Author Topic: Were the Russians planning to invade in 1942? (Read 1761 times)

Hortlund · « **Reply #15 on:** May 31, 2002, 09:26:37 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by --am--

Revisionist this denying of the international contracts and documents. It in what you are engaged. I can remind, that personally you have declared, that the German army did not make any crimes. I to result you the proof. You have broken off.

wtf are you talking about?

I have never said anything like that (assuming that I'm intrepreting your abysmal "english" correct).

--am-- · « **Reply #16 on:** May 31, 2002, 09:41:04 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by julle
--am-- there was NOTHING voluntary in the occupying of the Baltic and ½ of Poland.

You it is very bad to know a history. All these "states" did not exist before disintegration of the Russian Empire (except for Poland, but Poland has grasped a piece of Western Ukraine in war of 1920, Ukraine is republic in structure USSR). All of them have not won independence, and have received her from hands Communists (on which they so love to pour toejam). Besides the Baltic states everyone submitted the official application for the introduction in USSR. It was not by occupation, because the main attribute of occupation is the presence of military management, instead of civil. You would like, that it was by aggression. This your desire, but it does not correspond to the historical facts.

Hortlund · « **Reply #17 on:** May 31, 2002, 09:46:56 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by --am--

You it is very bad to know a history. All these "states" did not exist before disintegration of the Russian Empire (except for Poland, but Poland has grasped a piece of Western Ukraine in war of 1920, Ukraine is republic in structure USSR).

Dude, If you knew *anything* about history, you would know that Lithuania is older than Russia.

Lithuania was an independent country back when "Russia" or the Muscovites were nothing but serfs under the mongols.

You know, you keep posting crap in horrible English on subjects you dont know anything about. Perhaps you should do something else?

--am-- · « **Reply #18 on:** May 31, 2002, 09:49:56 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Hortlund

wtf are you talking about?

It is your words?

"It was so absurd, that a German soldier could kill a whole barn full of people and recieve no punishment at all, but if he raped one woman he was stripped of rank and sent to military prison. This was true even in the SS units whose only job was to butcher civilians, any soldier found guilty of rape was sent to military prison (or later, transferred to the really diddlyed up units like 36th SS "Dirlewanger")."

You on former to assert, what German army not ìade of mass military crimes, murders of the peace inhabitants and
execute? You on former to assert, what they bore punishment from the heads?

Hortlund · « **Reply #19 on:** May 31, 2002, 09:52:39 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by --am--

It is your words?

"It was so absurd, that a German soldier could kill a whole barn full of people and recieve no punishment at all, but if he raped one woman he was stripped of rank and sent to military prison. This was true even in the SS units whose only job was to butcher civilians, any soldier found guilty of rape was sent to military prison (or later, transferred to the really diddlyed up units like 36th SS "Dirlewanger")."

You on former to assert, what German army not ñîâðøàëà of mass military crimes, murders of the peace inhabitants and êàçíåé? You on former to assert, what they bore punishment from the heads?

There is a difference between saying that something was not a crime in Germany at the time, and saying that something was not a crime at all. I guess I just missunderstood what you wrote.

--am-- · « **Reply #20 on:** May 31, 2002, 09:54:36 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Hortlund

Dude, If you knew *anything* about history, you would know that Lithuania is older than Russia.

If you to know a history, instead of to show nonsense publicly to know, that Great Lithuanian this slavic state. Was destroyed and is seized by a German knightly award.

Masherbrum · « **Reply #21 on:** May 31, 2002, 09:55:18 AM »

Can we shake hands? Please?

--am-- · « **Reply #22 on:** May 31, 2002, 10:00:24 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Hortlund

There is a difference between saying that something was not a crime in Germany at the time, and saying that something was not a crime at all. I guess I just missunderstood what you wrote.

Means you to assert, that if in the state the mass murder of the citizens of other states is authorized, the soldiers which killed these citizens do not carry the responsibility for it?

Hortlund · « **Reply #23 on:** May 31, 2002, 10:11:44 AM »

A difficult question actually. Both philosophically and legally. Basically the question is whether it should be possible to punish people even though all they were doing was to follow the law of their own country. Basically Nuremberg answered this question with a "yes, under certain circumstances".

It is very easy to come up with absurd consequences of that reasoning though. Be that as it may, it is still the law, so to answer your question: Yes, the soldiers are responsible even if they did not do anything unlawful in their own country.

--am-- · « **Reply #24 on:** May 31, 2002, 10:21:07 AM »

Whereas you can speaks, what Germany and USSR it is identical, if in Germany the government permitted to kill the peace inhabitants of other countries, and in USSR for violence above the civil person sentenced to execution?

Hortlund · « **Reply #25 on:** May 31, 2002, 10:23:34 AM »

I'm sorry, I dont understand.

midnight Target · « **Reply #26 on:** May 31, 2002, 10:39:33 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Hortlund
A difficult question actually. Both philosophically and legally. Basically the question is whether it should be possible to punish people even though all they were doing was to follow the law of their own country. Basically Nuremberg answered this question with a "yes, under certain circumstances".

It is very easy to come up with absurd consequences of that reasoning though. Be that as it may, it is still the law, so to answer your question: Yes, the soldiers are responsible even if they did not do anything unlawful in their own country.

During the Mi Lai (sp?) trial in the US, I believe Lt. Calley was found guilty even though (he claimed) he followed the orders of a superior officer. It was determined that an Officer has the responsibility to refuse even a direct order if he feels it is unlawful.

I'm sure the exact wording is in Google somewhere.

--am-- · « **Reply #27 on:** May 31, 2002, 10:58:54 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Hortlund
I'm sorry, I dont understand.

What exactly is not clear? A difference between the state with policy " no punishment for crimes against the another's country`s citizens " and state with policy " who is loyal, he in safety, and who will disturb it will be punished by death "?

julle · « **Reply #28 on:** May 31, 2002, 12:05:30 PM »

Is that engrish?

"All your base are belong to us..."

HEHE! --am-- you are TOTALLY brainwashed and strong in your beliefs. That´s for sure. Who ever trained you did a fine job.

~~julle~~

Samm · « **Reply #29 on:** May 31, 2002, 01:04:22 PM »

This reminds me of a book "Liberators" written by Victor Suvorov .