
It does get my goat, I'll admit that. I have nothing against Germans, even those who lived through the war, and it was a long time ago. But WW2 was a clearer case for a just war as you'll ever see and I think the right side won, both in 1945 against Nazism and in 1991 against Soviet Communism.
-
Dresden was a showroom where allied airpower did show Russians what they are capable to do.
Like it or not it was a massacre of maybe hundreds thousands civilians.
-
You get all that from what I said Dowding? Did you not see in the first sentance where I said it was obvious who the bad guys were in the comparsion? You cant compare the death camps wth western allied actions in the war.
The point I'm making after that is a more general one, being that war makes normal people behave in certain ways.
And by that second point you get the dresdens and frankly just the fact that one guy picks up his rifle and shoots another guy cuz they are at war.
I think we are maybe arguing different things?
-
Originally posted by Dowding
Dresden was a staging post for sending troops to the Russian Front - it had strategic importance.
[/b]
No it wasnt, and no it didnt.
3 days after the Dresden attacks, the pile of rubble formerly known as Dresden was captured by the Soviets. There were no German army or SS units defending the city at that time. Nor were there any German Army or SS units defending the city at the time of the attack. There were some Luftwaffe battalions scattered around the city though, but they were manning AAA.
At Yalta, the Soviets demanded that the allied used strategic airpower to prevent any west -> east movement of German troops. Since Dresden was located on one of the west - east railway lines, it was decided to kill off Dresden.
The amount of overkill is what makes it a crime though. The railway was a legit target, so were a handful of industries (most notably the Zeiss-factory), but you cant justify the destruction of the city with that. Just like the USAF didnt use 800 B-52 to carpet-bomb Baghdad to ruins in 1991 "to take out the military HQs and communications centers".
I know a Lancaster veteran. I've been round to his house to help with computer problems, and he showed me a few things he has from his time on the Lancs. A picture of Dresden taken from the air after the war, target maps etc. By your logic of equivalence, he's the equal of an SS soldier tasked with liquidating an entire village, for instance. Do you believe that?
[/b]
Nah, he is more the equal of someone who spent the war butchering civilians from a distance. The major difference is that your old chap has "plausible denial" while the SS "soldier" doesnt.
Anyway, if you read up on Dresden a bit, you will note that the BC lied to the bomber crews before the attack on Dresden. I'm sure you know what Im referring to here, since you have read alot about the air war.
-
Best scene of those flicks was the Soviets using buckets of water to cool the barrels of their AA guns. Might be a good flick, so long as a neutral political atmosphere is maintained.
(sad, how this thread has already turned into a political argument ALREADY)
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
The Nazis/Russians/Japanese did institute systems that encouraged and condoned outrages no doubt. No sane person can dispute that.
Please, I want examples of Soviet system "encouraging and condoning outrages".
If you'll fail providing proof for your hallucinations as you usually do - I want your apologies. GH, and don't you dare to say that you are a "victim of evil communists".
-
Originally posted by Boroda
Please, I want examples of Soviet system "encouraging and condoning outrages".
Ilja Ehrenburg.
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
Ilja Ehrenburg.
Should I provide you an article from Pravda explaining that comrade Erenburg is "not right"?...
Pravda, April 18th, 1945. "Comrade Erenburg oversimplifies" by G.F. Alexandrov, "agitprop" chief in Central Committee. "Comrade Erenburg is not right, Hitlers come and go, but German people stays".
Anyway, wartime propaganda exists in every country at war, and Western "allies" are not an exception. What I mean is actions like Hitler's order from May, 13th, 1941, where all German military and emplyees are declared immune to any prosecution for crimes against Soviet civilians. This is a clear and obvious encouragemnt for atrocities and a direct violation of conventions.
http://www.stsg.de/main/zeithain/geschichte/sowjpow/index_en.php
-
Dowding: Of course, the Germans were wonderful, kind, magnanimous people on the advance and pitiful, undeserved victims on the retreat.
While I was living in the Soviet Union, I made sure to talk with the ukrainian and belorussian people that lived under geman occupation any chance I've got - and I've got a lot.
Those people (all country peasants) had about as much insentive to say nice things about germans as an average american redneck has to say about japanese in WWII.
To be sure, they all claimed that germans were evil and cruel - except for the particular germans that were stationed in their house and village. Those somehow behaved exemplary with respect to the local population. Go figure.
Could it be that the people strafing russian civilians from german planes were not germans but swedes? After all, some swedes hate russians passionately and believe that "Russia always has been, and always will be, our enemy. This dates back to well before 1534. We have had longer or shorter periods of peace, but we have more or less always been at war with them." :rolleyes:
-
Hi Boroda,
I have read a couple of books written by British POWs who were in Eastern Germany when the Soviet Union broke through into Prussia. One episode particularly sticks in my mind.
The POW's were working for a rich Prussian family in the grounds of their castle. Before the troops arrived, a Russian staff car pulled up. The Russian officers basically told the owners to flee, because they had lost control of their troops' behaviour.
Virtually any German captured soldier was shot. (I believe that only a tiny percentage of German POWs actually survived). Rape by Russian troops was wholesale and indiscriminate. The book mentions that girls that were raped were told by the Russians to wear a white armband which would mean that they would be spared a second time, when in fact it meant that they were 'hotties' and the armband advertised this to other soldiers who went onto rape them.
These POWs did say, however that Russian soldiers were incredibly kind to children.
All I say, is that from what I have read, the Russians were utterly brutal to the Germans when the tables were turned, although as I understand it, it was not that the Soviets had any particuarly 'system' of abuse toward German civilians, but that the officers just could not prevent it from taking place.
Given what Russia was put through by the Germans, one can understand the desire for vengance that the Russians must have felt and I make no moral point about this.
Ravs
-
Originally posted by Boroda
Should I provide you an article from Pravda explaining that comrade Erenburg is "not right"?...
Pravda, April 18th, 1945. "Comrade Erenburg oversimplifies" by G.F. Alexandrov, "agitprop" chief in Central Committee. "Comrade Erenburg is not right, Hitlers come and go, but German people stays".
[/b]
I know very well that the commies wanted to distance themselves from Ehrenburg at the closing minutes of the war.
But please do provide some articles from Pravda before 1945 where they distance themselves from him.
Anyway, wartime propaganda exists in every country at war, and Western "allies" are not an exception. What I mean is actions like Hitler's order from May, 13th, 1941, where all German military and emplyees are declared immune to any prosecution for crimes against Soviet civilians. This is a clear and obvious encouragemnt for atrocities and a direct violation of conventions.
Sure it is. And no, you will not find any Soviet order similar to the Commissar order of 1941.
You will however find persons like Ilja Ehrenburg encouraging Russian soldiers to rape, butcher and kill pretty much everything German with a pulse...with the good memory of the communist regime.
Until it got out of hand in April 1945 that is, when Soviet units began disobeying combat orders, and instead the soldiers would go on rape/pillage/burn and butcher everything rampages among the German civilian population.
-
Originally posted by miko2d
Could it be that the people strafing russian civilians from german planes were not germans but swedes? After all, some swedes hate russians passionately and believe that "Russia always has been, and always will be, our enemy. This dates back to well before 1534. We have had longer or shorter periods of peace, but we have more or less always been at war with them."
Nah, couldnt be because
a) the Swedish airunit in Finland wasnt equipped with Ju88s, and
b) This unit only flew missions over Finnish territory (if I remember correctly)
I edited your post to remove the emoticon that made it look retarded, no need to thank me.
-
From Grunherz statement about the Lancaster crews:
"who nightly killed thousands, tens of thousands even a hundred thousand German civilans... "
For your info:
RAF Bomber command dropped around 1 million tonnes on the German Reich in WW2. The Americans added a lot to that as well.
RAF bomber command lost around 100.000 aircrew in those operations.
From the combined RAF and USAAF bombing, German casualties of dead+ wounded cross the million.
In 1940 however with the RAF hopelessly trying accurate bombing on military targets, Bomber command lost more people than the victim, Germany, AND actually German losses of life were less than losses in traffic accidents in the same period.
The Russians lost 22 million people, MILLIONS of civilians. That does not include the Jewish part as far as I know.
Just to have some numbers right....;)
-
Could it be that the people strafing russian civilians from german planes were not germans but swedes?
Much more likely is that the pilots cannot possibly identify the demographics of the people they are attacking from 1000 meters away at 400km/h. There were often deliberate attacks on civilian populations throughout the war, but these clips do not necessarily show that civilians were the target of the attack. Why would the LW risk planes and crewmen to kill children?
ra
-
Ra:
to create confusion and chaos on the road network so that transportation logistics would be made harder for the military.
Ravs
-
Originally posted by ravells
Ra:
to create confusion and chaos on the road network so that transportation logistics would be made harder for the military.
Ravs
Yep, and this was done in Italy too, by *cough* another actor *cough*.
;)
-
Looks interesting. If its good, it'll get English subtitles (rather than dubbing).
-
Originally posted by Naso
Yep, and this was done in Italy too, by *cough* another actor *cough*.
;)
It was done in Ethiopia too, sometimes with poison gas. I don't remember by whom.
-
Originally posted by Boroda
Please, I want examples of Soviet system "encouraging and condoning outrages".
If you'll fail providing proof for your hallucinations as you usually do - I want your apologies. GH, and don't you dare to say that you are a "victim of evil communists".
No proof Boroda, all I have is western/nazi/polish/jewish/gulagvictim propaganda. You wouldnt wabnt to be botherd about that....
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Then post some of that "western/nazi/polish/jewish/gulagvictim propaganda" then ...
You arent serious right Gscholz? You need me to post prrof about the criminal excess commited by Stalins regime....
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
I know very well that the commies wanted to distance themselves from Ehrenburg at the closing minutes of the war.
But please do provide some articles from Pravda before 1945 where they distance themselves from him.
Sure it is. And no, you will not find any Soviet order similar to the Commissar order of 1941.
You will however find persons like Ilja Ehrenburg encouraging Russian soldiers to rape, butcher and kill pretty much everything German with a pulse...with the good memory of the communist regime.
Until it got out of hand in April 1945 that is, when Soviet units began disobeying combat orders, and instead the soldiers would go on rape/pillage/burn and butcher everything rampages among the German civilian population. [/B]
Hortlund, you don't understand what you speak about.
Erenburg could say anything, but there was no way to openly encourage rapes and murders of civilians. It was simply impossible. It was contradicting Soviet "religion", and political departments could never let anyone even speak about rapes and murders. All they could do was close their eyes on this, until some higher command could hear about it and they will be punished.
Official position was to shoot rapists and murderers in front of their units.
Again you mix up wartime propaganda with official political doctrine and declared values.
Any officer who's unit was caught on rape/murder could get severely punished.
And believe me, this politics started not in April 1945. It began even before Soviet Army crossed pre-war borders.
Ravells wrote"
Virtually any German captured soldier was shot. (I believe that only a tiny percentage of German POWs actually survived).
The same thing with captured German soldiers. When it was possible to make it look like accident or combat kills - they could get shot pretty easily, but any officer in charge of POWs could never let his soldiers kill them. It depends on unit and relations inside it: any soldier reported as a POW-killer by "whistlers" had severe problems.
You can't imagine how many German POWs worked here after the War. There are whole districts and towns built ny German POWs. You can still find buildings made by "German prisoners" in almost any village in Central Russia...
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
You arent serious right Gscholz? You need me to post prrof about the criminal excess commited by Stalins regime....
psst... there is no proof of Stalin's glorious regime committing any crimes. Those records were burned. Those who say otherwise are traitors to the motherland.
Besides all the enemies of the state were found to be criminally insane and the merciful state sent them to sanitariums for their health.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
No, but you claim the russian commanders were "encouraging and condoning outrages" by the soldiers. That's different.
Here is what I said:
"The Nazis/Russians/Japanese did institute systems that encouraged and condoned outrages no doubt. No sane person can dispute that."
Now of course you arent saying that Stalin's orders magically lept from him to the men who pulled the trigger, bypassing the command chain...
-
GH, I am just curious, who of us two is... hmmm... not very smart?...
I asked a direct question, and you answer by same meaningless "stalinwasaneviltyrrant" bla-bla-bla.
Again, I want proof, are you going to give me any? Otherwise I request your apologies.
You have to learn to be responsible for your words.
-
Originally posted by Boroda
Please, I want examples of Soviet system "encouraging and condoning outrages".
If you'll fail providing proof for your hallucinations as you usually do - I want your apologies. GH, and don't you dare to say that you are a "victim of evil communists".
Boroda,
Ask any Poles that survived your country's brutal rape and pillage of the territory that was Poland's long before the war started, and was retaken from the German's during the course of the war. Stalin's insistence that the allies divide up Poland's legitamate territory, and those bastards Roosevelt and Churchill's failure to stand up to that mad man are criminal as well. The Germans were not the only ones to kill mass amounts in rape and murder, the Soviets had a fair hand in it as did the brits, and the US.
-
Memoirs of signalmen: Yuri Koriakin (http://www.iremember.ru/signal/koriakin/letters/letter030345.htm)
Before crossing the German border in the region of Bromberg (Bydgoszcz) the company politruk (political officer - trans.) came to a meeting and announced the following: "We are entering German territory. We know that Germans brought uncounted evils to our land, that is why we are entering their territory, to punish the Germans. I ask you not to make contact with the local population, so that you wouldn't have any troubles, and not to walk alone. Well, and concerning the woman question, you can treat the German women rather freely, but so it wouldn't look organized. 1-2 men can go, do what they need (that's exactly what he said: "what they need"), return, and that's all. Any kind of pointless damage to German men and women is inadmissible and will be punished." This conversation made us feel that he himself didn't know exactly what norms of behavior should've been followed. Of course, we were all under the influence of propaganda, which didn't differentiate Germans and Hitlerites in those times. That's why I know of a ton of cases when German women were raped, but not killed.
A couple of times, when entering houses, I saw killed old people. Once, having entered a house, we saw that someone was lying on the bed. I pulled the blanket off and saw a woman with a bayonet in her chest. What happened? I don't know. We left without asking. But the picture completely changed after the Victory, when on May 12-14, an article by Academician Aleksandrov called "Ilya Erenburg Oversimplifies" was published in the Pravda newspaper. That's where it was declared that there are Germans, and then there are Hitlerites. That was the time of change, when peaceful reconstruction started. Then they started tightening the screws, punish practically every misdemeanor.
-
Originally posted by Bodhi
The Germans were not the only ones to kill mass amounts in rape and murder, the Soviets had a fair hand in it as did the brits, and the US.
As you could see - I never said that Soviet or other allied soldiers were innocent angels. But I insist that there was NO "encouraging and condoning outrages" from Soviet authorities, and the whole policy was to strictly avoid such things. I am sorry that GH probably fails to understand my English.
-
Boroda - I was saying that from the historical recollections I have read, the case was that the enlisted men were not in control - Particularly after they had been drinking.
Certainly from the point of view of the English POWs who saw all of this happen, they said that the officers were trying to warn any Germans who could to 'get away' to avoid getting raped.
Miko's post is interesting, and chimes with what I have read.
Ravs
-
Originally posted by Boroda
As you could see - I never said that Soviet or other allied soldiers were innocent angels. But I insist that there was NO "encouraging and condoning outrages" from Soviet authorities, and the whole policy was to strictly avoid such things. I am sorry that GH probably fails to understand my English.
Boroda,
How do you explain Stalin's directives to wholesale murder the Polish People. That and to REMOVE the Polish state from the face of the earth? THat sure sounds like "encouraging and condoning" the organised murder of the Poles caught under the Soviet advance to Germany...
Those words were spoken by Stalin at the conference in.... I want to say Yalta, but may need to look it up tonight when I get home.
Not trying to be a Soviet Basher Boroda, just that I find that government to be of a criminal caliber on the scale of the Nazi's.
-
Несмотря на героические усилия по отражению атак, экипажи погибали - от торпед, от арктической стужи. Более 200 моряков осталось на морской глубине, свыше 1300 спасли, большую их часть доставили в Архангельск.
as true today as when it was written
-
Boroda I understand that you have some perverse need to defend Stalin and his actions therefore I will not waste my time posting any further arguments. Now of course you may take that as lack of evidence but both of us know that if I posted anything, lets say about Katyn you would just come here and say it was all a lie - and not really evidence. In the end you would arrive at the same conclusion, except that in the second case I would waste much more of my time.
Anyway I'm glad you escaped injury in that non existant subway explosion that most certainly did have any involvent with non existent chechen terrorists....
-
Quote.
" Stalin's insistence that the allies divide up Poland's legitamate territory, and those bastards Roosevelt and Churchill's failure to stand up to that mad man are criminal as well. "
Ahemm.
Churchill actually DID stand up to that with the simple argument that Poland was the reason Great Britain entered the war in the first place. However, for some reason, Rooseveld didn't back him up there.
-
Rape, Bodhi? The US and Brits? I don't doubt there were occasions where pissed up soldiers commited rape, but you simply cannot compare that to the way the Germans and Russians behaved. If you do believe they are in any way comparable, perhaps you would find this website to your taste:
http://www.ety.com/HRP/rev/idx.htm
I doubt you will find it palatable reading though. It's more to Hortlund's taste.
-
Originally posted by Dowding
I doubt you will find it palatable reading though. It's more to Hortlund's taste.
Go f u c k yourself you disgusting piece of trash.
-
*counts to ten*
-
In retrospect, I prolly should have done that the other way around eh.
-
Nah, I didn't really think you'd believe the stuff on that site. You've got to admit the stuff on there is funny though. I was looking for information on the Royal Warwickshire Regiment and the atrocity committed against them by the SS. At first I thought it was a joke, but the more I read the more I realised the author is serious.
Check out his claim the British troops used dum-dums in the retreat to Dunkirk and how they killed nuns who they believed were German parachutists. He doesn't name a single source.
-
Originally posted by ra
It was done in Ethiopia too, sometimes with poison gas. I don't remember by whom.
And in Lybia, too.
Have you ever heard of Douhet ?
If you are thinking someone here is claiming higher moral standards, look to another direction.
I hope you got it.
Not everyone is a nationalistic fanatic, you know?
-
Originally posted by Bodhi
Boroda,
How do you explain Stalin's directives to wholesale murder the Polish People. That and to REMOVE the Polish state from the face of the earth? THat sure sounds like "encouraging and condoning" the organised murder of the Poles caught under the Soviet advance to Germany...
Those words were spoken by Stalin at the conference in.... I want to say Yalta, but may need to look it up tonight when I get home.
Not trying to be a Soviet Basher Boroda, just that I find that government to be of a criminal caliber on the scale of the Nazi's.
Didn't you stop drinking brandy every morning? (c)
Polish state was included ito Soviet sphere of interests, and AFAIK there was no "directives to wholesale murder the Polish People".
Or maybe you mean that Armia Ludowa contained only of bloody communists hired in Buryatia and taught to speak Polish?
What I really want to find out is where all this pseudohistorical hallucinations come from, but it's probably impossible without an experience of living in Western society since childhood.
-
Boroda, you stupid clot!
The rest of the missing polish officers many of which were excavated at Katyn...hemm.....were dug up near Smolensk.
That's something you should know by now from previous threads, and indeed ranks very well as WHOLESALE MASSACRE :mad:
Maybe it was all a hallucination?
-
Originally posted by Angus
Boroda, you stupid clot!
The rest of the missing polish officers many of which were excavated at Katyn...hemm.....were dug up near Smolensk.
That's something you should know by now from previous threads, and indeed ranks very well as WHOLESALE MASSACRE :mad:
Maybe it was all a hallucination?
Thank you.
You are probably unfamiliar with my years-long argument with Toad. I have to say again that I don't know who executed Polish officers in Katyn. It was Goebbels's discovery. The last solid document about this problem is a Burdenko's commission report made in 1944. The commission included some European journalists and experts who worked in nazi incestigation made in 1943. They stated that they were forced to sign German report while it was obvious that Poles were killed by nazis in 1941.
JFYI: Polish officers in Katyn' were killed from German weapons. Katyn was a Smolensk recreation ground in 1940. Many Polish officers declared "killed in Katyn'" wrote letters home in 1941 and 1942.
Think for yourself. I say - I don't know who have committed that crime. I don't want to believe that it was my country.
Just to prevent you from bringing well-known pro-nazi arguments here: all the "orders" and "directives" that are shown as "proof of Soviet crimes in Katyn'" are a fake, obvious to any person who can speak Russian. Frankly speaking - I don't want to waste my time explaining it again.
BTW, who do you think were the officers in Wojsko Polsko (sp?) who fought Germans together with the Soviet Army?
-
Originally posted by Boroda
Think for yourself. I say - I don't know who have committed that crime. I don't want to believe that it was my country.
Just to prevent you from bringing well-known pro-nazi arguments here: all the "orders" and "directives" that are shown as "proof of Soviet crimes in Katyn'" are a fake, obvious to any person who can speak Russian. Frankly speaking - I don't want to waste my time explaining it again.
This sums it up nicely, you dont want to belive..... Tell me boroda who ran the Gulags? Was it the Japanese? The mongolians? Spacemen from Mars?
-
Blagadaru Vas!
Ya vstretchayu vam pod stolom!
Zhdaroviya!
Ya nichego ne znayu!
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
This sums it up nicely, you dont want to belive..... Tell me boroda who ran the Gulags? Was it the Japanese? The mongolians? Spacemen from Mars?
GH, you lack the creative approach in almost any discussion. Refusing to bring arguments and continuing to speak about things that you can't even spell correctly.
GULAG = Gosudarstvennoe Upravlenie LAGerey, State Administration of [penitenciaty] Camps.
Again, JFYI: biggest GULAG population, in 1940, was 2 (two) times smaller then all Russian prisoners in 1999. One million for the whole USSR vs. two million for Russian Federation only (about one half ofthe USSR population).
Homework for Hrungerz: compare the number of prisoners per capita in USSR, USA, Germany and other industrial countries in 1940.
Grun, I still have my Grandfather's discharge documents under the glass together with his Order of Red Banner awad documets. My Grand-grandfather disappeared in GULAG in 1939 for "railway sabotage" on his line. I am the last person to say that Stalin was an angel, and I don't want that times to return. I have told you this many times before, but you are either deaf and blind or just unable to remember and understand information. Maybe you have problems at work or in family life? If so - I'll understand that laughing at such people is impolite and finally decide to add you to my ignore list. :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Nakhui
Blagadaru Vas!
Ya vstretchayu vam pod stolom!
Zhdaroviya!
Ya nichego ne znayu!
Next phrases should be:
Soobsh_i_te nOmer vAshey chAsti!
Gde lAger' partizAn?
Gde nahOdyatsya rakEtniye ustanOvki?
:lol :lol :lol
-
Boroda: FYI: Polish officers in Katyn' were killed from German weapons. Katyn was a Smolensk recreation ground in 1940. Many Polish officers declared "killed in Katyn'" wrote letters home in 1941 and 1942.
My father-in-law's father - the grand-grandfather of my children was tortured to death by soviet authorities.
Their family escaped from the german into the soviet occupation zone days/hours before germans took posession of their town.
He was a healthy man, father of 5 children.
There was recriting going on among the poles who have escaped from germans. Those who wished could sign up for work in soviet enterprises, others could sign up for emigration to England (or US). Those who did sign for emigration were arrested and most were not seen or heard from again. That is the first-hand testimony from my father-in-law who is alive only because he had an uncanny feel for danger and did not sign for emigration. It was him who few hours before occupation by germans got his family out of german occupation zone. Then he travelled to Soviet Union, came back and took the whole family there which saved most of them from german invasion. He was 14 at the time.
At 17 he enlisted into the Red Army but after Katyn was discovered and Anders escaped from the Soviet Union with the polish patriots of Armia Kraiowa, they - polish batallions - were sent to work in Siberia rather then anywhere they could escape from.
BTW, who do you think were the officers in Wojsko Polsko (sp?) who fought Germans together with the Soviet Army?
Those who did not have oppotrunity to escape with Anders and his Armia Krajowa or the communist puppers of the Stalin's regime.
miko
-
Homework for Boroda: Calculate the death rate per prisoner in a russian gulag and then compare it to a western jail. Calculate the amount of corruption, destroyed records and crimes against humanity.
Your society made the mistake of not murdering everyone they sent on the camps, there are actually first hand eyewitnesses still alive.
The western civilization didn't need a wall and machineguns to keep them on their side. It was the other way around.
Now why is that Boroda?
You've grown up in a society famous for it's blatant censoship, lies and corruption. You cite Pravda, the very same magazine that posts 'news' about UFO's on it's headlines.
Doesn't even THAT make you think?
It must be difficult for one to realise that the government you trust has been lying to you, in the open, for decades. Those lies were covered up by careful censorship of the western media and heavy limitations in traveling rights. Most travellers were followed by a spy at all times to monitor their activity.
In east (soviet)germany the stasi (like the local KGB) built up an elaborate network of spies where every neighbour was practically watching eachothers. The brainwash resulted in children exposing their parents to the system.
It's a sick, sick system you grew up in. Too bad you still can't see the light and believe in the lies.
-
Boroda lives down the rabbit hole, with Alice in Wonderland.
In April 1990, Premier Mikhail Gorbachev publicly admitted the NKVD's responsibility for the Katyn executions.
In 1992, Russian President Boris Yeltsin handed over to the Polish government Stalin's "Supreme Punishment" decree of March, 1940, ordering the execution of over 14,000 Polish officers and 10,000-plus other Poles. It explains why mass graves of Poles were uncovered decades later in other parts of the Soviet Union.
In January 2000, Russia's president-elect Vladimir Putin telephoned Polish President Aleksander Kwaњniewski to inform him of the discovery of a mass grave thought to contain the bodies of Poles murdered by Soviet forces during the Second World War.
-
Originally posted by Siaf__csf
Homework for Boroda: Calculate the death rate per prisoner in a russian gulag and then compare it to a western jail. Calculate the amount of corruption, destroyed records and crimes against humanity.
Your society made the mistake of not murdering everyone they sent on the camps, there are actually first hand eyewitnesses still alive.
The western civilization didn't need a wall and machineguns to keep them on their side. It was the other way around.
Now why is that Boroda?
You've grown up in a society famous for it's blatant censoship, lies and corruption. You cite Pravda, the very same magazine that posts 'news' about UFO's on it's headlines.
Doesn't even THAT make you think?
It must be difficult for one to realise that the government you trust has been lying to you, in the open, for decades. Those lies were covered up by careful censorship of the western media and heavy limitations in traveling rights. Most travellers were followed by a spy at all times to monitor their activity.
In east (soviet)germany the stasi (like the local KGB) built up an elaborate network of spies where every neighbour was practically watching eachothers. The brainwash resulted in children exposing their parents to the system.
It's a sick, sick system you grew up in. Too bad you still can't see the light and believe in the lies.
Siaf I am always having to correct you!!!
The Berlin wall was put around based on the wishes of the free german people of the east who wanted to protect themselves aginst the beggars from the west. Nobody wants panhandlers, you know. Unfortuantely heavy winds (predominatly blowing east to west) sometimes blew east germs into the electrified fences and minefields - so unfortunately somre were injured. But the beggars from west were kept out.
Just how poor was the west? Good that you ask. It was so poor that in 1948 the USA and UK had to prop up their west berlin puppet state with daily flights of food just so they did not all starve. All soviet food shipments to the city were cut off because the madman truman did not allow rail or road traffic for soviet aid into the city.
Now the gulags. They are like boyscout camps in the forest where people are educated in useful trades. Nobody was killed in them...
Stalin is great!!!! He is the besty!!!! I am being a good little boroda, no?
BTW boroda in common english usage the word gulag is used both singluarly and pluraly gulags to describe the system or individual camps...
-
Boroda, you stupid clot. I never thought you had a goldfish memory as well :D
From yourself:
"You are probably unfamiliar with my years-long argument with Toad. I have to say again that I don't know who executed Polish officers in Katyn. It was Goebbels's discovery. The last solid document about this problem is a Burdenko's commission report made in 1944. The commission included some European journalists and experts who worked in nazi incestigation made in 1943. They stated that they were forced to sign German report while it was obvious that Poles were killed by nazis in 1941. "
Are you unfamiliar with Putin apologizing to the polish nation because of Katyn? Are you unfamiliar with the fact that most of the missing poles were discovered near Smolensk recently, and while those were buried there, it was under Soviet command?
You and Toad, WTF, please stay on course mate. You should know this by now, since this has been shown to you in threads before in this very forum.
Of course you don't WANT TO belive it was your country. Who would want to belive it? But none the less, you cannot discard absolute fact. Your nation is big...errr..HUGE. **** happens. It was years ago, it's all past and it bloody well wasn't YOUR fault.
Hell, my ancestors went around Britain raping and pillaging anyway....
And then the icing on the cake. Your desperate dirt-bomb calling anybody a Nazy that does oppose you. GRR. GRRRR :
"Just to prevent you from bringing well-known pro-nazi arguments here: all the "orders" and "directives" that are shown as "proof of Soviet crimes in Katyn'" are a fake, obvious to any person who can speak Russian. Frankly speaking - I don't want to waste my time explaining it again. "
Now this is bad logic. And basically, I think that russian knowledge is irrelevant to history knowledge for most people, I don't know what they tought you though. I'm not picking up the glove for the bloody Nazis, however right is right.
Your time would be better spent debating professionally against apparently pro-nazi folks as sometimes really happens on these forums.I have not seen you there in the fieldd Boroda, why not, I wonder. Ok,here's your chance. Please check out the thread "When Enemy Was a Friend " in the aircraft and vehicles forum. Read my lines,do you think I am a Nazi?
Show your worth and take a different stand for once, you silly clot!!! There are better debates for you than this hopeless one, and honestly I'd like to see your point on many other threads.
Regards
Angus
-
stop picking on the poor brainwashed soviet rube.
-
Angus, to save you having to go back and find the threads, all evidence that Katyn was perpetrated by the Soviets is simply false.
Gorbachev lied when he accepted responsibility. Yeltsin was a drunk and obviously forged the paperwork to suck up to the West. Putin is continuing the conspiracy.
That pretty much sums up Boroda's argument.
-
NONONONO!
WE MUST BASH IT INTO HIS HEAD
After all, he has been brainwashed before.....:D
-
Grunherz, I am sorry, but I must admit that you are not worth talking to. It's impossible to activate your brain cells to switch you back from "dumb propaganda repeating straight flow" mode. Cold war is over. Now you don't have to repeat all the fairy-tales about "evil communists" to justify your new citizenship. Or you still have to? Look at Miko. I understand that you lack his mental abilities and education, but you can try to get rid of your habbit of repeating what you think you are supposed to say. You look much more like ideal Soviet citizen (a non-existant type here even in communist times) then Miko.
I still request your apologies - you openly refused to bring any proof here.
Toad, I am happy that some things in this world never change, like you ;) Same old radio again :) I have made my position clear and appealed to your logics, common sence and mutual understanding to show you the reasons for my point of view - but you still prefer to act like a radio and keep baiting me with all that fake "proofs" that were provided by a puppet traitor Gorbachov. If there are any other "proofs" then the leaflets with obvious Stalin's recolution "against" and only Kalinin, Voroshilov and Kaganovich voting "pro" - I want to see it. I admit that NKVD could execute Polish officers, but I see absolutely no proof other then Gorbachev's attempt to show how "evil" bolsheviks were. Yeltsyn and Putin are obviously caught in a trap - they simply can't bring out the true facts not to offend Poles. BTW, Putin refused to apologize for Katyn', while Polish press demanded it.
Angus, I didn't answer on your accusations against USSR targeting Iceland with several ICBMs. Just think, could it happen if your country didn't join an agressive alliance? After joining NATO you simply have to appreciate the propaganda rules.
I don't want to say that Soviet system was exellent or ideal. But I see advantages and drawbacks in both systems. Unfortunately, most of the Soviet citizens faced the bad side of Western system that we adopted 12 years ago. I am far from waving Red Banner and shouting "bring back sausage for two twenty", but I want to use all the good sides of Soviet system instead of wasting them in favour of "capitalism", "free market", whatever you call it.
And I never trust what they say on TV. You guys need to live under Soviet system for several years to understand it.
Now - back to the topic ;)
Do you think that using PQ-17 as a bait for Tirpitz and leaving it alone for slaughter was right? I don't remember, but didn't captain Lunin's torpedo hit on Tirpitz that made it return to base spoil allied plan for entrapping it?
Some Royal Navy regulations look too strange for me. Abandoning and sinking HMS Edinbourgh with Soviet gold themselves and then asking USSR to pay it again (!!!) looks not very friendly...
-
To Miko2d:
Мико, было бы интересно с тобой пообщаться в более непринуждённой обстановке :) Например у нас на форуме ВБ Фрихоста: ввв.вбфри.нет
Если я тебе тут еще не остодоел - напиши на tengrie собака sky точка chph точка ras точка ru или на борода собака вбфри точка нет.
Буду очень признателен.
На форуме у нас публика разная, как и тут, от пионэров типа нашей хорватской жертвы анальной медитации, и до докторов наук. Найдёшь интересных оппонентов и сторонников. Жалко что такой персонаж как ты пропадает для общения на родном языке ;)
-
See Angus?
Boroday, you're right; some things never change. You're still in denial about Katyn, for example.
Yet another discussion of Katyn that Boroda will dismiss :) (http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/academic/history/marshall/military/wwii/special.studies/katyn.massacre/katynlrc.txt)
...Until Spring 1940, some of these officers' families had been corresponding with them. Thereafter, the families' mail was returned as undeliverable. Inquiries about the missing officer prisoners from the Polish Government-in-Exile, in London, and from the British government went unanswered by the Soviet government...
...Then, on 13 April 1943, Radio Berlin announced the discovery of a
mass grave (at the Russian forest village of Katyn) of thousands of
Polish officers who had been murdered, it stated, by the Soviet NKVD.
After a two-day delay, the Soviet government responded on 15 April 1943,suddenly remembering and declaring that the Polish officers had been captured by the Nazis in late Summer 1941 and countercharging that the Germans had killed the Poles...6
...Under bitter pressure from its people within and outside of Poland,
the Polish Government-in-Exile demanded an investigation and called on
the International Red Cross to examine the site. The Red Cross agreed, but only on the condition that such an investigation would be acceptable to all governments. The Soviet government vetoed the proposal, of course, and broke off diplomatic relations with the London Poles on 25 April 1943, accusing them of "a hostile attitude towards the Soviet Union..."11
...Following its inquiry, the Commission presented its findings. The
men had been killed in their winter coats, indicating a cool season.
Their uniforms were in relatively good condition at the time of their
execution, indicating a period of captivity of months rather than years.
Their hands had been tied behind their backs using rope of Russian
manufacture. The mail and diaries left in their clothing indicated that their deaths had occurred during Spring 1940, when they were in Soviet custody. Several of the diaries even described the Poles' detraining at the railway station near Katyn and their growing concern about their impending fate.35 Local inhabitants testified that Katyn had been used by the NKVD as a killing site for years.36
The Poles executed at Katyn were all from the internment camp at
Kozielsk. However, not all of Kozielsk's internees had been murdered,
and those Polish officers who survived to join Anders' army had compiled sequential lists of the Spring 1940 departures of their campmates. The corpses identified at Katyn were buried in groups in the order of their departures from Kozielsk.37
Other evidence uncovered included tree saplings planted over the
graves. Although they were five years old, biological analysis
indicated they had been planted three years before the Spring 1943
German-sponsored investigation.38...
Everyone in the world KNOWS who was responsible for Katyn...... except, of course, Boroda.
-
CC Boroda
Now that tyhe Cold War is over I really must say that the Berlin wall was really a cool thing, fun even!!!!
-
Boroda,
I will take a look at that forum ine few days. I would need to get a russian setup for my keyboard before that.
It would probably do me some good to converse in russian.
miko
-
Hey Boroda!
Leaving debates aside, there is some recent information about PQ-17. Here in Iceland there was a double agent that had some info about this. He was actually accused by the British, for having "leaked" information about PQ-17 over to the Germans, but a deeper look ended with the Brits sending him their apologies.
The guy is still alive, around 90 years old or so. Quite a story he has to tell
I will see if I find something online about it.
Also, there is some stuff available online about PQ-17 by David Irving, - however, I'd take everything that guy has to tell through a filter, - just like your stuff at times :D
Anyway, untill tomorrow
-
To Miko:
AFAIK you can get Cyrillic stickers for your Клавдия Артуровна for about $10 by mail, but it can be easier and faster to just use red permanent marker to mark the keys. I have sent my Mother a Cyrillic "Cherry" kbd to Australia, so she doesn't have to bother with stickers.
Must be an interesting experience for you to try learning Cyrillic typing. In fact I type faster in Latin - I worked as a programmer 15 years ago on Polish and Bulgarian hardware that had normal English kbd layout, unlike EC series I worked on in late-80s that had phonetic keyboards.
Из интересного на нашем форуме в основном Оффтопик (есть теперь и такое русское слово :)) и исторический. Надо будет устроить тебе специальную провокашку для затравки, или поднять старые топики :) Сейчас вялотекущее обсуждение идёт в оффтопике в "ну, плять, политиканы....". Мылом могу представить основных участников. Есть и преуспевающие директора IT-компаний, и энтузиасты-бесеребренники, работающие в детских домах чуть ли не за харчи...
В топике "оправославились, итить " обсуждают нашу "всенародно любимую" православную церковь - тоже может быть любопытно.
Про Катынь у нас тоже до согласия далеко. Есть, например, один товарищ, глубоко мною уважаемый как хорошо информированный профессиональный флеймогон ;), который считает что наши таки расстреляли тех поляков - и правильно сделали, всё равно враги, и хуй бы с ними три раза. И такая точка зрения должна иметь право на существование в условиях зарождающейся российской демократии и попыток ограничения свободы слова :) (последнее предложение - сарказм :))
В "Юморе" - самый прославленный топик с нашего форума, над которым ржал весь Рунет, и который чуть не обвалил нам форум: " мой любимый президент Путин :)". Подписи к картинкам - жаргон курителей анаши, если ты не в курсе совеменного "молодёжного сленга" ;)
To Toad:
Thank you for bringing original nazi Ministry of Propaganda version here. It's a good example of reliability of your "sources", maybe even better then giving me a book title "Soviet agression against Poland in 1920". Thank you. Dismissed.
-
I would like to see how Boroda justifies the Soviets keeping all of there military conquests after Germany surrendered... Postwar USA rebuilt Germany and Japan, Soviets surpressed uprisings and sent returning Czech/Polish pilots who fought Germany from Britain to jail...
only good thing that came out of USSR was teh Su-27/MiG-29 schlem helmet mounted sight with R-73 Archer missle. ;p
-
Originally posted by Nath[BDP]
I would like to see how Boroda justifies the Soviets keeping all of there military conquests after Germany surrendered... Postwar USA rebuilt Germany and Japan, Soviets surpressed uprisings and sent returning Czech/Polish pilots who fought Germany from Britain to jail...
I would like to see how you justify American occupation of Western Europe after Germany surrendered. Also please try to learn how Europeans felt about becoming nuclear targets and a NATO/US playground. Also please remember that we left Eastern Europe while your forces still move towards our borders.
You "rebuilt" Germany and Japan?! Damn, now go tell me you did it out of altruism!
My country lost 27,000,000 people during the War, and more then 50% of all industry, and only 12 years later we reached into space. You got enormous profits out of WWII, and made a good investment, that was in fact payed by Russian blood...
Originally posted by Nath[BDP]
only good thing that came out of USSR was teh Su-27/MiG-29 schlem helmet mounted sight with R-73 Archer missle. ;p
LOL! A nice remark from a nation, famous worldwide for inventing chewing-gum :lol
Sorry, I start to go off the rocker from reading such things. :( No offences, please...
-
Originally posted by Boroda
I would like to see how you justify American occupation of Western Europe after Germany surrendered.
My justification is this: The Marshall plan, resulting in economic growth, and today we have a democratic, free Germany and Japan. What did the Soviets do? I think Grunherz mentioned it.
Also please try to learn how Europeans felt about becoming nuclear targets and a NATO/US playground. Also please remember that we left Eastern Europe while your forces still move towards our borders.
I trust that they realized it was all done to counter a possible Soviet threat; are you suggesting the USSR didn't practice military movements or training in countries you stole after WWII? In fact, the Soviets were the aggressors. This is witnessed by their remaining in countries they took from German occupation during the war and never gave up untill '89. We needed to prepare to defend ourselves against the communist aggressors.
You "rebuilt" Germany and Japan?! Damn, now go tell me you did it out of altruism!
I wouldn't. Self interest is always a motivation; the difference is we helped.
My country lost 27,000,000 people during the War, and more then 50% of all industry, and only 12 years later we reached into space. You got enormous profits out of WWII, and made a good investment, that was in fact payed by Russian blood...
[/B]
I am aware of what sacrifice the Russians made in human terms during the war and I am not putting it down--your leadership at the time did, however!
-
Might have been a lot fewer casualties is you had engaged Germany in 1939 and not Poland.
-
Originally posted by Pongo
Might have been a lot fewer casualties is you had engaged Germany in 1939 and not Poland.
Nice example of ignorance. "Everyone knows that USSR..." etc. ad nauseum.
Go find some book and learn that USSR spent months in futile attempts to form an alliance with France and UK. An allied delegation in Moscow in August 1939 failed to offer any answer to Soviet plans of military assistance to Poland, drew the negotiations to nothing, and left Moscow one or two days before Molotov-Ribbentrop pact was signed. Stalin had to sign a treaty with Germans when he understood that "allies" have nothing to offer. Fortunately - he have won 1.5 years of peace and saved half of Poland from nazi rape.
I can recommend you one good book: L. Mosley, "On borrowed time". A book by British historian.
Did you know that USSR was the only country that offered assistance to Czechoslovakia in 1939, after it was sold to Germany, Poland and Hungary be the "allies"?...
It's no fun to argue with people who know nothing about the subject of discussion. In USSR we had mandatory history classes at school. IMHO it's another great advantage of Soviet system.
-
Originally posted by Nath[BDP]
My justification is this: The Marshall plan, resulting in economic growth, and today we have a democratic, free Germany and Japan. What did the Soviets do? I think Grunherz mentioned it.
Marshall plan was nothing then a successfull attempt to rob the nations you were "helping", abd drawing them into the suicidal alliance with overseas "conquerors" at their own expence. Check recent Miko's posts on this subject.
In the same threads it was clearly shown that isolation of Soviet occupation zone was an answer to hostile "allied" politics in economical, political and military fields. You started the division of Germany, declaring "free" elections in your occupation zone, not us. You played the same trick in Korea, but, unfortunately, it resulted in a full-scale war... :(
We also had a democratic, free Germany. It all depends on definition of "democracy" and "freedom". For you "freedom" meant Marshall plan robbery and "democracy" meant ban of left political parties, while for us "freedom" was absence of transnational corporations influence and "democracy" was an election where left parties were the main forces.
Originally posted by Nath[BDP]
I trust that they realized it was all done to counter a possible Soviet threat; are you suggesting the USSR didn't practice military movements or training in countries you stole after WWII? In fact, the Soviets were the aggressors. This is witnessed by their remaining in countries they took from German occupation during the war and never gave up untill '89. We needed to prepare to defend ourselves against the communist aggressors.
Soviet agressors?! What did you smoke!? A country that lost TWENTY SEVEN MILLION people, half of it's industry, facing the enemy armed with A-bomb can be an agressor!? Yes, now I understand why Yugoslavia and Iraq were a direct threat to the US national security... Yeah, well said: "We needed to prepare to defend ourselves against the communist aggressors.". Soviet tanks were anxious about swimming across the Atlantic to attack US of A! Everyone knows: evil Soviets had agressive swimming tanks! :rolleyes:
Didn't you enjoy your own occupation zones arranged in Yalta and Potsdam? Again: we withdrew from Europe in 89-92, while your occupational forces keep on moving eastward, already having Leningrad, er, SPb, inside tactical aviation range. Why didn't you just leave Europe when we have put "bayonets into the ground"? Still protecting Europe from "asian hordes of jewish bolsheviks"? Get real. You still are, and always were AGRESSORS. I am happy that you can't rape my country as you did with Yugoslavia and Iraq - thanks to Stalin we have nukes.
-
Originally posted by Boroda
. Check recent Miko's posts on this subject.
I'd rather just read the author from which his arguments were most likely regurgitated.
Sounds like a Soviet propagandist.
Soviet tanks were anxious about swimming across the Atlantic to attack US of A! Everyone knows: evil Soviets had agressive swimming tanks!
USSR didn't have ICBMs or a will to invade Western Europe? ugh. i guess it was all American agitprop again.
Didn't you enjoy your own occupation zones arranged in Yalta and Potsdam? Again: we withdrew from Europe in 89-92, while your occupational forces keep on moving eastward, already having Leningrad, er, SPb, inside tactical aviation range. Why didn't you just leave Europe when we have put "bayonets into the ground"? Still protecting Europe from "asian hordes of jewish bolsheviks"? Get real. You still are, and always were AGRESSORS.
No, we needed to protect our economists and yuppies with MBAs who were trying to rebuild Eastern Bloc nations' economies in places like Slovakia because of USSR ;p I was in parts of Eastern Europe in the mid 90s. Such a depressing place. Hopefully they won't ever have to suffer under such venomous control again.
thanks to Stalin we have nukes...
... and a GDP per capita of nearly $26,000 less than the USA. Hurray for communism!
-
Boroda, it would be for your own good to shut up for once.
The Marshall plan:
"Marshall plan was nothing then a successfull attempt to rob the nations you were "helping", abd drawing them into the suicidal alliance with overseas "conquerors" at their own expence"
You clearly know nothing of this, - as little as I know, my little country got helped with these funds without any following commitments whatsoever.
In the east of Europe there was nothing like this....
Then this here:
"You started the division of Germany, declaring "free" elections in your occupation zone, not us"
Is Germany "free" today? Did the western forces build "the wall"? Why did the Western forces bother to make an airbridge to Berlin at the time, if the seperation was their doing?
Oh, I know..it's all a LIE?
And here is the icing on yer cake:
"It all depends on definition of "democracy" and "freedom". For you "freedom" meant Marshall plan robbery and "democracy" meant ban of left political parties"
YOU WHAT?
Western Nations?
There are and were left political parties in all of i.e. the NATO nations, except perhaps USA.
There are and were left governments in many if not most NATO nations at times after WW2.
Left politics were always open, not banned, and usually quite much in action. I will however not answer this for internal US affairs.
Now, the USA must get their credit for not mixing into internal politics of European/NATO nations. NATO governments could and would at times be LEFT sided. That is a lot different picture than the eastern side had.............
Looking at the total sum of the Marshall funds (who's distribution is an open source matter) there would not be many votes bought for that sum anyway. I guess that you are too deeply brainwashed from old times to understand the concept of "freedom" or "free choice" then.
-
Originally posted by Nath[BDP]
... and a GDP per capita of nearly $26,000 less than the USA. Hurray for communism!
I call that a comeback :D
-
Ohh, looking deeper into Borodas stuff, it just gets funnier:
"Marshall plan was nothing then a successfull attempt to rob the nations you were "helping", abd drawing them into the suicidal alliance with overseas "conquerors" at their own expence."
Own expence from suicidal alliance at least left the western side of Europe in a very nice economical state compared to the states on the eastern side of the "curtain"
Then this:
"Why didn't you just leave Europe when we have put "bayonets into the ground"? Still protecting Europe from "asian hordes of jewish bolsheviks"? Get real. You still are, and always were AGRESSORS."
Who was supposed to leave Europe? US forces?
They'd leave if asked, actually today even they're being asked not to leave.
And about the agressors...when did the west push eastwards in a century's time or so? Hmm. apart from Hitler's time, the only agression between east and west is SOVIET advance. From east TO west.
-
Let's keep pushing our petty arguments!
-
Sounds like fun.
-
Fortunately - he have won 1.5 years of peace and saved half of Poland from nazi rape.
True, saved it for soviet sodomy...
-
Originally posted by Boroda
Nice example of ignorance. "Everyone knows that USSR..." etc. ad nauseum.
Go find some book and learn that USSR spent months in futile attempts to form an alliance with France and UK. An allied delegation in Moscow in August 1939 failed to offer any answer to Soviet plans of military assistance to Poland, drew the negotiations to nothing, and left Moscow one or two days before Molotov-Ribbentrop pact was signed. Stalin had to sign a treaty with Germans when he understood that "allies" have nothing to offer. Fortunately - he have won 1.5 years of peace and saved half of Poland from nazi rape.
I can recommend you one good book: L. Mosley, "On borrowed time". A book by British historian.
Did you know that USSR was the only country that offered assistance to Czechoslovakia in 1939, after it was sold to Germany, Poland and Hungary be the "allies"?...
It's no fun to argue with people who know nothing about the subject of discussion. In USSR we had mandatory history classes at school. IMHO it's another great advantage of Soviet system.
Oh I know that Chamberlain was more affraid of Stalin and Comunism then Hitler and he basically derailed any chance of a Russian-French-British alliance against Hitler hopping to get a pact that would allow him to stay out of a war between Germany and Russia.
But that being said. Russia was on the side of the Third Reich and your pathetic revisionism doenst change that.
-
Originally posted by Boroda
To Toad:
Thank you for bringing original nazi Ministry of Propaganda version here. It's a good example of reliability of your "sources", maybe even better then giving me a book title "Soviet agression against Poland in 1920". Thank you. Dismissed.
Yeah, you know how Gorbachev, Yeltsin and Putin always were stooges for the Nazi's.
Do you ever stop and think how you look defending this when your country has admitted it?
I will suggest one book for you, although it's out of print. You may be able to get one on Amazon.
Check this out:
God's Eye: Aerial Photography and the Katyn Forest Massacre by Frank Fox
Guess what? There are "before and after" aerial photos of Katyn.
-
It's no use Pongo.
IIRC, Boroda even claims there was never a Molotov-Ribbentrop pact.
:)
-
Originally posted by Toad
Yeah, you know how Gorbachev, Yeltsin and Putin always were stooges for the Nazi's.
I already explained my POW on their reasons.
Originally posted by Toad
Do you ever stop and think how you look defending this when your country has admitted it?
There is a big difference between my country and above mentioned persons. Just like between American people and government.
Originally posted by Toad
I will suggest one book for you, although it's out of print. You may be able to get one on Amazon.
Check this out:
God's Eye: Aerial Photography and the Katyn Forest Massacre by Frank Fox
Guess what? There are "before and after" aerial photos of Katyn.
Great. Before and after aerial photos?... This sounds funny. Same photos used by mr. Powell in the Security Council? ;) /*please see my comments below*/
I recommend you another book, by Western author: Kurt Reiss, "Goebbels: the devil's advocate". It can somehow open your eyes on nazi propaganda kitchen, including Katyn'. I bet you will see how similar your propaganda is to nazi inventions, and that a huge percent of Goebbels's lies was employed by "blue side" in cold war times.
So far all your reasonable arguments are drowned by blatant lies and pesudohistorical propaganda myths. I simply can't trust any arguments from a person who seriously speaks about "Soviet agression against Poland in 1920".
Relations between our two countries in XX century were not very good. Please check the sad fate of Soviet POWs in 1920, and what happened in Poland to Russian POWs returning from Central countries after WWI. The number of POWs and interned servicemen who died in Polish camps will surprise you.
Again, Toad, unlike you - I was born in different country in a different time, and I had a rare (may you live in an interting time!) opportunity (by historical means) to live under two completely different environments, facing two opposite waves of propaganda. What I say here is opposite to current "politically-correct" version of official history. And in Soviet times we were not told about things like Katyn' and 1920 war at schools or on TV - we were friends with Polish People's Republic, and bringing such things to public attention were considered... hmm... can't find a correct word, maybe "inappropriate" is a good definition. This doesn't mean that "evil communists" were concealing such things, if you were intersted in it - you could find tons of information even from Western sources. You will probably not understand it, because you Westerners have an extremely distorted picture of life in USSR, but at least you can try.
And I have told you that I try to provide you with a different point of view, and I find it interesting and educating for me. What I strongly disagree with is that my country was an "evil force" opposed by "brave fighters for peace and democracy".
I hope I'll find understanding on your side.
BTW, can you tell me more about that aerial photo book? It seems to me it's unknown here, and I want to maybe state the main idea of this book to some historians, both "lefts" and "rights". Every source is intersting and must be examined closely. It will serve good for both points of view. This is what I mean by not trusting both sides, I have to make up my own mind, because both sides are equally biased. I give you pro-Soviet arguments here mostly because they face the obvious reaction of "everyone knows that...", and I hate things that "everyone knows". This words are usually used to hide the truth, and being raised in USSR I know it quite well.
Thank you.
-
Originally posted by Toad
It's no use Pongo.
IIRC, Boroda even claims there was never a Molotov-Ribbentrop pact.
:)
Toad, I only question the existance of so-called "secret protocols". I am surprised by the fact that noone ever saw the originals of this document. Please, remember when and why they were "discovered" and brought to public: it was an obvious attempt to justify and support nationalistic and separatist movements in Baltic republics.
Another "everyone knows that..." thing.
You have to look closer at the situation of 1939-40 to understand that such "secret protocols" were unnessesary and useless. Baltic states were an obvious beach head for nazi agression. USSR could not stay out of the process of "slicing the pie", because we could have Hitler in Leningrad in the first week of the War.
BTW, did you know that Lithuania received significant part of it's historical territory from Polish lands, including it's capital, Vilnus (Vilno) in 1940?...
IMHO Soviet "advance" of 1939-40 must be viewed as a vital nesessity, under a frightening lack of time. Looking at the catastrophe of 1941 you can easily guess what could happen if USSR didn't take a part of Poland and if Baltic states have signed same treaties with Hitler.
There is a frightening analogy with what we face now. I'll try to show it in next posts, and I have to apologize for them in advance.
-
Originally posted by Pongo
Oh I know that Chamberlain was more affraid of Stalin and Comunism then Hitler and he basically derailed any chance of a Russian-French-British alliance against Hitler hopping to get a pact that would allow him to stay out of a war between Germany and Russia.
But that being said. Russia was on the side of the Third Reich and your pathetic revisionism doenst change that.
UK and France made a brilliant attempt to make Russians follow their obligations to Poland, stating that they will deploy "some troops" in a matter of months in case of German agression against Poland, without giving any obligations to Soviet side. This negotiations are well documented. Check the Mosley book I mentioned before.
Voroshilov had nerves made of steel, trying to make something out of that "negotiations" and not seing any positive movements from his "partners".
This was the moment when Poland was sold out to Hitler.
USSR had to come to the "side of the Third Reich" only because we didn't want to start a war where so-called "allies" were supposed to sit and watch Russians dieing for their profits, like in Autumn, 1914. We had enough of that before, thanks.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
True, saved it for soviet sodomy...
...says Grunherz, the well-known victim, raped by evil communist regime. Calling this "sodomy" is a brave act of self-positioning.
:rolleyes:
sorry, couldn't resist :p
Grun, you know, if you'll be in Moscow - I'll be honored by an opportunity to pour you a glass or two ;) This is only flames on the Net. I was touched by your question after the underground bombing... I hope you understand that I don't have against you.
-
Boroda, while the German army was rolling over the French and the British, they were running on Russian Petrol. Russia kept supplying Nazi Germany with Petrol until 1941.
Actually, Churchill used this in a debate against Stalin. At Yalta actually.
Anyway, about the Katyn stuff, everything has been posted on these forums. I once started a thread about this, where Boroda fought bravely against common sense, - and lost.
The thread name:
"Were the Russians planning to invade in 1942?", the thread dates as 30th of may 2002.
(from the O club.)
Here is also a link:
http://www-hoover.stanford.edu/publications/digest/002/crozier.html
Then this:
http://www.ce-review.org/00/15/polandnews15.html
-
Originally posted by Angus
Then this:
"Why didn't you just leave Europe when we have put "bayonets into the ground"? Still protecting Europe from "asian hordes of jewish bolsheviks"? Get real. You still are, and always were AGRESSORS."
Who was supposed to leave Europe? US forces?
They'd leave if asked, actually today even they're being asked not to leave.
Ok. Now please explain me why, 10 years after our complete withdrawal from Eastern Europe, NATO moves eastwards? Maybe Estonians kindly asked them to build long-range radars, covering North-Western Russia's airspace, including Leningrad (SPb)? They definetly bribed someone in NATO to build airfields for tactical aviation within 15 minutes of flight from our Northern capital? Or maybe this is just a friendly act, a kind of charity?
It's a sign of time: fascist governments of Baltic states coming to Big Brother to "protect" their nationalistic, nazi-adoring regimes that inspire SS "veteran" demonstrations and build memorials to SS hangmen.
Yes, it's done only to protect America and Iceland from Soviet tanks! Your countries feel sooo insecure without having your aerial bandits aimed on StPeterburg!
Damn. You should see the bomb-scars on the noble marbles of cathederals in SPb. I hope we'll never let it happen again.
Originally posted by Angus
And about the agressors...when did the west push eastwards in a century's time or so? Hmm. apart from Hitler's time, the only agression between east and west is SOVIET advance. From east TO west.
Soviet advance!?
Go read some books.
1240-42: Swedes in Ingermanlandia, Teuton Order invasion into Pskov and Novgorod lands. Both got their prettythang kicked.
1610: Polish invasion to Russia. Poles went as deep as Kostroma. Got their prettythang kicked.
1700: Swedish invasion into Russia and Ukraine. Got their prettythang kicked.
1812: Napoleon's Grand Armie. Burned Moscow and got their prettythang kicked all the way to Paris.
1852-55: Crimean war. British and French troops invaded Crimea, British fleet in Finnish Gulf, White Sea and Far East (Petropavlovsk). Occupied Crimea, got their prettythang kicked in other places. Russia lost Black Sea until 1878.
1914: WWI. Declared by Russia to Austria for the attempt to conqer Serbia, the main Orthodox power in the Balcans.
1920: Polish invasion. Got their prettythang kicked all the way to Vstula.
1941: you know it.
The only "Russian invasion" seems to be a 7-year war in XVIII century, when Russian forces have visited Berlin for the first time.
I forgot some minor episodes when agressors didn't invade deep enough to be mentioned here.
Strange history, isn't it? Looks like as time goes the invasions are more and more frequent.
Don't you think that we have some reasons to be afraid of the threat from the West?...
Now we have "peacefull" NATO bases 15 minutes of flight from SPb. It definetly looks familiar, doesn't it?
Just explain me: why are you "fighters for freedom and democracy" there?
-
All (okay I didn't read 1/3rd of page 2) are making enemies out of friends.
Boroda has a different rendition of his past as opposed to those of you who were alive for it.
He clearly, atleast to a past occurance of him reading what we read, has come to understand "our" position on maybe one or two subjects.
As far as this thread is concerned, you do know Sylvester Stalone and Arnlod Schwarzenager (please forgive spelling errors) did not single handedly defeat Russia's dominant boxer or the ultimate terrorists (that failed to tell their ultimate leader the battery was low and then proceeded to urinate in his undie jamies? Every country has made a mistake in this past either through the choice of their citizens or their leaders.
-SW
-
Originally posted by Angus
Boroda, while the German army was rolling over the French and the British, they were running on Russian Petrol. Russia kept supplying Nazi Germany with Petrol until 1941.
Actually, Churchill used this in a debate against Stalin. At Yalta actually.
We had to trade with supposed enemy to prepare for war. We sold them raw materials, and got heavy cruisers in return. Stalin made German engineers work for Red Army, and gave back mostly useless resourses, that we had plenty, unlike qualified engineers and designers. We had German motors, ball-bearings, production machinery, all the resources that we didn't have.
JFYI: German ground forces ran on erzats-benzin, and Hitler needed oil only for navy. Besides that - Baltic sea was under complete German control, and they didn't have any problems getting all nessesary supplies from Sweden.
Yes, and US companies kept on investing into German industry even after Hitler declared war on the US.
I have evidence from Soviet fighter pilots who talked to B-17 crews landed in Soviet zone that they had "forbidden" objects, that they couldn't bomb, that were US enterprises in West Germany. Isn't it funny?...
Originally posted by Angus
Anyway, about the Katyn stuff, everything has been posted on these forums. I once started a thread about this, where Boroda fought bravely against common sense, - and lost.
The thread name:
"Were the Russians planning to invade in 1942?", the thread dates as 30th of may 2002.
(from the O club.)
Sorry, please give me exact links. Sounds like another repetition of Viktor Suvorov's lies paid by British intelligence.
-
Originally posted by Boroda
1240-42: Swedes in Ingermanlandia, Teuton Order invasion into Pskov and Novgorod lands. Both got their prettythang kicked.
[/b]
Yeah, Sweden got their bellybutton kicked so bad Ingermanland remained in Swedish possession to 1700-something.
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
Yeah, Sweden got their bellybutton kicked so bad Ingermanland remained in Swedish possession to 1700-something. [/B]
Jarl Birger. He had a good scar on his face :) left by St. Alexander of Neva.
Swedes didn't advance further into Novgorod Republic lands. I can call it a victory.
BTW, Carl XII was a great person. A great adventurer, and a good opponent to Peter the Great. Some people say that Ukrainian national flag (yellow-blue) was sewn from Swedish flags captured in Poltava battle... ;)
-
Boroda, here's an overview off the web.
West Chester University is proud to announce the publication of God's Eye: Aerial Photography and the Katyn Forest Massacre by Frank Fox, Professor of History. Of all the crimes in World War II, the most puzzling has been the massacre known as "Katyn Forest."
Not until the fall of the Soviet Union did the new leaders of Russia acknowledge that in 1940 their government had ordered the murder of 27,000 Polish officers. For the grieving Polish nation that knew this truth for half a century there was the unfinished task of finding the burial places. The twentieth century has recorded millions of brutal deaths as well as unprecedented efforts to eradicate or hide the scenes of mass murder. In recent times, Cambodia, Srebrenica in Bosnia, Sri Lanka, Chile, Guatemala, the killing grounds in Africa and the province of Kossovo are proof that the end of Soviet and Nazi dictatorships did not put a stop to massacres and concealments.
God's Eye describes the painstaking and unheralded work of a young Polish-American photo-interpreter, Waclaw Godziemba-Maliszewski, who was instrumental in the effort to locate the remains of the brave soldiers. It began when he came across a hoard of German aerial photographs at the National Archives and began to unravel one of the most closely guarded secrets of the Russian intelligence services -- the burial sites of the Polish officers. For the past ten years he has been supplying the Polish authorities with information that has enabled it, in spite of opposition and interference from the Russian side, to locate many of the remains.
It is particularly important that the American public read this record at a time when American treasure and trust are being invested in a Russia whose leaders until recently concealed the truth about Katyn, pensioned off its executioners and refused to compensate the victims' families. This work utilizes materials from Polish, German, Russian and American sources, including documents that have only recently been declassified. God's Eye shows how in a struggle between the expediency of state power and moral principles, the dedication of one person can make a difference.
Frank Fox came to the United States from his native Poland in 1937. During the war he served in Military Government in France and Germany. He holds a doctorate in history from University of Delaware and taught at Temple University and West Chester University. He was the recipient of research grants from the American Philosophical Society and the Eleutherian Mills (DuPont) Foundation.
His writings have appeared in a variety of scholarly and popular publications, including Jahrbucher fur Geschichte Osteuropas, French Historical Studies, Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, East European Jewish Affairs, New York magazine, PRINT, The World & I, and Affiche. He contributed a chapter on Polish poster art for Tony Fusco's reference work Posters (New York, 1994) His essay "Poland and the American West" has been published by Washington State University Press in Western Amerykanski, a catalog for the 1999 exhibition at the Gene Autry Museum of Western Heritage. He has edited and translated from Polish a wartime memoir, Am I a Murderer? Testament of a Jewish Ghetto Policeman, published in 1996 by Harper/Collins, and has written poetry for a cantata based on that work which premiered in Philadelphia in 1997. In 1998 he was invited to lecture at the National Museum in Warsaw on the occasion marking the 30th anniversary of the Polish Poster Museum.
Frank Fox, Author
-
Boroda: Check recent Miko's posts on this subject.
Nath[BDP]: I'd rather just read the author from which his arguments were most likely regurgitated.
Sounds like a Soviet propagandist.
Hey, Nath[BDP]!
Do you claim that you personally oversaw the Marshall plan and have the first-hand knowlege of it? Maybe your real name is Marshall?
If you call all knowlege not gained first hand "regurgitated" and "Soviet propaganda", you are an idiot. Because everyone else here learned about the Marshall Plan - and pretty much everythiong else - second or theird-hand - from books and teachers. Who am I kidding? I am probably the only one who cared tor ead up on it.
Here is what I found - in US government sources which are probably the soviet propaganda for an imbecile like you:
Germany has to thank the Marshall Plan for a total of almost $1.4 billion received in aid. In addition, while the German government was receiving help from the Marshall Plan, it was still obliged to make reparations and restitution payments that amounted to well over half the funds received from the United States from the Marshall Plan. ( $1.4 billion - a measly $12.4 billion in 2002 money of which over half was paid right back?)
France received a grant of over $2.7 billion from the Marshall Plan - nearly twice as much as Germany - but it still took France 30 years to reach the economic level Germany arrived at within less then 15 years.
When looking at these statistics and the fact that it took Germany only half as long as France to reach a comparable economic level of develop, we must ask ourselves what caused the German "economic miracle". It is clear that the Marshall plan was not the major contributor to Germany's rapid economic growth.
Don't drag me into your stupid ignorant squables. I have as much use for american fascists like you as I have for ex-soviet communists.
If you had some problem with the numbers on Marshal Plan I posted in a separate thread in November, you should have posted then and presented whatever numbers you think more accurate.
Boroda: 1920: Polish invasion. Got their prettythang kicked all the way to Vstula.
:rofl It was soviet bolshevics who invaded Poland in 1920 and got their tulips kicked out.
miko
-
Originally posted by miko2d
Hey, Nath[BDP]!
Do you claim that you personally oversaw the Marshall plan and have the first-hand knowlege of it? Maybe your real name is Marshall?
If you call all knowlege not gained first hand "regurgitated" and "Soviet propaganda", you are an idiot. Because everyone else here learned about the Marshall Plan - and pretty much everythiong else - second or theird-hand - from books and teachers.
miko
I'm not saying that at all. But, if you think that one cannot form new and innovative conclusions from different sources on historical events--and without stealing them from authors and posting them on a BBS--you are fooling yourself. Of course, I would expect you to give a reply that attempts to legitimise your own inability for independant thought.
-
Originally posted by miko2d
:rofl It was soviet bolshevics who invaded Poland in 1920 and got their tulips kicked out.
miko
hu ????
I thought it was it was poland who started ?
-
Boroda.
Ok, there we go again:D
"Ok. Now please explain me why, 10 years after our complete withdrawal from Eastern Europe, NATO moves eastwards?"
Well, I guess you are referring to the Baltics? They're "moving" towards the west in a sense....ummm....could it possibly mean that they don't want YOU guys back :D
Oh, and I stand corrected with the "east" indeed being invaded in the last 100 years, - Poland did invade ukraine, and of course I bloody well know that the Germans rolled eastwards. I don't count nazi Germany and western forces as the same.
But I was surprized that you immediately admitted the business deals between the USSR and Nazi Germany. Well, grabbing for excuses, most of your reply is utter BS, such as the heavy German built cruisers for a start.
Germany built 3 light cruisers (Kцnigsberg class, 6000 tonnes) and used them, 5 heavy cruisers (Hipper class, 14000 tonnes) and used them. They never had enough cruisers, maybe you are referring to destroyers?
Then on to the Katyn forest. I did give you links, and this:
"I once started a thread about this, where Boroda fought bravely against common sense, - and lost.
The thread name:
"Were the Russians planning to invade in 1942?", the thread dates as 30th of may 2002.
(from the O club.) "
This is how you find it on these boards Boroda, I just don't know how to get the URL for it. This is the exact thread name and date on this very board. It has pictures. links and docyments. Molotov and Ribbentrop, etc, etc.
More links, or do you need glasses?
http://www.katyn.org.au/
and
http://www.pharo.com/warfare/katyn_forest/articles/wwkf_00_contents.asp
and
http://edition.cnn.com/SPECIALS/cold.war/episodes/01/spotlight/
and
http://www.ce-review.org/01/11/books11_rohozinska.html
Enough?
-
Enough?
Not for boroda, never!!!!!
Resit comrade, resit!!! Za rodinu!!!
(http://citd.scar.utoronto.ca/HISB07/13.ST/SCMEDIA/LeninFuns.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Angus
But I was surprized that you immediately admitted the business deals between the USSR and Nazi Germany. Well, grabbing for excuses, most of your reply is utter BS, such as the heavy German built cruisers for a start.
Germany built 3 light cruisers (Kцnigsberg class, 6000 tonnes) and used them, 5 heavy cruisers (Hipper class, 14000 tonnes) and used them. They never had enough cruisers, maybe you are referring to destroyers?
"Petropavlovsk" heavy cruiser, renamed to "Tallin" on Sep. 1, 1944, "Admiral Hipper" class, original Geman name "Lutzov" (sp?), bought in 1940, incomplete, construction continued on Baltic shipyard. Still incomplete in 1941, only 70% ready. Sunk by German artillery on Sep. 17, 1941. Later repaired and used as a floating battery.
http://sovnavy-ww2.by.ru/cruisers/typ_hipper.htm
Next, please.
I don't know if USSR supplied oil and petrol to Hitler. I doubt it. What I know is that the quality of raw materials sold to Germany was so low that they could not be processed by Sovet industry. "Trading with Hitler" is one of the most brilliant Soviet foreign contracts: we got vital resources for nothing. You see, it was a free market. Why didn't "allies" offer same materials for lower price? Only one year later we had to pay solid gold for crappy second-hand fighter planes and tin tanks.
I start to understand your point of view: USSR had to fight nazis alone, pay for the opportunity to keep "allies" from war (like they did until 1944) in gold, and after defeating Germany you want us to kindly give all the lands taken by Soviet Army to "allies" for free. Very clever. Fortunately we didn't have Gorbachev at that time. :rolleyes:
-
Unfinished Petropavlovsk cruiser:
(http://sovnavy-ww2.by.ru/cruisers/pic/petropavlovsk.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Boroda
Only one year later we had to pay solid gold for crappy second-hand fighter planes and tin tanks.
[/b]
Well, that's got to be the first time someone calls the Spitfire a "second-hand fighter". I see you forgot to include all the trucks, boots, locomotives, radios, foodstuffs etc etc...but I guess your propaganda class forgot to include those.
Just out of curiosity Boroda, are you ready to admit how important lend lease was to the soviets? And try to see beyond the crappy spitfire planes and Sherman tanks now. Im talking about the other things now, the boots, the locomotives, the radios, the trucks...
I start to understand your point of view: USSR had to fight nazis alone, pay for the opportunity to keep "allies" from war (like they did until 1944) in gold, and after defeating Germany you want us to kindly give all the lands taken by Soviet Army to "allies" for free. Very clever. Fortunately we didn't have Gorbachev at that time. :rolleyes:
No, you should not give any lands to the allies, you should have returned them to their rightful owners by giving them back their independence.
Instead you took over the nazi job and kept those nations opressed under a brutal totalitarian dictatorship for more than 50 years.
****ing *******s.
-
The British stood alone against the Nazis for one year. At the time, the German war machine ran nicely on russian raw materials.
The Russians never stood alone against the Nazis.
And about the "crappy fighters" The German view of them is maybe to be best trusted.
One German ace stated that facing US fighters such as the P39 was more dangerous than the russian ones, since it could be taken for granted that the US fighters had a better aiming device, since reflector sights were not so widely distributed with the Red air force in the beginning.
Gunther Rall faced Spitfires on the eastern front, - after the original encounter he was asked to keep it silent, - the German pilots would lose morale if they knew they were facing Spifires on top of everything else.
And so, the German cruisers are now down to 1 half-built?
Anyway, nice to know more about the brotherhood of Hitler and Stalin :rofl
-
Oh, and the Oil etc:
1940: 900.000 metric tonnes of crude oil, 500.000 tonnes of manganese ore, 100.000 tonnes of chrome, and some millions of tonnes of food for Germany's horse drawn units.
That served the Germans nicely, capturing Norway, Denmark, France, Holland, Belgium, etc.....
Good uncle Joe :D
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
Well, that's got to be the first time someone calls the Spitfire a "second-hand fighter". I see you forgot to include all the trucks, boots, locomotives, radios, foodstuffs etc etc...but I guess your propaganda class forgot to include those.
Just out of curiosity Boroda, are you ready to admit how important lend lease was to the soviets? And try to see beyond the crappy spitfire planes and Sherman tanks now. Im talking about the other things now, the boots, the locomotives, the radios, the trucks...
When did I say that lend-lease was unimportant? You forgot canned pork and telephone wire.
What I mean is that "allies" didn't offer better price for the supplies we have got from Germany. And they refused to cooperate against Hitler. Refused in a very impolite way. Go read the transcripts of the negotiations between "allies" and USSR in August, 1939. With such allies we didn't need enemies.
We didn't want to stand alone against Hitler, and do this unprepared and without any assistance. US companies were trading with nazis until May, 1945, and it doesn't surprise anyone: it's called "free enterprising". OTOH Soviets are evil by default.
Hortlund, I have to remind you that Sweden didn't stay neutral in the cold war. You performed nice jobs for American intelligence, invading Soviet airspace hundreeds of times and providing US with all kinds of information.
Originally posted by Hortlund
No, you should not give any lands to the allies, you should have returned them to their rightful owners by giving them back their independence.
Instead you took over the nazi job and kept those nations opressed under a brutal totalitarian dictatorship for more than 50 years.
****ing *******s.
Giving back independance? Did I miss something? What countries lost their independance after "Soviet invasion"? All the countries liberated by soviet Army had democratic elections, and have chosen their way, in the same way as countries occupied by "allies".
We took a nazi job? Did we slaughter any nation completely? Did we plan elimination of whole ethnical groups? Hortlund, when you say something - please try to employ your brain.
"Land of free" planned nulear massacre of major Soviet cities since 1946, and they admit it. We needed to protect our almost completely destroyed country from another gang of "civilized Western people" - and we managed to do it somehow for 50 years. Now we withdrew from Europe and what we have is NATO agressors already targeting Leningrad (SPb) and controlling most of our North-Western airspace. Tell me, why do that "fighters for freedom and democracy" need bases in Estonia? Just to eat smoked fish? Or to "protect" fascist Baltic regimes from "asian hordes of Jewish bolsheviks"? I doubt it. We saw how they protected Moslim terrorists in Yugoslavia by bombing schools and hospitals. We have been invaded from the West many times, and we have all possible reasons not to belive their peacefull intentions. So we did since 1945. Kicking out Western agressors every several decades isn't our favourite hobby.
If NATO agressors need to "protect" Baltic countries from us (that is ridiculous) - they have to send ground troops and SAMs there, but they move agressive forces there, and already target SPb for aerial attacks. Now tell me why they need it.
NATO planes violate Russian airspace hundreeds of times every year. We have AWACS planes cruising our borders in Baltic states and Georgia, they establish bases all around Russia - is it only a charity so we should feel safer with every bomber squad targeting our cities?
-
Oh, sorry, forgot to say about second-habd fighters and tin tanks.
First "allied aid" to USSR were used Hurricanes from UK. They were so awfully bad even compared to outdated I-16s that Soviet pilots tried to crash them on landings only not to go to combat in this suicidal coffins. And it was all paid with solid gold! Not useless ores, not timber and not ferilizers, but - solid gold. I can't call it an "assistance". It was commerce.
About "better aiming devices" - it's funny :) Americans and Brits refused to fly P-39s, while well-trained and experienced Soviet pilots made it a formidable opponent to Germans. But first several hundreeds of Cobras we recieved were abandoned twice: first time by Americans and then by Brits.
Spitfires were useless in Russian front. After very few combat episodes they were all sent to Air Defence (PVO) units.
Yeah, it was "aiming devices". How can any Westerner ever think that Russians are capable of doing something better then "fighters for freedom and democracy"?... They are all "asians on their shaggy mounts"!
:mad:
-
The British stood alone against the Nazis for one year. At the time, the German war machine ran nicely on russian raw materials.
The Russians never stood alone against the Nazis.
[/B][/QUOTE]
Did we have brave "allied" troops fighting shoulder-to-shoulder with us in Stalingrad or Kursk? What? They promised us second front in 1942? All we had from "allies" was moral support and some supplies unnessesary for them that were paid by solid gold. But now this brave negotiants say that "Russians never stood alone against the Nazis".
BTW, did you know that USSR was the only (ONLY!) country that had to pay for all the lend-leased supplies? Also, please, compare the figures of American assistance to the UK and resources sold to USSR. You'll be surprised.
Again: at the same times American companies were collecting profits from their trade with Germany, and companies like Opel, owned by GM, were building weapons for nazis.
Originally posted by Angus
And so, the German cruisers are now down to 1 half-built?
Anyway, nice to know more about the brotherhood of Hitler and Stalin :rofl
How many cruisers were sold to us by the "allies"? Answer is: one, "Milwakee" ("Murmansk"), built in 1919 and obsolete well before WWII started. And the antique battleship "Roayl Soverign" ("Archangelsk"), built during WWI. Both ships were returned to "allies" and wend right into scrape metal because they were useless. Both were too old for combat duty before they were lended to USSR.
-
Originally posted by Angus
Oh, and the Oil etc:
1940: 900.000 metric tonnes of crude oil, 500.000 tonnes of manganese ore, 100.000 tonnes of chrome, and some millions of tonnes of food for Germany's horse drawn units.
That served the Germans nicely, capturing Norway, Denmark, France, Holland, Belgium, etc.....
Good uncle Joe :D
Nice numbers, especially when seen only on paper.
Ores that were sold to Germany were mostly useless even for Germans with their developed industry. Chrome? It's funny. The number looks like the supplies captured by Germans in 1941.
Again: did we have to fight Germans with bare hands, just to please people who led hostile politics against us and even planned to bomb Baku oil mines in 1940?
What else should we have done to make "allies" cooperate with us? Say that all our base are belong to them?
They wanted to watch the fight between Germany and USSR, and refused to do anything to protect Poland as they promised. In 1940 this brilliant politics brought it's expected results.
If in August, 1939, they were serious negotiating with USSR - the whole history could change completely.
Again I have a feling that I argue with a radio tuned to "Radio Liberty" or "Voice of America" from cold-war times. Common sence gets drowned in waves of hatred, and the same old sentences get repeated ad nauseum.
-
Originally posted by Boroda
First "allied aid" to USSR were used Hurricanes from UK. They were so awfully bad even compared to outdated I-16s that Soviet pilots tried to crash them on landings only not to go to combat in this suicidal coffins. And it was all paid with solid gold! Not useless ores, not timber and not ferilizers, but - solid gold. I can't call it an "assistance". It was commerce.
Solid Spanish gold gained from selling them second hand fighters, bombers and tin tanks. :lol
-
Originally posted by miko2d
[Boroda: 1920: Polish invasion. Got their prettythang kicked all the way to Vstula.
:rofl It was soviet bolshevics who invaded Poland in 1920 and got their tulips kicked out.
БСЭ, Советско-польская война 1920г. (http://encycl.yandex.ru/cgi-bin/art.pl?art=bse/00072/66600.htm&encpage=bse&mrkp=/yandbtm7%3Fq%3D1064495431%26p%3D0%26g%3D1%26d%3D0%26ag%3Denc_abc%26tg%3D1%26p0%3D0%26q0%3D1131630240%26d0%3D1%26script%3D/yandpage%253F)
I hope you'll not doubt this source.
This story of Polish invasion and how "everyone knows that it was soviet bolshevics who invaded Poland in 1920 and got their tulips kicked out" is a good example of rewriting history, and we have a chance to see how it is done. When I hear that "everyone knows" somwthing - I know I'd better check some sources...
-
So, Boroda, the Polish attacked Russia in 1920 and took YOUR land, right?
Tell me what's your view of the Polish Partition of 1772-1775?
All this "who stole who's land" stuff sort of depends on where you draw the "Start" line, doesn't it?
-
Originally posted by Toad
So, Boroda, the Polish attacked Russia in 1920 and took YOUR land, right?
Tell me what's your view of the Polish Partition of 1772-1775?
All this "who stole who's land" stuff sort of depends on where you draw the "Start" line, doesn't it?
You are right. But it's hard to draw such a line between Poland/Lithuania and Russia/Ukraine.
What I say is: in 1920 Polish army crossed the border and on May, 6th, took Kiev. It is a fact. I mean - it is truth. Poles were in Kiev. You can hardly call Kiev a Polish city. And now your "sources" call it a Soviet agression against Poland. And even Miko says that "everyone knows it". I find it frightening. In 50 years "everyone will know" that evil Russians were the allies to Hitler and so on.
-
Boroda, you sheep-head!
"Did we have brave "allied" troops fighting shoulder-to-shoulder with us in Stalingrad or Kursk? What? They promised us second front in 1942? All we had from "allies" was moral support and some supplies unnessesary for them that were paid by solid gold. But now this brave negotiants say that "Russians never stood alone against the Nazis".
BTW, did you know that USSR was the only (ONLY!) country that had to pay for all the lend-leased supplies? "
What was going on in land warfare in the timeframe from Stalingrad to Kursk? Nothing apart from the eastern front?
Forgot the Desert war have we? Have you also forgotten the Italian campaign? This is all before Normandy.
I have had the fortune of studying LW loss reports from 1942 to 1944 from original source (microfilms actually).
It came as quite a surprize to me that the LW seemed to loose roughly the same number of aircraft in the desert war as they did while fighting at Stalingrad for instance. Which is a total surprize since the British planes were obsolete jink compared to the russian rata's :D
And, for your info, the British did have to pay pay for their stuff, buying stuff from the USA I mean. Before they could get their first batch of lend-lease hardware (obsolete WW1 destroyers, however better than nothing), the US dispatched a cruiser to pick up gold from cape town. THAT WAS WHILE GUDERIANS TANKS WERE RUNNING ON RUSSIAN FUEL, supplied by the nice Hitler-Stalin brotherhood. Hehe, Stalin even got the blueprints from Bismarck as a trade piece, I bet he had a nice time looking at those.
As for the UK/US not supplying the USSR with battleships or cruisers, it went OK didn't it. After all, the Royal Navy sort of "took care of" the big rides of the Kriegsmarine, with a little help from the RAF may I add.
Oh, blimey, no, the Russians were vital in the destruction of the Tirpitz, - It got hit from a Russian field actually ;) Advanced airbase a-la-USSR ;)
Then finally, I must confess, I never heard "the voice of America".
I also must confess, that I did read a leftie-magazine in my country called "News from the Soviet Union". It had a lot of news from Pravda. Used to give me giggles for weeks.
Also, we did have news from TASS, just as well as Reuters. Did you have Western radio in the USSR? I seem to recall some Poles I know telling me about the western channels being scrambled as much as possible.............
-
Oh, to clear a point.
The Polish did indeed have the initiative and and advanced into Ukraine. Some sort of a cook-up between them and the Ukranians, which were at the time recently "membered" with the Soviet union.
They did take Kiev, but the Russians drew them back.
-
"everyone will know" that evil Russians were the allies to Hitler"
Not true!!! It was the Brazillian army that invaded eastern Poland on September 17 1939!!!
Belive!!!!
(http://citd.scar.utoronto.ca/HISB07/13.ST/SCMEDIA/LeninFuns.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Boroda
What I mean is that "allies" didn't offer better price for the supplies we have got from Germany. And they refused to cooperate against Hitler. Refused in a very impolite way. Go read the transcripts of the negotiations between "allies" and USSR in August, 1939. With such allies we didn't need enemies.
[/b]
In August 1939, there was no war. Now try to understand this:
Everyone in the western world hated the soviet union.
The ONLY reason you were accepted into the allies was because Germany was a bigger threat than the USSR in 1941. No one really wanted to be allied with you, no one really cared about your plight. But "the enemy of my enemy is my friend", and therefore you got lend lease, and therefore you were a part of the allies. As soon as the threat was gone, the alliance was dissolved (for your part that is, the rest formed NATO) and everyone went back to plotting the destruction of the Soviet union.
OTOH Soviets are evil by default.
[/b]
Not by default, but by action. It kinda comes with the territory if you first nationalize lots of industry, some of which is foreign owned, then proceed to set up the mother of all police states, then slaughter huge chunks of your own population, then start numerous wars of agression to annex various neighbours or parts of neighbours.
Hortlund, I have to remind you that Sweden didn't stay neutral in the cold war. You performed nice jobs for American intelligence, invading Soviet airspace hundreeds of times and providing US with all kinds of information.
[/b]
Of cource we didnt stay neutral. We are your enemy. Always have been, always will be.
Giving back independance? Did I miss something? What countries lost their independance after "Soviet invasion"?
[/b]
Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, East Germany, Czchechoslovakia, annexed parts of Finland
All the countries liberated by soviet Army had democratic elections, and have chosen their way, in the same way as countries occupied by "allies".
[/b]
Riight
We took a nazi job? Did we slaughter any nation completely? Did we plan elimination of whole ethnical groups? Hortlund, when you say something - please try to employ your brain.
[/b]
No, the difference between the nazis and the communists is that the nazis choose their victims based on race, while the communists choose their victims based on politics.
"Land of free" planned nulear massacre of major Soviet cities since 1946, and they admit it.
[/b]
Of cource they did, see the "everybody hates you" part above. Back in 46, the US was the only nation with nukes, the USSR was the land with a mad dictator and a gigantic army poised to attack western europe. OF COURCE everyone planned to use nukes against Russia, that would be the only defence against the Red Army.
-
Yet one point:
"Did we have brave "allied" troops fighting shoulder-to-shoulder with us in Stalingrad or Kursk?"
Did we see red army troops fighting shoulder to shoulder with the Brits in Burma or Malasya?
-
Originally posted by Angus
Boroda, you sheep-head!
Thank you. I am sincerely pleased by the degree of mutual respect in this civilized discussion. :p
Originally posted by Angus
What was going on in land warfare in the timeframe from Stalingrad to Kursk? Nothing apart from the eastern front?
Forgot the Desert war have we? Have you also forgotten the Italian campaign? This is all before Normandy.
I have had the fortune of studying LW loss reports from 1942 to 1944 from original source (microfilms actually).
It came as quite a surprize to me that the LW seemed to loose roughly the same number of aircraft in the desert war as they did while fighting at Stalingrad for instance. Which is a total surprize since the British planes were obsolete jink compared to the russian rata's :D
Desert War my...!!! The number of nazi troops in Stalingrad kettle was how many times more then total number of troops in Northern Africa? Five? Ten? You probably don't realize the scale of warfare on Russian front. We lost 27 million people during the War. All "allied" operations before Normandy were minor clashes in terms of Soviet command. Looking at WWII from Iceland must be interesting. Having such a great military history in last 500 years makes you see no difference between operations of batallions and fronts.
Originally posted by Angus
And, for your info, the British did have to pay pay for their stuff, buying stuff from the USA I mean. Before they could get their first batch of lend-lease hardware (obsolete WW1 destroyers, however better than nothing), the US dispatched a cruiser to pick up gold from cape town. THAT WAS WHILE GUDERIANS TANKS WERE RUNNING ON RUSSIAN FUEL, supplied by the nice Hitler-Stalin brotherhood. Hehe, Stalin even got the blueprints from Bismarck as a trade piece, I bet he had a nice time looking at those.
Americans decided not to take money for lend-lease from UK and other allies except USSR. As for the destroyers - check out what "lend-lease" means, and when the "lend-lease" law was signed. OTOH, British supplies to USSR were not "lend-lease" and were paid in gold immediately. I already mentioned HMS Edinbourgh here, sunk by Brits after it was damaged by German torpedo, with full load of Soviet gold aboard.
Originally posted by Angus
As for the UK/US not supplying the USSR with battleships or cruisers, it went OK didn't it. After all, the Royal Navy sort of "took care of" the big rides of the Kriegsmarine, with a little help from the RAF may I add.
Oh, blimey, no, the Russians were vital in the destruction of the Tirpitz, - It got hit from a Russian field actually ;) Advanced airbase a-la-USSR ;)
Let's get back to the beginning of this thread. British escorts chickening from PQ-17 after Tirpitz left harbour is a good example of "taking care of the big rides of the Kriegsmarine". And after that Tirpitz was damaged by a lonely Soviet submarine...
Originally posted by Angus
Then finally, I must confess, I never heard "the voice of America".
I also must confess, that I did read a leftie-magazine in my country called "News from the Soviet Union". It had a lot of news from Pravda. Used to give me giggles for weeks.
Also, we did have news from TASS, just as well as Reuters. Did you have Western radio in the USSR? I seem to recall some Poles I know telling me about the western channels being scrambled as much as possible.............
News from Pravda were a good laugh for most of Russians too :) "Vocie of America", "BBC Russian Service", "Radio Liberty" were anti-Soviet propaganda radios, providing us with "true information". After Chernobyl "VoA" stated the number of victims daily. It went up from 1000 dead on a first day all the way to 70,000 in a week or two, after that I stopped listening to this crap.
Yes, this propaganda radios were jammed in big cities like Moscow, but with a decent radio (I had a first class tube radio made in 1968 with a good antenna) you could hear their transmittions. Jammers worked only in big cities, 100km away from Moscow, Leningrad or Kiev you could listen to them on cheap transistors with short-wave band.
I have to admit that BBC had beautiful musical programms in Russian. Some of my friends even recorded them on tapes. Led Zeppelin or Pink Floyd history programms were the only source of information about our favourite bands...
-
Originally posted by Boroda
And after that Tirpitz was damaged by a lonely Soviet submarine...
Yeah...I wonder why nobody aboard the Tirpiz noted the damage though.
"Sobald Tirpitz, Admiral Scheer und Admiral Hipper die offene See erreicht hatten, kam die kьstennahe alliierte Sicherung zum Tragen. Um 17:00 Uhr meldete ein russisches Uboot den Verband und griff die Tirpitz an, etwa 45 Meilen nordwestlich des Nordkaps. Zwei Torpedotreffer wurden von K 21 gemeldet aber keiner wurde erkannt, geschweige denn von den Deutschen bemerkt, diese hatten nicht einmal den Angriff selbst bemerkt. Um 18:16 Uhr, eine Stunde nachdem K 21 die Sichtmeldung abgegeben hatte, sichtete eine Catalina von Grasnaja/ Archangelsk die Tirpitz Nordost vom Nordkap und meldete dies."
(From the wardiary of the Tirpiz)
-
Boroda - You are funny, I'll give you that. Deluded, but funny. Do you really believe four destroyers and a handful of corvettes would have stood a chance against Tirpitz and Prinz Eugen? They would have been sunk in a couple of salvoes and then the convoy would have been destroyed ship by ship. Scattering the convoy was the only option in the face of such a threat.
BTW, my grand-father was on the Russian convoys.
Americans decided not to take money for lend-lease from UK...
Wrong! The money for arms practically bankrupted the British government prior to the US entering the war.
As for Russia - well, it was run by a nutcase despot and enemy of the West. Not really an ally at all. The West didn't owe Stalin anything; they just had to make sure he didn't lose.
BTW, I love the line about how the people of Eastern Europe 'chose' to be under the Soviet yoke. lol! Those East Germans demanding to be let into the West on that cold night in November, 1989 must have all been insane, eh? And those tanks in Hungary - they were there as part of traffic control measures! Thankyou Red Army!
Maybe one day you'll wake up and smell the manure, Boroda. But I doubt it. Soviet Russia lost the Cold War - and the whole world breathed a sigh of relief.
-
Originally posted by Dowding
Boroda - You are funny, I'll give you that. Deluded, but funny. Do you really believe four destroyers and a handful of corvettes would have stood a chance against Tirpitz and Prinz Eugen? They would have been sunk in a couple of salvoes and then the convoy would have been destroyed ship by ship. Scattering the convoy was the only option in the face of such a threat.
BTW, my grand-father was on the Russian convoys.
Salute to your Grandfather! Sailors who were on Polar convoys are maybe the greatest symbol of allied assistance. This people have done much more then most of the Western politicians...
My Father was a Navy cadet since 1943. In 1944 they had a "field practice" at Northern Fleet, and he served several weeks on battleship "Archangel'sk" ("Royal Soverign")...
Now back to the subject. Now I will repeat what was the Soviet version of PQ-17 tradegy, sounded in "Requiem to PQ-17" by Valentin Pikul', the book upon which the new movie is based.
British forces wanted to use PQ-17 as a bait to catch Tirpitz. The battleship/CV task force followed the convoy, IIRC north of it's route, to intercept Tirpitz and sink it, something like a "Sharnhorst" trap a year later. But due to the order from Admiralty (IIRC) the task force turned back and left the convoy helpless.
IIRC, Admiral Golovko's memoirs describe it in the same way. I'll check his book, "Together with the Fleet" later, I don't remember if I have it at home or at my Father's.
This is what we have been told in popular literature. Pikul' was famous for twisting historical truth sometimes, and historical inaccuracy well hidden under enormous load of details. This applies mostly to his books about XVIII century, but I found some anachronisms in his books about Russo-Japanese war. I don't know, but he served at Northern Fleet during WWII and probably knew what he was speaking about.
Disclaimer: if the movie crew followed the book story line - this version will be shown in a "PQ-17" film.
I'll appreciate any links about Royal Navy role in PQ-17 tragedy. I admit that what I told can be not true.
Originally posted by Dowding
Wrong! The money for arms practically bankrupted the British government prior to the US entering the war.
Check the dates, when US Congress signed the lend-lease law. I mean that UK didn't pay for lend-leased supplies. Also please notice that UK received several times more aid then USSR.
Originally posted by Dowding
As for Russia - well, it was run by a nutcase despot and enemy of the West. Not really an ally at all. The West didn't owe Stalin anything; they just had to make sure he didn't lose.
Thank you. It's exactly what I tried to say. Russians lost 27 millions while some nations got enormous profits out of this war (I don't mean UK). No doubt, they still think of war like it's nothing but a good business.
You don't owe anything to us. It's us who still owe you for canned pork and telephone wire.
Dowding, can you explain me why did we have to pay you gold that your own navy sunk on board of HMS Edinbourgh again? Did you know that when this gold was lifted from the sea in 1988-89 UK and USSR divided it 50/50 again?...
-
Originally posted by Angus
Yet one point:
"Did we have brave "allied" troops fighting shoulder-to-shoulder with us in Stalingrad or Kursk?"
Did we see red army troops fighting shoulder to shoulder with the Brits in Burma or Malasya?
Wrong again. Did you ever study history at school?
We hade a neutrality pact with Japan, signed in 1940. Yes, we were collaborating with all your enemies, just in case if you think Japan was a direct threat to Iceland. Oh, sorry, you had a nice experience of being "conquered" by a single pirate ship crew, so you have reasons to be afraid of everyone, including Japanese raiders and Russian tanks.
Again you ask us to start another war in the Far East, wheb we almost broke our spine beating Hitler. I am glad that you think that we Russians are all sons of Heracles, but some things are too much even for us.
In the end it was Soviet Army who defeated Japanese ground forces in Manchuria and Korea, just in case you didn't know. We followed all allied obligations, while the "second front" was delayed by the "allies" for years.
-
He never talked about his experiences to me or any of his grand children. Sadly he died 15 years ago, yesterday, when I was 10 years old.
David Irving wrote a book about the convoy in the 60s. But he's a disgraced Nazi apologist. He argued that the whole thing was an Admiralty blunder.
As for Russia and the West - Communism was the enemy as much as Nazism. Neither was to be allowed to win. I think if you bear that in mind when considering most actions during the war, things become clearer. As for the gold - it was payment for arms. It belonged to the UK on a British wreck, but was in Russian waters. I'd say 50/50 was a fair agreement.
-
Boroda! Sheep head is a compliment for you. It is also a delicatessen in my country! Hmm, maybe I'd rather use the term "mutton", which expresses lack of intelligence.......
Now, on to the first (meehh):
"Americans decided not to take money for lend-lease from UK and other allies except USSR."
Well, they DID, and Britain was Bankrupt from 1940/1941 onwards because of it.
It was paid with gold, firms, estates, stock and technical info.
You must have been hit by Pravda there :D
(or TASS, who declared 2-3 days after the Finland invasion that there was a new "Peoples government" in Finland")
Now, onto the Tirpitz/PQ-17 affair.
PQ 17 is a very sad story. Tirpitz actually turned around after some of its escort destroyers ran aground (N-Norway is still notorious for unexact charts). The Brits took the very questionable decision to scatter the Ships, which left them as easy pray for German subs and planes.
They were not avoiding Tirpitz, on the contrary, they were looking for the Tirpitz, with a trailing task group. The British did indeed absolutely engage the Kriegsmarine in surface battles, as you should well be aware off, loosing ships, but usually sinking the big ones as well. Well, they sank 3 out of the 4 capital German BB's, and crippled the fourth. RN 2, RAF 1 +1. The value of PQ-17 was vast, of course as you put it, worthless, crappy aircraft and so on, but well, here you go:
"Its cargo was worth a staggering $700 million. Crammed into bulging holds were nearly 300 aircraft, 600 tanks, more than 4,000 trucks and trailers, and a general cargo that exceeded 150,000 tons. It was more than enough to completely equip an army of 50,000."
My great uncle flew for the RAF at the time. He was to be sent to Russia with his squadron along with more squadrons from the RAF. Their planes never arrived in Russia, so they were re-routed to the N-African Theater. There, the RAF was doing well enough for LW squadrons to be routed FROM Stalingrad to N-Africa, incliding i.e. famous LW ace Heinz Baer.
The Battle at Kursk is no doubt the biggest land battle fought in WW2. The battle at Stalingrad was also very very big, I am fully aware. So was Normandy. So was Anzio. So was El-Alamein.Please do not fail to realize that had the RN, RAF, USSAF, British Army, US army, and the factories of those nations not been on the job, the USSR would have lost. Germany could have unleashed all their might against the USSR with no other front. And without the allied bombing campaign going on, the German manufacture and supply status would have been a lot better off.....
If you want some stats for comparison, I'll try to help you
;)
BTW, the soviet fighting method demanded many times the troops of anything known so far. Or as Zhukov once put it: "When my troops enter a minefield, my troops move over it as if it were not there"
-
You always wonder how many of those would have lived through the war if tactics other than human wave had been used. That old "fire and maneuver" thing.
But you have to admit, reading the Fractured Fairy Tales Boroda puts out is one of the best parts of the O-Club.
"Yeah, well, Poland, sure we took their land in the partition. But let's focus on 1920 when they invaded us to get it back when it was OURS by then. And all those East European countries LOVED us. We had to build big fences to keep the Westerners out of paradise."
Gotta love it.
-
Oh, addition, our proud Icelandic military history started some 1000 years ago with plundering Britain and the Baltics, sailing into Russia (which we named "Gardariki") So, we may have snatched some of your women along with the blossoms of Britain.
Then there was peace and hunger. In ww2, we were feeding the British, whos's occupation here was most welcome, did not influence the politics, did not include executions (like in Nazi occupied states), and actually the Rape-rate was unchanged as well. Even the left parties said they were thankful about the allies behaving so well.
Then, from the 40's to the 70's we had 3-4 big scruffles with the English, all about fish really. Cannons were used, and ships kept smashing into each other. We won, expanding our limit from 4 miles to 200, all other nations were to follow. Happy?
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
In August 1939, there was no war. Now try to understand this:
Everyone in the western world hated the soviet union.
The ONLY reason you were accepted into the allies was because Germany was a bigger threat than the USSR in 1941. No one really wanted to be allied with you, no one really cared about your plight. But "the enemy of my enemy is my friend", and therefore you got lend lease, and therefore you were a part of the allies. As soon as the threat was gone, the alliance was dissolved (for your part that is, the rest formed NATO) and everyone went back to plotting the destruction of the Soviet union.
Thank you. It explains a lot. Blind hatred. It must be somewhere in the genes.
You can't understand us, and that's why you hate us. It's 1000 years old. Western Christianity vs. Eastern. Two different basic concepts of life. Two worlds.
I am happy we finaly refrained from being an only force oppossing Western conqest, but I see that you'll never leave us alone and let us live as we want to. You keep on slaughtering everyone who doesn't follow your standards, like you did with Yugoslavia.
I am glad we still have nukes.
You live for profit. We survive.
You just explained what I was telling you on three pages of this discussion.
Hortlund - dismissed.
-
Watch it Boroda.
Hortlund is still in the cold war :D
-
Originally posted by Boroda
You keep on slaughtering everyone who doesn't follow your standards, like you did with Yugoslavia.
See? This is a treasure!
"Our" standards are just unreasonable. The peace-lovink pipples of Bosnia/Yugoslavia should have been left to their mutual lovefest. Such audacity to interrupt an obvious sharing and caring between two totally harmless populations.
The only injuries there prior to the evil West attacking were lips chapped from kissing each other and skinned knees from the three-legged races at the picnics.
-
The only injuries there prior to the evil West attacking were lips chapped from kissing each other and skinned knees from the three-legged races at the picnics.
Heh.
-
I've got blisters on my fingers!
;)
Look how far this discussion went. From an information about a new Russian film to usual accusation against Soviet Army for raping everything that moved to accusation of dividing Poland to accusation of trading with Hitler etc.
Whenever I beat any argument - I get 10 more. But this time I am curious if I can stand long enough so this thread will stop with my last post.
Thank you. Pouring another mug of strong Ukrainian beer, and trying to follow your attacks from 360 degrees, from above and below :)
-
"the end it was Soviet Army who defeated Japanese ground forces in Manchuria and Korea, just in case you didn't know. We followed all allied obligations, while the "second front" was delayed by the "allies" for years."
When did the russians defeat the japanese again? How lng did you delay your second front?
-
Originally posted by Dowding
. As for the gold - it was payment for arms. It belonged to the UK on a British wreck, but was in Russian waters. I'd say 50/50 was a fair agreement.
We gave you the gold, it was loaded on board of HMS Edinbourgh. You sank it. We had to pay it again. Then we divide it 50/50 after it was salvaged by USSR/UK rescue party.
We payed you 200%, then got 25% rebate, minus the cost of the rescue expedition.
Good business for UK.
Dowding, one of my favourite books is "HMS Ulisses" ("Polar Convoy") by Alister McLean. If you read it - you should understand that Soviet Northern Fleet had only destroyers in the Arctic, either built during WWI or built for shallow Baltic sea, that had a habbit of falling apart in Arctic storms...
Here is a good film for you to watch, about Soviet naval aviation in the Arctic: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0262052/
You can order it on DVD. It's one of the most frightening films I ever saw... Unfortunately I have it in DiVX only with Russian soundtrack.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
When did the russians defeat the japanese again? How lng did you delay your second front?
GH, we promised to declare war on Japan and start hostilities no more then tree months after victory in Europe. Manchurian operation started on August, 8th.
Compare it to the promises to start second front in Europe in 1942.
-
I'd like to see your sources for this HMS Edinburgh episode. None-pravda, please.
HMS Edinburgh served as escort during World War 2 for the North Atlantic Convoys. On escort duty during the Russian Convoys she was torpedoed by Uboat U456 while escorting Convoy QP11 on May 2 1942, she was carrying 45million in gold bullion.
On 30 April 1942, the EDINBURGH was struck by two torpedos from the German submarine U456 and seriously damaged, she was taken in tow, but later was able to proceed at slow speed under her own steam. On 2 may, however, after driving off attack by torpedo aircraft, she was attacked off Bear Island by German destroyers, but was agained torpedoed, and later had to be abandoned, being finally sunk by torpedo from the destroyer FORESIGHT, Two officers and 56 ratings were lost.
Sounds like she was immobilized and then scuttled to avoid capture. That would be a common occurance in WW2. No conspiracy.
I'll check out that book some time and possibly the DVD. :)
-
Originally posted by Angus
BTW, the soviet fighting method demanded many times the troops of anything known so far. Or as Zhukov once put it: "When my troops enter a minefield, my troops move over it as if it were not there"
A famous quote by Eisenhower. He didn't tell that in that particular operation the projected losses from German fire while removing the landmines were 2 times bigger then from landmines if the mine field was crossed immediately. Not even speaking about a chance for Germans to regroup and meet our troops with full strengths.
It's a classic example. Again you are wrong telling me what "everyone knows".
Damn. Sorry. I have been told our "beloved" president fired our government. I have to check what is going on. The new prime-minister is an unbelievable areshole... This is scary. I think I'll take a little break here - this is important.
-
Originally posted by Dowding
I'd like to see your sources for this HMS Edinburgh episode. None-pravda, please.
Sounds like she was immobilized and then scuttled to avoid capture. That would be a common occurance in WW2. No conspiracy.
I'll check out that book some time and possibly the DVD. :)
From Admiral Golovko's book: Edinbourgh was torpedoed by a German sub, still was able to move. According to Admiralty directive it was abandoned and sunk by British destroyers.
Frankly speaking I don't remember about second and third attacks, i have to check Golovko's book. Golovko was a Northern Fleet commander during the War, being oneof the youngest Soviet admirals. I remember him not being very friendly towards Brits. I have read his book maybe 15 years ago, but it has to be on a bookshelf at my Father's library or in my flat.
What you wrote shows that I am a victim of this "everyone knows..." too :) Well, not "everyone", but someone interested in navy history...
This is good, but I want an answer to a simple question: why did we have to re-pay that money?
Alistair MacLean's "HMS Ulisses" is one of the best war books I have read.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0385041837/qid=1077643159/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/104-0520524-5063919?v=glance&s=books
-
Originally posted by Angus
Watch it Boroda.
Hortlund is still in the cold war :D
Mid-80s, a Soviet airborne trooper is dropped on a training somewhere in Belorussia. He loses his way, and after wandering through the forest for two days comes to a lonely wooden house. He asks a host, an aged bearded peasant for some fresh water, host leads him to a well and asks: "Sonny, how did you lose your unit? Fascists surrounded you again?"
-"Daddy, what fascists?! The War was over 40 years ago!"
-"Really!? Damn, and we still blow up trains!"
:D :D :D
-
Russian soldiers raped and killed half my family on my fathers side. East Prussia 1945, Boroda will of cource deny that any Russian soldier ever did such a thing.
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
Russian soldiers raped and killed half my family on my fathers side. East Prussia 1945, Boroda will of cource deny that any Russian soldier ever did such a thing.
My Grand-Uncle was killed in East Prussia is 1945. He was 17.
I am sorry for your family.
Just as I am for millions of innocent people killed, raped and tortured to death in USSR, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, France, Norway, etc.
You came with a sword, like in XIII century. Our cause was just, the enemy was defeated, the victory was ours. We didn't start it.
Keep on blowing up trains. But you'd better do something about your leaders, who want to come with a sword again. And go drink some water so you'll not have a heart attack because of uncontrolled hatred that you show here.
Yeah, it was unfair: that asians on their shaggy mounts came to "rape and murder" civilized Europeans who only wanted to use their skin for wallets and make soap of their body fat. Now go tell me that it's only communist lies.
Some people never learn.
-
My Grandmothers 2 brothers were also killed in the war, they were unarmed fishermen and were machine gunned by German U-Boats. Some hundreds of Icelandic sailors were killed in the war, almost all by U-Boats, some by German aircraft.
And yes, there were Icelandic sailors on PQ-17 and the convoy actually sailed from Reykjavik.
There was an Icelandic double-agent in Reykjavik, sending messages to Germany, which had been written by the British Intelligence. He belives he may have been used to "inform" the Germans about PQ 17, an attempt to lure Tirpitz into a trap.
The RN did a big mistake, no doubt, the admiral was an ill man, and at the heat of the moment, he probably belived that Tirpitz was nearer to the convoy than even their own TG. There was dense fog, so he issued the scatter order, which proved to be so fatal when the weather cleared up.
Had Tirpitz continued on course, it would presumably have run into the RN TG. That would have been some fireworks: Tirpitz, Hipper und Sheer w. destroyer escorts vs. HMS Duke of York, two cruisers and 14 destroyers, the battleship USS Washington and the carrier HMS Victorious.
That, my dear Boroda, may well be more steel and firepower then at Kursk
The value of PQ 17, was also, according to your own numbers from HMS Edinburgh, 15 times as much as that precious cargo.
The value of goods destroyed, and therefore not delivered would have been very much more than the loss from HMS Edinburgh.
Will bring more data later on ;)
-
honestly this thread has turned into one of the most outragous arguments ever i must say first off all of this happened a long time ago and im sorry but i think its time for some of u to get over the whole nazi russian jap american thing , seriously some of u are kinda making it sound like every russian or nazi/ german was responsible for some of the crimes commited in wwII , i lost 2 great uncles in wwII and my grandfather but i dont hold either russians nazis or anyone else responcible it was war chitty things happen in war thats pretty much all u can say now i know some of u are gonna rip me a new one for saying that but hey go right ahead personally i think russian women are hot so im gonna be as nice to the russians guys as possible ;) no but seriously this thread has gotton outta hand and i would hope some of u agree
-
Because they were bastards?
They probably suspected the Fishermen were radio equipped recon ships.
Or maybe it is all Allied propaganda and the Trawlermen were really killed by mutant sea bass, created by evil Allied scientists in their spare time, when they were not busy designing more terror weapons.
But all that is guesswork.
-
This is good, but I want an answer to a simple question: why did we have to re-pay that money?
My guess is this. Obviously there was a clause in the contract - the payment had to reach British territory before it was considered 'received'. If it was lost in transit, it must be repaid. Blame the Russians who signed on the dotted line.
-
They didn't consider shooting lifeboats full of holes on sinking ships as a waste of ammo.
-
Dowding should do a google on "Laconia incident".
-
Hortlund should read Das Boot.
"I swam around until I came across the broken bow of our lifeboat, which, was upside down and managed to scramble on top of it. Even now the submarine did not submerge, but deliberately steamed in my direction and when only 60 to 70 yards away fired directly at me with a short burst from the machine gun. As their intention was quite obvious, I fell into the water and remained there until the submarine ceased firing and submerged, after which I climbed back onto the bottom of the boat. The submarine had been firing her guns for a full hour."
That's an excerpt from the Nuremburg Trials, specifically relating to the interpretation of the Laconia Order. Another:
"That the witness saw the dead on the deck of the Antonico as he and his crew tried to swing out their lifeboat; that the attack was sudden, lasting almost 20 minutes; and that the witness already in the lifeboat tried to get away from the side of the Antonico in order to avoid being dragged down by the said Antonico and also because she was the aggressor's target; that the night was dark, and it was thus difficult to see the submarine, but that the fire aboard the Antonico lit up the locality in which she was submerging, helping the enemy to see the two lifeboats trying to get away; that the enemy ruthlessly machine-gunned the defenceless sailors in No. 2 lifeboat, in which the witness found himself, and killed the Second Pilot Amoldo de Andrade de Lima, and wounded three of the crew; that the witness gave orders to his company to throw themselves overboard to save themselves from the bullets; in so doing, they were protected and out of sight behind the lifeboat, which was already filled with water; even so the lifeboat continued to be attacked, At that time the witness and his companions were about 20 metres in distance from the submarine."
Seems to me that there were U-Boat crews willing to take the Laconia order for its full meaning, particularly the part relating to the destruction of ship crews.
-
If you are arguing that submarines should not shoot at shipwrecked enemies, you should first take it up with your US allies regarding their trackrecord in the pacific...then you can try to claim some moral high ground here.
You may report back here when you have done that.
Thanks.
-
I don't really know Scholzie. There were few survivors to tell the tale. Wreckage was usually found all holed through, and there are some reports of concentraited fire on the lifeboats.
Well, we were on the allied side, for one, shipping tremendous amounts of food to the British, and then secondly, U-boats being spotted could be reported. That's all I can think off.
Just reading a book about the War years up here, tremendous stuff really. Seems to have been much more going on then I ever imagined.
That spy-part was also quite a thing. He may have had his fingers in luring the Scharnhorst out, it was a similar bait as supposed to get to the Tirpitz, but worked that time.
He was also assigned to making the Germans belive that the allied planned a seaborne invation from Iceland to Norway, by sending false reports of the Alled strength up here. Some belive that because of that, the Germans kept a bigger force in Norway than necessary. I don't really have any info about that, would be great if you had some.
BTW, there were quite a few Norse units here, including one squadron!
-
I'm not taking any moral high ground, but it seems you are heading that way. Enlighten me as to why the Laconia incident is relevant in ascertaining the reasons why U-Boats machine-gunned and shelled unarmed sailors and their lifeboats?
And kindly take your supercilious condescension and shove it up your arse. There's a good chap.
-
Hot issues....
On the morning of the 10th of may, 1940, an unknown fleet was spotted headed for Reykjavik harbour. Our PM was woken up, and he asked: Which navy is this? It looks like the Brits he was told.
"Thank god" he said. "Had it been the Germans, I'd have been shot, had it been the Russians, I'd have been put in prison, now I can just sleep a bit more"!
-
A little twist of fate ;)
My wife's granfather is a German. He was drafted and assigned to a sub. He never got his boat though, so his wartime years were spent minesweeping.
My grandfather was however a Fisherman around Iceland, stopped that and started farming sometimes in 1940.
-
Originally posted by Angus
had it been the Russians, I'd have been put in prison,
Lies!!!!!