The Victims of the Soviets [Archive] - The Apricity Forum: A European Cultural Community

Motörhead Remember Me

10-27-2010, 09:26 AM

The Soviets behaved 10 times better in Germany except some fucked up bastards than the Germans did in the USSR. Period.

Not true.

The Germans were brutal but so were the Soviets. I just hate this with Russians, how they systematically forge their history. Even today 2010...

Soviet soldiers were known to be brutal and rapes were committed at an unprecedented level. Only the brutality in the Japanese sacking of Nanking paralleles the crimes against women comitted by Soviet solders. Massrapes are not comitted by "some fucked up bastards", they are comitted by thousands and yet thousands of soldiers.
Germany:

A study published by the German government in 1989 estimated the death toll of German civilians in eastern Europe at 635,000. With 270,000 dying as the result of Soviet war crimes, 160,000 deaths occurring at the hands of various nationalities during the expulsion of Germans after World War II, and 205,000 deaths in the Forced labor of Germans in the Soviet Union. These figures do not include at least 125,000 civilian deaths in the Battle of Berlin.
Following the Red Army's capture of Berlin in 1945, one of the largest incidents of mass rape took place. Soviet troops reportedly raped German women and girls as young as 8 years old. Estimates of the total number of victims range from tens of thousands to two million.

The crimes were not only comitted against Germans but all along the eastern front.
Hungary:

During the siege, an estimated 50,000 women and girls were raped, though estimates vary from 5,000 to 200,000. Hungarian girls were kidnapped and taken to Red Army quarters, where they were imprisoned, repeatedly raped, and sometimes murdered.[60]:70–71 Even embassy staff from neutral countries were captured and raped, as documented when Soviet soldiers attacked the Swedish legation in Germany
Poland:

During the years 1939–41, nearly 1.5 million inhabitants of the Soviet-controlled areas of former eastern Poland were deported, of whom 63.1% were Poles or other nationalities and 7.4% were Jews. Only a small number of these deportees survived the war.[29] According to American professor Carroll Quigley, at least one third of the 320,000 Polish prisoners of war captured by the Red Army in 1939 were murdered.

Murdered Finnish children (reported to be "enemy soldiers" by Soviet partisans):
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/91/DeadFinnishcivilians1942.jpg/250px-DeadFinnishcivilians1942.jpg

Soviet war crimes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_crimes)

In a recently published book by the Professor of Modern History at Cambridge, Richard Evans, a young Russian officer is quoted recalling how when his unit overtook a column of fleeing German refugees: [B]'Women, mothers and their children lie to the right and left along the route, and in front of each of them stands a raucous armada of men with their trousers down.

The women, who are bleeding or losing consciousness, get shoved to one side, and our men shoot the ones who try to save their children.'

A group of 'grinning' officers ensured that 'every soldier without exception would take part'.
Evans records: 'Rape was often accompanied by torture and mutilation and frequently ends in the victim being shot or bludgeoned to death. The raging violence was undiscriminating.'

Read more:
Stalin's army of rapists (http://http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1080493/Stalins-army-rapists-The-brutal-war-crime-Russia-Germany-tried-ignore.html)

The inhumanity of the Soviet purges were comparable to Byelorussia and Ukraine, available when the German armies evicted the Soviet forces in June 1941. Juozas Viktoravicius, a Lithuanian survivor of the tortures in the Forest of Death at Petrosiunai, four miles outside Kaunas, describes his experiences:

I was beaten 45 hours without stopping, they bound my hands and feet and put me into cold water. Others had their testicles kicked to pulp, were seated on red-hot stoves (called in Russian: tiepelushka), had needles rammed under their fingernails, were scalped, had their jaws ripped down to their necks, and their eyes gouged and their tongues torn out. At Kretinga, victims were bound to trees with iron hoops before being burned alive. In order to avoid the sound of shot in Kaunas prison, the commandant of the jail had instructed his executioners to kill each victim by bashing in his temples with a hammer.

Ethnic Cleansing and Soviet Crimes Against Humanity (http://vip.latnet.lv/LPRA/ethnic_cleansing.htm)

The Ripper

10-27-2010, 09:34 AM

Soviet brutality is in a sense more justified, though, since it was revenge. Nazi brutality on the Eastern front is not something that can be explained away.

Motörhead Remember Me

10-27-2010, 09:50 AM

Soviet brutality is in a sense more justified, though, since it was revenge. Nazi brutality on the Eastern front is not something that can be explained away.

??

Civilians, children and women were at the receiving end and when it comes to all other countries except Germany there was no reason for revenge.

The Sovietunion orchestrated the WWII and was one of the two instigating parties to the whole mess!!!

:mad:

Basil

10-27-2010, 09:52 AM

^Uh, way to justify your claim.:rolleyes2: You know, putting "period" at the end of something you write doesn't convince anyone worth convincing that your claim is accurrate. Furthermore, who acted worse seems to largely be beside the point. The Japs behaved much worse than our boys ever did in Asia, yet I would not think for one minute that such atrocious behaviors like the Nanking Massacre justifies the dropping of two atomic bombs on civilians.

What do I need to justify my claim? To post photos of tortured children? I could. There's also such thing which is called statistics, and it says that the whole number of civilian losses in the USSR is estimated to be up to 17 million. They were innocent women and children not able to defend themselves who were hunted in such manner:
"... Confident in approaching victory, the Germans took a sadistic pleasure in the repression. How agreeable to combine duty and sport; to bask in the glow of the crusader while enjoying the particular physical pleasure which so many Germans derive from the infliction of pain. In the long summer evenings "man hunts" used to be organised on the slightest pretext, villages surrounded, set alight, and the inhabitants "beaten" like rising game birds and cut down in the streets.
Then it was rewarding to loot the dwellings for "souvenirs" and to send these, and photographs of the scene, to friends and the family back in Germany. Accompanied, for instance, with such an inscription as this one: '... here is a lock of hair from a Russian girl. Before the death she fought like a wild-cat and was quite subhuman (Untermensch) . . .' "
From the book Barbarossa, by Alan Clark

And I have never justified massacring of the innocent. Moreover I hate war and warmongers.

Motörhead Remember Me

10-27-2010, 09:56 AM

the whole number of civilian losses in the USSR is estimated to be up to 17 million.

Like I said, it was self inflicted. Stalin - Hitler, Molotow - Ribbentrop.

Basil

10-27-2010, 10:03 AM

Like I said, it was self inflicted. Stalin - Hitler, Molotow - Ribbentrop.
Yeah, when it's concerning the Russians, it's always self inflicted. Do say, they deserved it. Fuck you.

http://www.russian-victories.ru/russian_boy_vitya_cherevichkin_killed_by_german_sa dists.jpg
http://www.russian-victories.ru/russian_children_tortured_to_death_by_wehrmacht.jp g
http://www.russian-victories.ru/mother_children_baby_killed.jpg
http://www.russian-victories.ru/the_slaughter.jpg

Debaser11

10-27-2010, 10:14 AM

What do I need to justify my claim? To post photos of tortured children? I could.

Did I in any way imply that that was justifying a claim? I mean, really.

There's also such thing which is called statistics, and it says that the whole number of civilian losses in the USSR is estimated to be up to 17 million.

Uh, right. No one is arguing that the Germans didn't kill a lot of Soviet civilians.

They were innocent women and children not able to defend themselves who were hunted in such manner:

I assume that's what this discussion has always been about.

"... Confident in approaching victory, the Germans took a sadistic pleasure in the repression. How agreeable to combine duty and sport; to bask in the glow of the crusader while enjoying the particular physical pleasure which so many Germans derive from the infliction of pain. In the long summer evenings "man hunts" used to be organised on the slightest pretext, villages surrounded, set alight, and the inhabitants "beaten" like rising game birds and cut down in the streets.
Then it was rewarding to loot the dwellings for "souvenirs" and to send these, and photographs of the scene, to friends and the family back in Germany. Accompanied, for instance, with such an inscription as this one: '... here is a lock of hair from a Russian girl. Before the death she fought like a wild-cat and was quite subhuman (Untermensch) . . .' "
From the book Barbarossa, by Alan Clark

And I have never justified massacring of the innocent. Moreover I hate war and warmongers.

So based on this quote from Mr. Clark's book (which isn't even a PRIMARY source!!!) you want me to conclude that there was something unqiuely thuggish about Germans that wasn't present in Russians when they were unleashing their destruction on the aforemetioned countries or on Germany itself? Uh, okay. :rolleyes2:

And last I checked, Russia acted as the aggressor toward five other countries (and they were looking to increase that number) before the Germans invaded. This is really a case of the school yard bullies playing the victim particularly with newfound evidence concerning Soviet preparations for an invasion of Germany. Only, unlike you, I seem to make a distinction between state actors, the army, and civilians. If you'd bother to do the same, your first post in this thread would have hardly been necessary. I'm not trying to turn this into a game of quantifying victims. But even playing such trivial game, it still doesn't look good for Russia.

Peasant

10-27-2010, 10:21 AM

Civillian loses in the USSR? I bet the scorched earth policy didn't help.

The Ripper

10-27-2010, 11:41 AM

??

Civilians, children and women were at the receiving end and when it comes to all other countries except Germany there was no reason for revenge.

The Sovietunion orchestrated the WWII and was one of the two instigating parties to the whole mess!!!

:mad:

It is more justified because it is avenging German atrocities. In my opinion.

But I generally prefer not to take sides when it comes to genocidal massmurderers.

Motörhead Remember Me

10-27-2010, 12:41 PM

Yeah, when it's concerning the Russians, it's always self inflicted. Do say, they deserved it. Fuck you.

I did not mean they deserved it nor am I indifferent to the suffering of civilians no matter ethnicity.

I'm more interested in Russians/Soviets admitting their responsibility for causing WWII and not always act the innocent liberator.

But Russians in general are totally numb to admitting this.

The Ripper

10-27-2010, 01:45 PM

I'm more interested in Russians/Soviets admitting their responsibility for causing WWII and not always act the innocent liberator.

But Russians in general are totally numb to admitting this.

Here we can agree, Russians would rather ignore the R-M pact altogether.

Svanhild

10-27-2010, 02:23 PM

Basil

10-27-2010, 04:08 PM

Pardon my french Basil, but don't talk balderdash. Sovjet Russia killed millions over millions of your own people before any war. As a matter of fact, millions of Russians died of starvation because Stalin/Moscow decided it. Hundred of thousands were shot to dead and killed during Russian civil war 1917 to 1920. The Zar and his family. The members of the white army. Later, the sailors of the Kronstadt rebellion and thousands over thousands more. The biggest misery of Russian history in the 20th history were the Russians themselves.

Don't point with your finger at us Germans. Your own countrymen have the most blood on their fingers. But Russians seem to be rather professional in ignoring that fact.

Oh, come on, it's the whole different story. My g-granddad was released from gulag right before the outbreak of the war but he didn't think for a minute not to join the army to defend his people from the threat which he considered far more formidable than Stalin and his jackals all together. You don't feel the difference which every Russian in sound mind feels. The war for you, Germans, was never at any point a struggle for the very existence of your people. It was quite the opposite for us, if we had lose it, we wouldn't exist anymore. And your Hitler btw did his utmost for revival of Stalin's popularity among the ordinary people. That's only because of the war, which he entered as the most despised person, Stalin was able to become a symbol of the greatest victory ever, when people were forced to concolidate around the current political power however bad it was under the threat of being exterminated or enslaved by the invaders.

German atrocities against Russian civilians were punished merciless. Like sovjet officiers and partisans were punished merciless. Both sides fought increasingly reckless as time progressed. Both sides had to take a huge blood-letting. But the war is over and I don't consider Russians as my foes as long as they respect my country.

Yes, the war is over, the nazis in power were hanged, so let's not to stir up the past. I don't consider Germans as my foes either as long as they don't stick to the nazi ideology.

Debaser11

10-27-2010, 08:55 PM

You don't feel the difference which every Russian in sound mind feels. The war for you, Germans, was never at any point a struggle for the very existence of your people. It was quite the opposite for us, if we had lose it, we wouldn't exist anymore.

Wow. Only a person completely ignorant about this conflict would make such a ridiculous statement. Are you not familiar with the Morgenthau Plan and just how close Germany was to being turned into a medieval feudal, but stateless territory? Are you not familiar about the terms of unconditional surrender Germany was offered? (No offer was made to negotiate for a peace.) Are you not familiar with the wholesale bombing of civilian targets which began on the Allied side? (Dresden was actually done to appease Stalin.) There was a very real possibility that Germany was going to be wiped off the map. You sit here and say that the Germans were never struggling for their existence the way the Russians were with the full benefit of sixty plus years hindsight. Get real, already. And I think a good argument can be made that Germany has never really been the same culturally, racially, spiritually or politically since that war so it's ridiculous for you to propose that only Russia had their existence on the line. Have you taken a look at the modern government of Germany? They're still basically governed by occupied powers in some respects. It's not far-fetched to say their government is a bit of a puppet government of the U.S. We still have military bases there to this day.

And your Hitler btw did his utmost for revival of Stalin's popularity among the ordinary people. That's only because of the war, which he entered as the most despised person, Stalin was able to become a symbol of the greatest victory ever, when people were forced to concolidate around the current political power however bad it was under the threat of being exterminated or enslaved by the invaders.

This is absurd. You're actually blaming Hitler for the state of Russia's politics after the war?! You act as if Russians have no free will of their own. By this same logic, we can blame France and England for making it easier for a man like Hitler to come to power. Trying to place blame in such a manner is stupid.

Yes, the war is over, the nazis in power were hanged, so let's not to stir up the past. I don't consider Germans as my foes either as long as they don't stick to the nazi ideology.

In other words, you like the Allied version of the story and any other version that you don't like shouldn't be addressed even if it gets us closer to the true nature of this European civil war.

Osweo

10-27-2010, 11:30 PM

millions of Russians died of starvation because Stalin/Moscow decided it.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_YsIHHYwMUV8/Rwr2RbSIGfI/AAAAAAAAAKM/Em-1kLodhik/s400/Stalin+Profile.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8c/Ordzhonikidze,_Stalin_and_Mikoyan,_1925.jpg

The Zar and his family.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a1/Old_Russia_-_Yakov_Sverdlov.jpg/414px-Old_Russia_-_Yakov_Sverdlov.jpghttp://www.marxists.org/archive/lunachar/works/silhouet/sverdlov.gif

Later, the sailors of the Kronstadt rebellion and thousands over thousands more.
http://www.cddc.vt.edu/marxists/archive/trotsky/photo/t1900b.jpg

The biggest misery of Russian history in the 20th history were the Russians themselves.
Ever seen a Russian? Clue: there are no pictures of any in this post. :rolleyes:
(Let's not get into just what country allowed Lenin safe passage from Switzerland to the Baltic in 1917, eh?)

Hitler btw did his utmost for revival of Stalin's popularity among the ordinary people.
True, and so very VERY sad. Very easily, Hitler could have been a hero. And what did he do? Fucked up everything. Russia, Germany, all of Europe, and probably even mankind forever if we're not lucky. :rage

Wow. Only a person completely ignorant about this conflict would make such a ridiculous statement. Are you not familiar with the Morgenthau Plan and just how close Germany was to being turned into a medieval feudal, but stateless territory? ... There was a very real possibility that Germany was going to be wiped off the map.
Maybe maybe maybe. Fact is that the Morgenthau Plan WAS seen as the crazy fucked up madness that it was. It was never going to happen. Stalin probably wouldn't have allowed it anyway.

You sit here and say that the Germans were never struggling for their existence the way the Russians were with the full benefit of sixty plus years hindsight. Get real, already.
Germany lost. Germans are still here. They've been fucked over, but who hasn't recently?

What would have happened if Germany had won??? :eek: It wouldn't have been pretty, I'm sure. Perhaps there would have been a rethink on all that Untermensch stuff, but how likely do you think that would have been? :ohwell:

...............

Russian soldiers raped and murdered German civilians in the thousands. I don't think it can be denied. It most certainly cannot be justified.

I'm afraid it can be understood to some extent, though. Humans can be evil things, especially after one of the worst wars ever. :( Russian soldiers believed that their very people had been in danger of utter annihilation, and when the boot was on the other foot, they took revenge. :(

I don't doubt that the most disgusting outrages imaginable were perpetrated, but I do have some reservations about how widespread this sort of thing was. Perhaps I'm being naive there. I don't know, and don't think we ever will really, considering the nature of the sources.

Ekh, what a century.

Basil

10-28-2010, 03:39 AM

Wow. Only a person completely ignorant about this conflict would make such a ridiculous statement. Are you not familiar with the Morgenthau Plan and just how close Germany was to being turned into a medieval feudal, but stateless territory? Are you not familiar about the terms of unconditional surrender Germany was offered? (No offer was made to negotiate for a peace.) Are you not familiar with the wholesale bombing of civilian targets which began on the Allied side? (Dresden was actually done to appease Stalin.) There was a very real possibility that Germany was going to be wiped off the map. You sit here and say that the Germans were never struggling for their existence the way the Russians were with the full benefit of sixty plus years hindsight. Get real, already. And I think a good argument can be made that Germany has never really been the same culturally, racially, spiritually or politically since that war so it's ridiculous for you to propose that only Russia had their existence on the line. Have you taken a look at the modern government of Germany? They're still basically governed by occupied powers in some respects. It's not far-fetched to say their government is a bit of a puppet government of the U.S. We still have military bases there to this day.

Germany has thrived well since 1945, that's all what I know. And I don't care about hypothetical projects as long as people in power don't actually give a start to them. Many countries which have never lost any war are US puppet states and have US military bases on their territories, so what?

This is absurd. You're actually blaming Hitler for the state of Russia's politics after the war?! You act as if Russians have no free will of their own. By this same logic, we can blame France and England for making it easier for a man like Hitler to come to power. Trying to place blame in such a manner is stupid.

To be honest, I don't give a damn about Stalin and Hitler. Both are dead and I'm pretty contented with the fact. I just describe the situation as I see it: there was the war which is considered sacred (you know, like in the song (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Svyaschennaya_Voyna)) and Stalin by the will of destiny was an immanent part of this war, and because Russians are oversensitive about everything pertaining to the war, it's damn hard for society to re-think the whole subject of stalinism once and for all. It's a very sad fact and first of all for Russians themselves.

Motörhead Remember Me

10-28-2010, 06:07 AM

Yes, the war is over, the nazis in power were hanged.

Unfortunately none of the Soviet communists were hanged.

Oh no. They continue to rule under new titles. That's why Russia has'nt changed morally and is still a megalomaniac mythomanian haven.

Motörhead Remember Me

10-28-2010, 06:12 AM

The war for you, Germans, was never at any point a struggle for the very existence of your people. It was quite the opposite for us, if we had lose it, we wouldn't exist anymore.

Was your peoples existence threatened by neutral countries like Poland, Finland, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania?
Was the existence of Sovietunion, led by a ruthless dictator, more important then the existence of democratic nations with elected leaders?
Was the deportation of millions of non Russian civilians helping the existence of the Sovietunion?
Was the existence of Sovietunion threatened in any way, by any other pact, than the Molotow-Ribbentrop pact which was instigated, it's content dictated, negotiated and executed by the Sovietunion???

Motörhead Remember Me

10-28-2010, 06:21 AM

But the war is over and I don't consider Russians as my foes as long as they respect my country.

The Russians have a very different idea of "respect". For them "respect" is something they constantly demand even though they don't deserve it.
The Russians perceive friendship as something which is acceptable only when they are in command.
Russia is the only nation who is a real threat to a number of European nations because they are still rotten inside.
Make no mistake about that.

Motörhead Remember Me

10-28-2010, 06:25 AM

Are you not familiar about the terms of unconditional surrender Germany was offered? (No offer was made to negotiate for a peace.) .

The Sovietunion demanded unconditional surrender from Finland both in the Winter war and Continuation war.

Finland refused and fought on until the Sovietunion had to settle for peace agreements.

Debaser11

10-28-2010, 09:02 AM

Germany has thrived well since 1945, that's all what I know. And I don't care about hypothetical projects as long as people in power don't actually give a start to them.

Which is largely a testament to the strength and will of the German people. Hypothetical projects? Well maybe the Kyoto Protocol will turn out just be a hypothetical project and nothing else. But we don't know what the future holds for certain. By the same token, a German in 1944/45 would have no idea that the Morgenthau Plan is just hypothetical. They can't predict the future. Knowing the Morgenthau Plan's existence is plenty motivation for them to fight on. You're looking at this through the point of view of someone living in 2010. The Germans had no guarantee that their country would be left in tact if they had just surrendered. Are you incapable of empathizing at even such a basic level? If you want to understand history and the motivations of state actors and nations as a whole properly, it would damn well behoove you to try to put yourself in the mindset of people actually living at the time. But your criticism almost implies that Germany should have just known that it would have survived a surrender to the Allies in the 1940s simply based on information you have about the country's state of being some 60 years onward. How were they to know they were secure as a nation and a people? The evidence at the time did not suggest this was a likely outcome.

And just because Germany is prosperous today hardly justifies Allied aggression. I'm sure many Germans alive in the 1940s would very much hate what their country has become and rightfully fought to prevent such a scenario as we see today. Simply because you feel their loss was something minor compared to the threat Russians faced is pretty meaningless. You're not a German in 1944. Small thought experiment: Pretend America occupies your country in much the same way as it occupies Germany. How would you like it if I said something like "well, Russia shouldn't mind American occupation because it's prosperous today"? Would you not rightfully be upset? Furthermore, do you not think that contemplating such a scenario would not make Russians alive in 1944 sick even you yourself didn't mind such an arrangement?

Many countries which have never lost any war are US puppet states and have US military bases on their territories, so what?
Do you even understand why I mentioned Germany's status as a quasi-puppet state? There was a point. It was not just some little "did you know?" factoid meant to impress you. My point was not that it's surprising that Germany is some puppet, which is what your comment suggests. I agree that that in and of itself is hardly notworthy and is to be expected. The reason I pointed out this fact was that you act like Germany lost without suffering any consequences while the Russians were facing utter doom. Again, the Germans in 1945 could have in no way predicted that Germany would still be on the map today following their defeat (indeed there was plenty of evidence at the time to believe it wouldn't be) and the fact that U.S. occupies it to some degree is indicative of a loss of sovereignty to some degree. Your claim that the Russians had something to lose while Germans did not is utterly myopic. German culture since its defeat has radically changed even if the country still goes by the same name.

To be honest, I don't give a damn about Stalin and Hitler. Both are dead and I'm pretty contented with the fact.

I don't see how "not giving a damn" about either man is a relevant point to our discussion.

I just describe the situation as I see it: there was the war which is considered sacred (you know, like in the song (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Svyaschennaya_Voyna)) and Stalin by the will of destiny was an immanent part of this war, and because Russians are oversensitive about everything pertaining to the war, it's damn hard for society to re-think the whole subject of stalinism once and for all. It's a very sad fact and first of all for Russians themselves.

Every patriotic soul is sensitive about their country's mythologies. That doesn't mean such narratives shouldn't be critically examined. I mean, no one made you click on this thread and participate if it bothers you.

Basil

10-28-2010, 10:08 AM

Was your peoples existence threatened by neutral countries like Poland, Finland, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania?
Was the existence of Sovietunion, led by a ruthless dictator, more important then the existence of democratic nations with elected leaders?
Was the deportation of millions of non Russian civilians helping the existence of the Sovietunion?
Was the existence of Sovietunion threatened in any way, by any other pact, than the Molotow-Ribbentrop pact which was instigated, it's content dictated, negotiated and executed by the Sovietunion???
Get lost, idiot. I'm fed up with your nonsense.The Molotov-Ribbentrop pact was a part of political game. I have nothing to do with it, nor did millions of dead Russian civilians have, the most part of them didn't even know about the existence of such pact. I've never stated that the Soviet Union was ever an ideal state and all its actions were right and justified, but don't try to bullshit me with your "democratic nations". Your Finland held civillians in concentration camps in Karelia where they died as flies and was about to deport them in the German occupation zone where survived were doomed to death anyway. That's your fucking way to fight the tyranny. With concentration camps and deportations.
http://actualhistory.ru/thumbs/zc=1;350x366;/app/var/pub/files/952/konzlager.jpg
Were these children dangerous for you, uh? So don't play innocence, thanks God, Finland didn't have enough manpower to cause us serious harm otherwise I'm afraid we would have drowned in blood considering what the rate of paranoic russophobes like you to the whole population of Finland is. There is nothing extraordinary that a more powerful state is more harmful and dangerous to both its citizens and neighbours (that's why I'm for decentralization and self-management of local areas) but, come on, what makes you totally different after all those concentration camps and proposed deportations? You are like an evil midget not able to harm seriously anyone and therefore always crying "help, help, I'm bullied by that monster".

The Russians have a very different idea of "respect". For them "respect" is something they constantly demand even though they don't deserve it.
The Russians perceive friendship as something which is acceptable only when they are in command.
Russia is the only nation who is a real threat to a number of European nations because they are still rotten inside.
Make no mistake about that.
Good proof that you're nothing more than a village idiot. Adieu.

Every patriotic soul is sensitive about their country's mythologies. That doesn't mean such narratives shouldn't be critically examined. I mean, no one made you click on this thread and participate if it bothers you.
My first post in this thread was
The Soviets behaved 10 times better in Germany except some fucked up bastards than the Germans did in the USSR. Period.
My point is, Germans carried out the policy of intentional genocide on the occupied Soviet territories. The Soviet war crimes in Germany weren't dictated by any declared or undeclared policy directed to intentional extermination of civilians. The Soviet Union lost up to 17 million civilians, whereas the German civilian losses as far as I know are estimated to be around 1,7 m or even less and 500 thousand out of them are the victims of allied air bombings. For me, it's very obvious who behaved better in general. I'm not here to discuss the causes of the war and the potentional post-war future of Germany. Good bye.

Svanhild

10-28-2010, 10:47 AM

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_YsIHHYwMUV8/Rwr2RbSIGfI/AAAAAAAAAKM/Em-1kLodhik/s400/Stalin+Profile.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8c/Ordzhonikidze,_Stalin_and_Mikoyan,_1925.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a1/Old_Russia_-_Yakov_Sverdlov.jpg/414px-Old_Russia_-_Yakov_Sverdlov.jpghttp://www.marxists.org/archive/lunachar/works/silhouet/sverdlov.gif

http://www.cddc.vt.edu/marxists/archive/trotsky/photo/t1900b.jpg

Ever seen a Russian? Clue: there are no pictures of any in this post. :rolleyes:
Don't be ridiculous. Stalin killed all the millions of Russian with his own bare hands, huh? He had thousands over thousands of followers, recipients of orders and executing doers. Russian doers. His party was full of Russians and Russians were the ones who were fighting for Stalin. You're a russophile so you seem to be resistent to judiciousness on this very matter.

My first post in this thread was
[I]The Soviets behaved 10 times better in Germany except some fucked up bastards than the Germans did in the USSR. Period.[/I
And extactly that ia a blatant lie.

The Ripper

10-28-2010, 11:47 AM

Your Finland held civillians in concentration camps in Karelia where they died as flies and was about to deport them in the German occupation zone where survived were doomed to death anyway. That's your fucking way to fight the tyranny. With concentration camps and deportations.
http://actualhistory.ru/thumbs/zc=1;350x366;/app/var/pub/files/952/konzlager.jpg

That picture is staged, btw.

They interred the potentially hostile population, just as was done in most other countries during the war. The relatively high death count is due to the age structure of the inmates (very young and very old, most of the able-bodied population had been evacuated) as well as the fact that all of Finland had periodic food shortages during the war. And its funny you should criticize Finland for their measures, when a large share, if not the majority, of the inmates had only recently been forcefully "re-situated" to Karelia, from Russia, Ukraine, etc, by the Soviet authorities. This was war time. The Soviet regime murdered its own citizens in camps by the million during peace time. Stalin does not have the moral high ground here.

Finland did what they did because they basically had to do it. And that's a consequence of the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact. Russia had attempted to occupy Finland in 1939 and continued to strive for "Finland's liquidation" after the Moscow Peace Treaty 1940. Our fight was a matter of national survival against a completely ruthless regime that sought to expand over our territory.

Motörhead Remember Me

10-28-2010, 12:47 PM

Which is largely a testament to the strength and will of the German people.

And the efficency of the Marshall plan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_Plan)...

All western European countries benefitted from this, except Finland. For Finland this was denied by the Sovietunion.

You see, the open war hostilities were changed to outright bullying of small neighbouring countries. Maybe little Finland still threatened the existence of the wonderful Bolshevik nation?

The Soviet leaders hoped that Finland, left alone and imposed an outrageous war debt of 300 million dollars by the allied (dictated by the Sovietunion), would starv and succumb into chaos and despair and be led into the Warszaw-pact...

We pulled through. That is real strenght and will.

Motörhead Remember Me

10-28-2010, 12:53 PM

That picture is staged, btw.

Yes, that picture is infamous and proven to be 100% fake.
It was taken by a well known Soviet propaganda photographer (a woman, I can't remember her name).

Look at the picture and think for a while; why are the children not malnourished? Why are their faces plush, if they are just being liberated from a concentration camp?

The camps were there, true. But they were far from concentration camps. They were the result of a drastic measure to keep Soviet civilians out of the way of the war. The Finnish army had conquered eastern Karelia and could not have civilians running around the woods.

One more thing to think about. Why did the Soviets refuse the Karelian civilians to be evacuated? Why were they left in a war zone?

The Ripper

10-28-2010, 01:03 PM

Yes, that picture is infamous and proven to be 100% fake.
It was taken by a well known Soviet propaganda photographer (a woman, I can't remember her name).

Look at the picture and think for a while; why are the children not malnourished? Why are their faces plush, if they are just being liberated from a concentration camp?

The camps were there, true. But they were far from concentration camps. They were the result of a drastic measure to keep Soviet civilians out of the way of the war. The Finnish army had conquered eastern Karelia and could not have civilians running around the woods.

One more thing to think about. Why did the Soviets refuse the Karelian civilians to be evacuated? Why were they left in a war zone?

The interred were Russians and some non-Finnics who were seen as politically unreliable. And you might as well call them concentration camps, because the idea was to concentrate most of the non-Finnic population in one place so they could later be re-located. Most of the able-bodied male population had been evacuated into the USSR by the Soviets, regardless of ethnicity.

Motörhead Remember Me

10-28-2010, 01:22 PM

Get lost, idiot. I'm fed up with your nonsense.
I have given sources and you tell me it's nonsense?

It tells me you are an average victim of the Russian lies.

The Molotov-Ribbentrop pact was a part of political game. I have nothing to do with it, nor did millions of dead Russian civilians have, the most part of them didn't even know about the existence of such pact. I've never stated that the Soviet Union was ever an ideal state and all its actions were right and justified, but don't try to bullshit me with your "democratic nations".
You see, it would help if you were not dismissing Soviet/Russian crimes as bullshit and nonsense.
The people who committed these crimes are still heroes in Russia. In a normal country, military parades where rapists and murderers take part would be seriously questioned.
Your burden is real and current since you have not dealt with your past. You are still justifying Soviet warcrimes as "necessary".

Your Finland held civillians in concentration camps in Karelia where they died as flies and was about to deport them in the German occupation zone where survived were doomed to death anyway. That's your fucking way to fight the tyranny. With concentration camps and deportations.

You are not leaning on sources here.

Only Soviet soldiers "of intrest to the wehrmacht" (officers mostly) were exhcanged with Germany for prisoners Finland was intrested in.

As for the deaths, yes 42 000 Soviet soldiers and some civilians died in the camps 90% of them the first winter because of shitty preparations and food shortage. The high number of prisoners was a surprise for the Finnish army as a result of the swift conquest of Karelia, the Soviet soldiers will to surrender to the Finnish army and a desperate measure to remove civilians from the front. Also, the Russians were not considered as "trustworthy people" as they could cause terror behind the lines. So as the attack went on the Russians were sent to camps.These camps prevented the use of local population from the Soviets to use as partisans. So the partisans had come from outside of the Finnish controlled areas.

These things are well documented and sources are official and there have several books published about the subject.

Were these children dangerous for you, uh? So don't play innocence, I'm not, you are.

Finland didn't have enough manpower to cause us serious harm otherwise I'm afraid we would have drowned in blood considering what the rate of paranoic russophobes like you to the whole population of Finland is.
The only thing making us Russophobes are millions and millions of Russians just like you. Blame yourself for not having friends in Finland or anywhere else you wreaked havoc.

come on, what makes you totally different after all those concentration camps and proposed deportations? That Finland never realized any of the things you accuse us of?

You are like an evil midget not able to harm seriously anyone and therefore always crying "help, help, I'm bullied by that monster".
Evil midget..?
LOL, Is Finland a threat to Russia now 2010? No, and was even less so 1939 when your "political play" started.
You triggered our little unwilling, laughable and shitty army into the army which after Wehrmacht have killed most Russians. So sorry....

Good proof that you're nothing more than a village idiot. Adieu.Dasvedanya...

My first post in this thread was
The Soviets behaved 10 times better in Germany except some fucked up bastards than the Germans did in the USSR. Period.
My point is, Germans carried out the policy of intentional genocide on the occupied Soviet territories. The Soviet war crimes in Germany weren't dictated by any declared or undeclared policy directed to intentional extermination of civilians. The Soviet Union lost up to 17 million civilians, whereas the German civilian losses as far as I know are estimated to be around 1,7 m or even less and 500 thousand out of them are the victims of allied air bombings. For me, it's very obvious who behaved better in general. I'm not here to discuss the causes of the war and the potentional post-war future of Germany. Good bye.
Excuse me?
Are you not informed about the "policy of intentional genocide" carried out by Sovietunion?

Ooops, sorry! I forgot for a moment that you received a Russian education: "Do not mention our own crimes. Just lie"

Motörhead Remember Me

10-28-2010, 01:30 PM

Most of the able-bodied male population had been evacuated into the USSR by the Soviets, regardless of ethnicity.

LOL, they were "evacuated" into the Red Army.

The Ripper

10-28-2010, 02:37 PM

LOL, they were "evacuated" into the Red Army.

Naturally.

Basil

10-28-2010, 03:39 PM

That picture is staged, btw.

OK, if you say so it must be so. But I searched the net and didn't find the mention of this photo being staged.

The people who committed these crimes are still heroes in Russia. In a normal country, military parades where rapists and murderers take part would be seriously questioned.

Those who commited crimes aren't heroes. I hope most of them were sentenced by court-martial to what they deserved. Though the average Red Army soldier is a hero. As for the rest: if you don't consider for instance Latvia where the waffen-ss parades take place as a normal country, then yes, you're right.
The book of documents presented to the reader’s attention contains a great number of terrifying illustrations of atrocities committed by the Lettish collaborators in Byelorussia. Many documents fix unattractive facts of cruelty without revealing motives of crimes against humanity. Were they committed only by the command’s order, due to consciousness of impunity and acquisitiveness? Th e Russophobic motives of annihilation Byelorussian village population are refl ected in the report of the officer at large of “the Russian liberation army” (RLA) home front, lieutenant V. Baltinsh, represented to the RLA representative in Riga, colonel V. Pozdnyakov from May 26th, 1944. In that report he states: “In 1944 I came to Morochkovo village. It was burned down completely. In hut cellars the Lettish SS-men were settled. On the day I arrived they should be replaced by a new-come German unit, but I still got to talk in Lettish with a few Lettish SS-men. I asked one of them why there were unburied dead bodies of women, old men and children – hundreds of dead bodies and killed horses. Putrid smell was in the air. Th e reply was: “We killed them in order to exterminate as many Russians as possible”.13

Besides the soldiers of the 15th division Waff en-SS or “Arais`s crew” in the atrocities described above, police battalion members could be involved as at that time they wore both the ancient Lettish uniform and Wehrmacht and Waff en-SS uniform.14 Motivation of the atrocities stated in the report by V. Baltinsh coincides with the evidence of the 19th and 321st Lettish police battalions’ ex-officer Alfred Vitinsh.15 In the transcript of interrogation dated December,15th, 1945 he states that in the end of May, 1944, as he met captain Mezhgravis (the commander of the 321st Lettish police battalion) they happened to talk that there was nowhere to stay overnight. Mezhgravis told him know in response: “Yes, I executed this work in pursuance of the order of the general Jeckeln who had ordered to annihilate everything that was Russian in my way, I burned down over 200 settlements and villages, we also burned down children and old people since we had no time to mess about them, about 10 thousand were killed there, may be more, it is so hard to recall everything. I received the Iron Cross for it. I did it in 1943 and now there is nowhere to stay overnight». And then he added: “Here our battalions and units did a good job, the Russians will recollect the Baltic States. You should not pity them but
annihilate the whole lot of them, the orders of Jeckeln are the order of Führer and we ought to protect their interests».
The complete report of V. Baltinsh:
http://img502.imageshack.us/img502/5069/baltinshreport1.jpg
http://img830.imageshack.us/img830/9239/baltinshreport2.jpg
http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/7461/baltinshreport3.jpg

You are still justifying Soviet warcrimes as "necessary".

You lie. I have never justified any crime as necesarry. And the majority of my countrymen do share the same opinion with me.

The only thing making us Russophobes are millions and millions of Russians just like you. Blame yourself for not having friends in Finland or anywhere else you wreaked havoc.

Friends in Finland? Not a big loss.

The Ripper

10-28-2010, 03:54 PM

Galina Sankon ottama valokuva venäläisistä lapsista suomalaisella siirtoleirillä sen jälkeen kun suomalaiset olivat vetäytyneet alueelta.[1]

1. Laine, Antti 1982: Suur-Suomen kahdet kasvot. Itä-Karjalan siviiliväestön asema suomalaisessa miehityshallinnossa 1941–1944, kuvaliite. Helsinki: Otava.

Translation: The picture of Russian children in Finnish internment camp taken by Galina Sanko was taken after the Finns had retreated from the area.

Pallantides

10-28-2010, 04:37 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kola_Norwegians

In 1930, the fishermen were gathered into a kolkhoz "Poljarnaja Zvezda" (Norwegian: Polarstjernen; Polaris). Beginning in 1936, persecution by the Soviet authorities under Joseph Stalin hit the small community hard. At least 15 were shot after summary trials, or starved to death in Soviet labour camps. It is alleged that some were denounced, sentenced and executed for having talked in Norwegian

On 23 June 1940 Lavrenty Beria of the NKVD ordered the Murmansk Oblast, encompassing the entire Kola Peninsula, to be cleaned of "foreign nationals". As a result, the entire Norwegian population was deported for resettlement in the Karelo-Finnish SSR. Soon they had to move from there too, because of pressures caused by the Finnish invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941. In spring 1942, a large proportion died of starvation and malnutrition.

Osweo

10-28-2010, 04:57 PM

Don't be ridiculous. Stalin killed all the millions of Russian with his own bare hands, huh? He had thousands over thousands of followers, recipients of orders and executing doers. Russian doers. His party was full of Russians and Russians were the ones who were fighting for Stalin.
The capability of Russians to CHANGE the regime in the 30s was FAR LESS than yours to change the present German one in the present. Can you understand now?

The reasons why YOU CANNOT change your state's disastrous social and ethnic policies NOW, were active TENFOLD in the RSFSR of the time. The difference is, you can at least spread sedition on the internet. Had you done the equivalent in Russia, one of those delightful gentlemen in the photos I posted would have overseen something truly disgusting done to you. Verstehen?

And the proportion of Russians in the Organs in the worst stages of the Terror was far less than you seem to think. Can you imagine how many spiteful Jews, Latvians, Caucasians etc. there were in the Russian Empire, who would queue up to get the chance to torture, beat, shoot and lord it over Russians? THink about it.

You're a russophile so you seem to be resistent to judiciousness on this very matter.
I am a Russophile. Strange result of having lived with them for a few years. You might catch the same syndrome yourself, given such exposure. :rolleyes:

The only thing making us Russophobes are millions and millions of Russians just like you.
You NEED Russians to be like how you characterise them there. You are unable to compute when faced with a decent Russian who HAS admitted some atrocities took place AND condemned them. You only know the script to deal with the stupidest Russians you occasionally find on the net, and it's embarrassing to see how you interact with those like Basil here. :rolleyes2:

I have seen NO attempt to justify Russian warcrimes here, but just to put them in the correct historical perspective. Imagine the lifestory of the average Red Army soldier. Imagine a childhood in Revolution and Civil War, growing up at the height of the Terror, Collectivisations, Purges... Imagine what he'd SEEN on the road to Berlin, imagine what EXTRA things the propaganda machine had told him. It's no wonder that the savage erupted in some of them, once the lands of the genocides themselves had been reached.

Great blame lies upon the officer corps of the time for not controlling the mayhem. But even here we can see why this was difficult to put into operation. A Red Army soldier in Berlin 1945 is in the FREEST time of his life. To step in and try to control the excesses this was associated with would have been potentially very dangerous. Many remembered how the soldiers of the Imperial Army had revolted in 1917, you see.

And there WERE evil bastards who were throwing oil on the fire too. Ehrenburg needs no introduction here. :(

To people like Motorhead, I ask, What do you want Russians to say and do? A war to save the very existence, culturally, politically EVEN BIOLOGICALLY, of your people is a Holy War. Stupid antagonistic sneering attitudes in tackling these matters are hardly going to do any good. But you don't WANT to make progress, do you? You aren't intent on solving the issues, or even actually addressing your opponants - just PLAYING TO THE GALLERY. Your mission is just to blacken Russian reputations. It's dull and tiresome, and does NOBODY any good.

I'm sure there are very tragic personal stories that motivate this, but who on the Continent HASN'T got such a story to tell? :(

The Ripper

10-28-2010, 05:48 PM

OK, if you say so it must be so. But I searched the net and didn't find the mention of this photo being staged.

I'm not really surprised.

Don

10-28-2010, 06:27 PM

http://www.cddc.vt.edu/marxists/archive/trotsky/photo/t1900b.jpg

Poor Trotsky.

Killed by a secret agent of the NKVD, the spaniard Ramón Mercader.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/40/112329038_ecd9d6d15e.jpg
Notice here the Spaniard touching gently his cojones.

Glups...
just in here -> :mmmm:
http://www.jornada.unam.mx/2005/04/22/fotos/a56n1cul.jpg

Debaser11

10-28-2010, 08:17 PM

Maybe maybe maybe. Fact is that the Morgenthau Plan WAS seen as the crazy fucked up madness that it was. It was never going to happen. Stalin probably wouldn't have allowed it anyway.

But that is all beside the point, really. That "maybe maybe maybe" means a hell of a lot to a German living in 1944/45.

Germany lost. Germans are still here. They've been fucked over, but who hasn't recently?

Germans are still here but that's not thanks to Russia. And I don't know what you're implying here. Should they not have defended themselves simply because you estimate that a lot of people are getting fucked over these days?

What would have happened if Germany had won??? :eek:

Certainly nothing worse than what happened when the Russians won and Eastern Europe was subjected to half a century of horrors. I'd take Vichy France over any Stalinist domain. Genocides happened in great numbers behind Soviet lines so even buying this Jewish/Allied-motivated interpretation of what the Nazi regime was (which is as far as I can tell, largely fiction), I'd still have taken my chances with them.

It wouldn't have been pretty, I'm sure. Perhaps there would have been a rethink on all that Untermensch stuff, but how likely do you think that would have been? :ohwell:

I don't believe there is sound evidence that such an ideology would have led to the Hollywood versions of Auschwitz or Buchenwald. Most of the evidence points toward efforts to massively deport these peoples. Again, I'd take my chances with those policies over efforts the Soviets made to KEEP conquered peoples inside their domain using a hellish wall of death.

My first post in this thread was
The Soviets behaved 10 times better in Germany except some fucked up bastards than the Germans did in the USSR. Period.

I know. I think that's hogwash.

My point is, Germans carried out the policy of intentional genocide on the occupied Soviet territories.

Again, as someone who has tried to study this war in some depth, I ask you for your evidence. You have as much evidence for a German policy of "international genoicide" as I would for a Soviet policy of "international genocide" were I to make such an outlandish claim. Some text lifted from a non-primary source is not evidence, either. And even that text that you tried to pawn off as some sort of evidence for genocide never mentioned any policy. In every army, there are roguish thugs who break protocol and act out. We have similiar thugs in the U.S. army doing that just a year or two ago in Iraq. That hardly means we have a policy of international genocide. In fact, it's laughable you thought that citation somehow added weight to your charge against the German nation. Why don't you just quote Elie Wiesel's Night while you're at it? (He talks about Germans using babies as target practice; there's no evidence that this ever happened and most anyone who studies WWII honestly realizes he's a total fraud.)

The Soviet war crimes in Germany weren't dictated by any declared or undeclared policy directed to intentional extermination of civilians.

Neither was any German policy or behavior. The fact that you use a suspect word that Zionists the world over want you to use like "extermination" over actually giving me any evidence for your claim of such German policies speaks volumes about your bias. If Nethanyahu couldn't provide any good evidence for German POLICIES of extermination (declared or otherwise) on the U.N. floor when addressing Ahmadinejad, then it makes me skeptical that you can dig up anything, either. Hint: Mass killings, although terrible, do not equal policies of genocide. If that were the case, believe me, I have plenty of evidence to accuse the Red Army of the very same charge. Mass killings, though not really justified in most cases, are a part of war.

The Soviet Union lost up to 17 million civilians, whereas the German civilian losses as far as I know are estimated to be around 1,7 m or even less and 500 thousand out of them are the victims of allied air bombings.

Quantifying death to determine the morality of either side is ridiculous. Is a mass murderer who kills fifty-three men to escape a crowded area a better person than a mass murderer who has to kill sixty-three men to accomplish the same goal? I mean, trying to answer such a question in terms of quantifying body counts is ridiculous. You're just applying that type of logic on a larger scale the way you're trying to turn this into some quantification game. And the higher Russian losses don't automatically tell me that the Germans were more brutal. You take a blank statisitic like that and just interpret it in a way that most aligns with some emotional view you have about the war, as far as I can tell.

More people live in Russia than in Germany. It's natural that their numbers are going to be higher. It's completely beside the point even if you want to lowball German civilian deaths.
I know your claim was about civilians, but the Germans had a better army and a smaller population. It's natural that they would inflict more casualties on the Russians than vise versa especially considering how long the Germans were able to hold out. The Russians won because of their sheer numbers and resources. In a horrible state such as war, I would expect the side with more civilians and crummier logistics to suffer more losses. That's about as evident as observing the sun rising in the east.

And let's talk about the Red Army a bit because your whole claim is that they behaved better. Yes, they, like the civilian population lost more men than the Germany army. I mean, "duh," the larger army that's less trained will inherit heavier losses. In fact, Russia had such a mass of people within its ranks compared to the German side that human shields were a common Russian blitz tactic. Many Russian officiers ordered any men seen retreating or hesistating in their advance to be shot. If they did this to their own people, it's not hard for me to imagine the horrors they readily inflicted on the German masses civilian or otherwise which I doubt was "ten times better" than German behavior.

As Peasant also said, many of those casualties also staved to death. (Starvation is a common feature of war.) The Allied side should understand this perfectly well considering how their bombing of German rail lines, highways, and communications towers brought on a typhus epidemic that's shamelessly used as "evidence" of a massive German plot to kill off whole peoples.

For me, it's very obvious who behaved better in general. I'm not here to discuss the causes of the war and the potentional post-war future of Germany. Good bye.

It's only obvious to you because you're biased as hell, as far as I can tell. Furthermore, you're the one that took the conversation in such directions concerning Germany's status. All I've been doing is quoting your own words back to you and explaining why I think they are either unsubstantiated or total nonsense. You were the one who trotted out the ridiculous claim that Russians were fighting for their existence while Germans weren't. So forgive me for going into some detail (something you don't seem to appreciate) to attempt to explain why such a view is hardly fair.

...............

Russian soldiers raped and murdered German civilians in the thousands. I don't think it can be denied. It most certainly cannot be justified.

I'm afraid it can be understood to some extent, though. Humans can be evil things, especially after one of the worst wars ever. :( Russian soldiers believed that their very people had been in danger of utter annihilation, and when the boot was on the other foot, they took revenge. :(

I don't doubt that the most disgusting outrages imaginable were perpetrated, but I do have some reservations about how widespread this sort of thing was. Perhaps I'm being naive there. I don't know, and don't think we ever will really, considering the nature of the sources.

Ekh, what a century.

Amen.

Osweo

10-28-2010, 11:38 PM

@ Debaser

Lebensraum.

A central plank of policy since those days in the cell in Landsberg.

Impossible without eradication of the previous inhabitants.

Poland would have been simply wiped off the map. Russia too? Seems like it. Leaving any sort of rump after doing something like taking all the western provinces seems dangerous, so I suppose the whole lot would have been taken.

It's impossible to deny that German ideology was deeply married to the notion of the Untermensch. It's naive to think this wouldn't have played a role in a post-Sieg Europa.

The Soviet model of conquest had already been demonstrated before the War. The intelligentsia was slaughtered, upper class annihilated. BUT the workers and peasants were given some sort of Sovietised national culture, at least. Germans never faced utter annihilation at Stalin's hands. What they did face was horrific, but a future of sorts was still offered - a glimmer not afforded to Poles or Russians in the Ostplan.

'The plans are not certainly known!!!'
- Sure, you can tell from Mein Kampf what sort of thing they would involve.

Eldritch

10-29-2010, 12:26 AM

The Soviets behaved 10 times better in Germany except some fucked up bastards than the Germans did in the USSR. Period.

Fuck you.

Get lost, idiot.

Memo @ Motor, Debaser and Svanhild:

Russians, even generally intelligent and knowledgeable ones, are not capable of respectful disagreement or civilized debate over the internet. They let their emotions get the better of them every time, and then descend into primitive ad hominems and strawman arguments. Forget it.

Osweo

10-29-2010, 12:44 AM

Memo @ Motor, Debaser and Svanhild:

Russians, even generally intelligent and knowledgeable ones, are not capable of respectful disagreement or civilized debate over the internet. They let their emotions get the better of them every time, and then descend into primitive ad hominems and strawman arguments. Forget it.

The first example cited of Basil's text to show a swear word was quite merited in the context. Rapists are obviously 'fucked up bastards', these are exactly the words I would use.

The other two are responses to Motor's typical antagonistic and dismissive attitudes. :rolleyes: This describes Motor very well too;
not capable of respectful disagreement or civilized debate over the internet.

I hate doing this in threads made to remember the German dead. Those deserve to be commemorated somewhere, but it always turns into a shit-flinging match like this. :(

Guapo

10-29-2010, 01:00 AM

The first example cited of Basil's text to show a swear word was quite merited in the context. Rapists are obviously 'fucked up bastards', these are exactly the words I would use.

The other two are responses to Motor's typical antagonistic and dismissive attitudes. :rolleyes: This describes Motor very well too;

:clap:

poiuytrewq0987

10-29-2010, 01:04 AM

http://www.cddc.vt.edu/marxists/archive/trotsky/photo/t1900b.jpg

Are we sure that he is not Tonsor's great grandfather?

Eldritch

10-29-2010, 01:08 AM

The first example cited of Basil's text to show a swear word was quite merited in the context. Rapists are obviously 'fucked up bastards', these are exactly the words I would use.

Actually what I was objecting to was him pointing out something obvious (that soldiers who rape defenseless civilians are fucked-up bastards) as a way of belittling the whole issue. As if rapes are OK, as long as they are committed by "some" (how many fucked-up bastards do there have to be so that they are no longer "some", but a hell of a lot?) fucked-up etc.

Aemma

10-29-2010, 01:18 AM

Debaser11

10-29-2010, 01:23 AM

@ Debaser

Lebensraum.

A central plank of policy since those days in the cell in Landsberg.

Impossible without eradication of the previous inhabitants.

Simply because Hitler pontificates in his book that if Germans are to expand it would likely have to occur from acquiring lands in the East, hardly implies that Nazi Germany had a policy of eradicating whole groups of people. That's complete news to me that a nation is genocidal just because a leader talks about hypothetical possibilities for expansion in a book he had written years before World War II. Again, find me an outlined policy or written order that explicitly talks about eradicating a group (and not Jewish Bolshevism as a political force) as opposed to relocating them instead of citing Mein Kampf.

Poland would have been simply wiped off the map. Russia too? Seems like it. Leaving any sort of rump after doing something like taking all the western provinces seems dangerous, so I suppose the whole lot would have been taken.

Poland, East Germany and the rest of Eastern Europe existed in name only. I see little difference except that we know how horrible the Russians were during their half century long reign. We can only wildy speculate about how the Germans would have handled their spoils over the same amount of time. We do know that relocation was probably most likely. I'd take that over being penned up in a hellhole like Stalinist Russia.

It's impossible to deny that German ideology was deeply married to the notion of the Untermensch. It's naive to think this wouldn't have played a role in a post-Sieg Europa.

Sure, but "played a role" can mean many things. I want Pakis, Arabs, and Africans out of the U.K. so whites there can have a larger and healthier living space to flourish spiritually and culturally while avoiding extinction, but does that imply I want all these nonwhites thrown into gas chambers?

The Soviet model of conquest had already been demonstrated before the War. The intelligentsia was slaughtered, upper class annihilated. BUT the workers and peasants were given some sort of Sovietised national culture, at least. Germans never faced utter annihilation at Stalin's hands. What they did face was horrific, but a future of sorts was still offered - a glimmer not afforded to Poles or Russians in the Ostplan.

The Western Allies didn't mitigate Stalin at all? Again, were Germans supposed to somehow know that they would be spared in any shape or form in 1944? Let's not kid anyone, the mindset on both sides was kill or be killed. And rightfully so.

'The plans are not certainly known!!!'
- Sure, you can tell from Mein Kampf what sort of thing they would involve.

We also know the Poles were looking to expand westward as were the Soviets. The Poles had no trouble gobbling up part of Czechoslovakia afterall. Nor did they hesistate to expel tons of Germans in newly acquired lands after the first world war. Why the huge moral outrage when Germany or Japan (though I concede that Japan was distinctly barbaric on a level that rivals the Mongols) play the same games the U.S., Great Britain and Russia had been playing for the previous 100 years or so prior? Why is their expansion (even if unjust on some level like most expansion) on almost a priori grounds linked to genocide?

Incidentally, the Jews in Russia were probably spared from terrible mass liquidation themselves by Stalin's sudden death in 1953.

Motörhead Remember Me

10-29-2010, 06:20 AM

OK, if you say so it must be so. But I searched the net and didn't find the mention of this photo being staged
Galina Sanko (thanks Riippumatto).
Profession; War correspondant and photographer. Made also propagandafilms
Task: Telling the Soviet truth, the pravda.

Those who commited crimes aren't heroes. I hope most of them were sentenced by court-martial to what they deserved.
I agree. But they weren't court martialed, and certainly not the one's ordering the crimes.

Though the average Red Army soldier is a hero.
Perhaps every soldier fighting for a cause is a hero.

As for the rest: if you don't consider for instance Latvia where the waffen-ss parades take place as a normal country, then yes, you're right.I don't know about this. Please tell me more.

The book of documents presented to the reader’s attention contains a great number of terrifying illustrations of atrocities committed by the Lettish collaborators in Byelorussia. Many documents fix unattractive facts of cruelty without revealing motives of crimes against humanity. Were they committed only by the command’s order, due to consciousness of impunity and acquisitiveness? Th e Russophobic motives of annihilation Byelorussian village population are refl ected in the report of the officer at large of “the Russian liberation army” (RLA) home front, lieutenant V. Baltinsh, represented to the RLA representative in Riga, colonel V. Pozdnyakov from May 26th, 1944. In that report he states: “In 1944 I came to Morochkovo village. It was burned down completely. In hut cellars the Lettish SS-men were settled. On the day I arrived they should be replaced by a new-come German unit, but I still got to talk in Lettish with a few Lettish SS-men. I asked one of them why there were unburied dead bodies of women, old men and children – hundreds of dead bodies and killed horses. Putrid smell was in the air. Th e reply was: “We killed them in order to exterminate as many Russians as possible”.13

Besides the soldiers of the 15th division Waff en-SS or “Arais`s crew” in the atrocities described above, police battalion members could be involved as at that time they wore both the ancient Lettish uniform and Wehrmacht and Waff en-SS uniform.14 Motivation of the atrocities stated in the report by V. Baltinsh coincides with the evidence of the 19th and 321st Lettish police battalions’ ex-officer Alfred Vitinsh.15 In the transcript of interrogation dated December,15th, 1945 he states that in the end of May, 1944, as he met captain Mezhgravis (the commander of the 321st Lettish police battalion) they happened to talk that there was nowhere to stay overnight. Mezhgravis told him know in response: “Yes, I executed this work in pursuance of the order of the general Jeckeln who had ordered to annihilate everything that was Russian in my way, I burned down over 200 settlements and villages, we also burned down children and old people since we had no time to mess about them, about 10 thousand were killed there, may be more, it is so hard to recall everything. I received the Iron Cross for it. I did it in 1943 and now there is nowhere to stay overnight». And then he added: “Here our battalions and units did a good job, the Russians will recollect the Baltic States. You should not pity them but
annihilate the whole lot of them, the orders of Jeckeln are the order of Führer and we ought to protect their interests».
The complete report of V. Baltinsh:
http://img502.imageshack.us/img502/5069/baltinshreport1.jpg
http://img830.imageshack.us/img830/9239/baltinshreport2.jpg
http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/7461/baltinshreport3.jpg
Intresting, thank you for the source.

You lie. Motörhead Remember Me never lies.

I have never justified any crime as necesarry. "You" as in Russians in general.

And the majority of my countrymen do share the same opinion with me.The majority of your countrymen have not been told the truth. Unfortunately. And this is what it boils down to, Russia is continuing to fortify the great myths and lies of the Sovietunion. Deal with them!

Friends in Finland? Not a big loss.
Agreed. We are few and neglectable. But, do you have friends anywhere?

Motörhead Remember Me

10-29-2010, 06:30 AM

I think I should have closed this thread when it first started.

Ease up all of you. It's a discussion forum. Discuss and leave the personal attacks aside.

Happy now celti? Useless thread that just serves to create further division among us. Nice going.

What are you on about? There's a healthy discussion here about exposing national myths.
The root for antagonism is the staunch believe in nationalistic bullshit and exposing the myths and discuss them is a way to create better understanding among us.
I for example think Basil is a smart guy and is capable of reading the sources and maybe, just maybe, Basil will one day say:
"I'm proud to be Russian but I'm ashamed of a lot of the things that my people have done to other people and I acknowledge that. I also know that other people acknowledge what Russians have gone through. I accept that Ukes, Finns and Balts are proud people too and they have all reasons in the world to be as proud as I am. And yes, I have a new Finnish friend in Motörhead Remember Me. Actually we took a few beers in St Pete and talked about tits and arses ..."

Curtis24

10-29-2010, 06:42 AM

nvm this thread just depresses the hell out of me.

The Ripper

10-29-2010, 06:43 AM

Yes, I think very few will deny the suffering that Russians and other peoples in the USSR went through, thanks to their leaders and the leaders of others. But Russians, at least nationalist Russians, would do well to leave that Soviet nostalgia (and propaganda) behind. The Soviets were justified in defending themselves, but their part in WW II started before 1941. The history of the USSR itself is a prolonged tragedy of epic proportions, and not just for Russians, but all the peoples and countries they annexed and ruled over. If we are expected to feel sympathy for the Russian victims, it would be nice if the present day Soviet nostalgics would also acknowledge that they caused a whole lot of suffering to undeserving nations themselves. I have no interest in playing the villain, a fascist white bandit, in this mythical epic between good and evil, as I'm sure Estonians and the Balts do not like the epithet of "nazis," afforded to them because they did not welcome the "liberation" of their countries. :coffee:

Motörhead Remember Me

10-29-2010, 07:10 AM

I am a Russophile. It's a form af satanism.:D

You NEED Russians to be like how you characterise them there. You are unable to compute when faced with a decent Russian who HAS admitted some atrocities took place AND condemned them. Osweo. I have, believ it or not, met so called "decent Russians". In fact I think that Russians as a people are mostly decent and I don't dislike any Ilja or Natalya just because they are Russian. I strike up conversation with Russians about weather, economy and family and I know they are no different from me. But, they have all been people who left Russia for a reason. And the reasons they have told makes me wonder if not the hardest critics of Russia are the Russians themselves.
What I am highly critical about is that Russia today is only a transformation of the Sovietunion into a cold capitalistic country which rest on the history of the Sovietunion.

Russians must deal with their past. Don't you agree with me?

I have seen NO attempt to justify Russian warcrimes here, but just to put them in the correct historical perspective. Imagine the lifestory of the average Red Army soldier. Imagine a childhood in Revolution and Civil War, growing up at the height of the Terror, Collectivisations, Purges... Imagine what he'd SEEN on the road to Berlin, imagine what EXTRA things the propaganda machine had told him. It's no wonder that the savage erupted in some of them, once the lands of the genocides themselves had been reached. Trust me, I'm a great fan of first hand Soviet soldier eyewitness accounts. In fact I've read a few...

To people like Motorhead, I ask, What do you want Russians to say and do? A war to save the very existence, culturally, politically EVEN BIOLOGICALLY, of your people is a Holy War. Stupid antagonistic sneering attitudes in tackling these matters are hardly going to do any good. But you don't WANT to make progress, do you? You aren't intent on solving the issues, or even actually addressing your opponants - just PLAYING TO THE GALLERY. Your mission is just to blacken Russian reputations. It's dull and tiresome, and does NOBODY any good.

Are you for real, Osweo? The WWII was NOT a war of existence for the Russians/Soviets.
It was a war of conquest between to expansive dictatorships!!
Nazi Germany and Sovietunion divided Eastern Europe between themselves. Then they dealt with each other.
Don't you get it?

As for understanding a desperate fight for survival; My people, my grandfathers and my great uncles, have fought those "HOLY WARS" where our existence was at stake and it has always been a result of the Russian/Soviet aggression!!
What I want Russians to do is to openly call for history revision. Revise the lies and expose the truth. There are still sad fucks in Russia who think Finland attacked and caused the Winter war against the peace loving mother of all workers paradise!!

Motörhead Remember Me

10-29-2010, 07:18 AM

The other two are responses to Motor's typical antagonistic and dismissive attitudes. :rolleyes: This describes Motor very well too;
(

Yes. I'm really nasty.

Wicked.

Motörhead Remember Me

10-29-2010, 07:24 AM

Just for the record. I see that debaser has several points but I disagree with the "lack of evidence" of German war crimes.

I'm no fan of nazism or communism. I like Hardcore.

Basil

10-29-2010, 05:54 PM

Again, as someone who has tried to study this war in some depth, I ask you for your evidence. You have as much evidence for a German policy of "international genoicide" as I would for a Soviet policy of "international genocide" were I to make such an outlandish claim. Some text lifted from a non-primary source is not evidence, either. And even that text that you tried to pawn off as some sort of evidence for genocide never mentioned any policy. In every army, there are roguish thugs who break protocol and act out. We have similiar thugs in the U.S. army doing that just a year or two ago in Iraq. That hardly means we have a policy of international genocide. In fact, it's laughable you thought that citation somehow added weight to your charge against the German nation. Why don't you just quote Elie Wiesel's Night while you're at it? (He talks about Germans using babies as target practice; there's no evidence that this ever happened and most anyone who studies WWII honestly realizes he's a total fraud.)
Neither was any German policy or behavior. The fact that you use a suspect word that Zionists the world over want you to use like "extermination" over actually giving me any evidence for your claim of such German policies speaks volumes about your bias. If Nethanyahu couldn't provide any good evidence for German POLICIES of extermination (declared or otherwise) on the U.N. floor when addressing Ahmadinejad, then it makes me skeptical that you can dig up anything, either. Hint: Mass killings, although terrible, do not equal policies of genocide. If that were the case, believe me, I have plenty of evidence to accuse the Red Army of the very same charge. Mass killings, though not really justified in most cases, are a part of war.

Have you ever heard about Generalplan Ost? Oh, wait, since you're a holocaust denier I have no chances to succeed with it as a proof.

The Russians won because of their sheer numbers and resources.

The total ratio of Soviet to Nazi military losses on the Eastern front was 1,3:1. Not a stuff of sheer numbers for sure.
Notice, 28% and 57% of all Soviet losses were incurred in 1941 and 1942 respectively – the period when the Soviet army was still relatively disorganized and immobile, whereas for the Germans the balance was roughly the opposite with losses concentrated in 1944-45.

In fact, Russia had such a mass of people within its ranks compared to the German side that human shields were a common Russian blitz tactic.

Human shields? It sounds horrible, but to be honest I have no idea what it means. I've come across this text in wikipedia:
After World War II it was claimed by German SS general Gottlob Berger that there was a plan, proposed by the Luftwaffe and approved by Adolf Hitler, to set up special POW camps for captured airmen of the Royal Air Force and the United States Army Air Force in large German cities, to act as human shields against their bombing raids. Berger realised that this would contravene the Geneva Convention and argued that there was not enough barbed wire - as a result this plan was not implemented.[2][3] However, the practice was widespread in the war on the Eastern front, where the Wehrmacht used civilians ahead of their troops in an effort to deter Soviet attacks.

Is it what you meant?

Many Russian officiers ordered any men seen retreating or hesistating in their advance to be shot. If they did this to their own people, it's not hard for me to imagine the horrors they readily inflicted on the German masses civilian or otherwise which I doubt was "ten times better" than German behavior.

The Feldgendarmerie by the end of the war executed a great deal of retreating German soldiers and deserters as well.

Memo @ Motor, Debaser and Svanhild:

Russians, even generally intelligent and knowledgeable ones, are not capable of respectful disagreement or civilized debate over the internet. They let their emotions get the better of them every time, and then descend into primitive ad hominems and strawman arguments. Forget it.
You're right, Eldritch, we Russians are all the same, that's why nobody likes us (what a pity). It must have something to do with genetics or geoanomaly.

What are you on about? There's a healthy discussion here about exposing national myths.
The root for antagonism is the staunch believe in nationalistic bullshit and exposing the myths and discuss them is a way to create better understanding among us.
I for example think Basil is a smart guy and is capable of reading the sources and maybe, just maybe, Basil will one day say:
"I'm proud to be Russian but I'm ashamed of a lot of the things that my people have done to other people and I acknowledge that. I also know that other people acknowledge what Russians have gone through. I accept that Ukes, Finns and Balts are proud people too and they have all reasons in the world to be as proud as I am. And yes, I have a new Finnish friend in Motörhead Remember Me. Actually we took a few beers in St Pete and talked about tits and arses ..."

This all would make a sense if you debunked national myths of others with the same zeal as you show exposing the Russian ones. This thread is the best example of nationalistic provocation from the very first post but you prefer to be blind about it, the message is simple: 'oh, look at these innocent victims, what brutal beasts we had to fight against if they did such things'. But it's ok with you. I'm sure, in a similar thread about the victims of the nazis, you wouldn't miss your chance to appear out of the blue and recall every possible crime of the soviets. Maybe I will take one day a few beers with a Finn, but not with you for sure. I don't feel this discussion is a way to create better understanding and I regret participating in it.

Eldritch

10-29-2010, 07:10 PM

You're right, Eldritch, we Russians are all the same, that's why nobody likes us (what a pity). It must have something to do with genetics or geoanomaly.

Huh? I don't know if all Russians are "the same" or not, of from whose perspective, but I at least like them/you, at least the ones I've met in person. All I was saying is that in my experience internet debates with Russians don't work out.

Don

10-29-2010, 08:10 PM

The total ratio of Soviet to Nazi military losses on the Eastern front was 1,3:1. Not a stuff of sheer numbers for sure.
Notice, 28% and 57% of all Soviet losses were incurred in 1941 and 1942 respectively – the period when the Soviet army was still relatively disorganized and immobile, whereas for the Germans the balance was roughly the opposite with losses concentrated in 1944-45.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Krasny_Bor

Crossbow

10-29-2010, 08:12 PM

I don't doubt that the most disgusting outrages imaginable were perpetrated, but I do have some reservations about how widespread this sort of thing was. Perhaps I'm being naive there. I don't know, and don't think we ever will really, considering the nature of the sources.

Ekh, what a century.

Why do you have reservations about how widespread the mass rapes, torture and violence were? Because the nazi-crimes got full attention year after year, and allied crimes simply did not exist?

Debaser11

10-30-2010, 08:30 AM

*edit

Debaser11

10-30-2010, 12:58 PM

:rolleyes2:
Have you ever heard about Generalplan Ost? Oh, wait, since you're a holocaust denier I have no chances to succeed with it as a proof.

Uh, yeah. I have heard of that plan. It's an Allied BS justification for the wholesale slaughter of the German state (including the bombing of civilian targets like Berlin and Dresden). So? What's your point?

"Nearly all the wartime documentation on Generalplan Ost was deliberately destroyed shortly before Germany's defeat in May 1945.[2][3] Thus, no copies of the plan were found after the war among the documents in German archives. Apart from Ehlich's testimony, there are several documents which refer to this plan or are supplements to it. Although no copies of the actual document have survived, most of the plan's essential elements have been reconstructed from related memos, abstracts and other ancillary documents."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generalplan_Ost

How convenient. A massive undertaking by any stretch of the imagination and not one tangible shred of evidence aside from some dubious testimony at the mercy of Allied kangaroo courts. Surely in light of both the lack of material evidence as well as the circumstances surrounding such testimony, you can forgive my healthy skepticism regarding the true nature of this policy. Afterall, it's not like any of the Allied countries have ever resorted to torture *cough* Hess *cough* to obtain testimony that they wanted to parade at political show trials.

Nothing explicitly (or arguably implicitly) has been found within any German documents regarding genocide.

Do you just want to keep spitting out Allied talking points (aka wartime propaganda) like a child?

Eight million Ukranians starved to death prior to the German invasion of the Soviet Union. And you go on about some dubiously understood plan? Wha what? :rolleyes2:

The total ratio of Soviet to Nazi military losses on the Eastern front was 1,3:1. Not a stuff of sheer numbers for sure.

What?

Notice, 28% and 57% of all Soviet losses were incurred in 1941 and 1942 respectively – the period when the Soviet army was still relatively disorganized and immobile, whereas for the Germans the balance was roughly the opposite with losses concentrated in 1944-45.

So? Is this not common sense? What's you point? This was not an argument about who had the stronger military might. Is it not obvious that a country would suffer more casualities when caught off guard versus switching to a wartime economy with two key allies pitching in? :rolleyes2:

Human shields? It sounds horrible, but to be honest I have no idea what it means. I've come across this text in wikipedia:
After World War II it was claimed by German SS general Gottlob Berger that there was a plan, proposed by the Luftwaffe and approved by Adolf Hitler, to set up special POW camps for captured airmen of the Royal Air Force and the United States Army Air Force in large German cities, to act as human shields against their bombing raids. Berger realised that this would contravene the Geneva Convention and argued that there was not enough barbed wire - as a result this plan was not implemented.[2][3] However, the practice was widespread in the war on the Eastern front, where the Wehrmacht used civilians ahead of their troops in an effort to deter Soviet attacks.

Is it what you meant?

Actually I was thinking of something more along the lines of the following:

"For Zhukov it was a moment of triumph. For the first time, his ambitions had been realized: he had devised a solid battle plan on the spot, and the vozhd had unequivocally approved it. Strategically, the arcs looked like a major coup, the stuff of military history textbooks. Conceived on the fly, they nonetheless made sense. Using remnants of the Western Front troops as a human shield, he would place the reserves along a major natural obstacle and, he hoped, stall the unchecked progress of enemy panzer corps."

http://books.google.com/books?id=QFk5BaDyhkQC&pg=PA188&lpg=PA188&dq=Soviet+front+lines,+WWII,+human+shields&source=bl&ots=7oGSkXkDnq&sig=nYJmHE7WLFSXg7GuHpouot4o5UE&hl=en&ei=ZjDLTI-6NML98AaBwNCIAQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8&ved=0CCsQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q&f=false

"The military turning point of the war in Europe comes with the Soviet victory at Stalingrad in the winter of 1942-43. On 28 July, Stalin orders the Soviet troops to take "not one step backwards". Front line forces are flanked by second lines under orders to shoot down any soldier who tries to flee. When the German forces laying siege to the city are encircled and trapped by a Soviet counteroffensive, Hitler refuses to allow them to attempt an escape. They surrender on 2 February 1943."

http://hrsbstaff.ednet.ns.ca/mwebb/stalin.htm

And for good measure, this should also be considered when factoring in Soviet civilian deaths:

"He [as in Stalin] also announces that a "scorched earth" policy will be employed to deny the Germans 'a single engine, or a single railway truck, and not a pound of bread nor a pint of oil.'"

http://hrsbstaff.ednet.ns.ca/mwebb/stalin.htm

Because nothing the Soviets themselves did contributed to the death toll of their own people.:rolleyes2: Oh, did I mention the Ukraine before? :)

The Feldgendarmerie by the end of the war executed a great deal of retreating German soldiers and deserters as well.

:rolleyes: Of course. But this is a complete red herring to our argument. Did I ever claim that the German Wehrmacht behaved "10 times better" than the Red Army? :rolleyes2: Again, did you forget the original comment that sparked our little exchange? You made the outlandish positive claim that you can't defend. I spoke out of my ass in no such way.

And believe it or not, I actually admire Russian culture a great deal. I greatly appreciate Russian authors like Dostoyevsky and Tolstoy (among the many great Russian writers) and even consider the old Soviet national anthem to be one of the most beautiful pieces of music ever penned. But I at least try to be objective when weighing the evidence concerning questions about World War II. I'm American, for Chissakes. If I were as biased as you seem to be, I'd be spitting the same nonsense.

Aemma

10-30-2010, 06:32 PM

What are you on about? There's a healthy discussion here about exposing national myths.
The root for antagonism is the staunch believe in nationalistic bullshit and exposing the myths and discuss them is a way to create better understanding among us.
I for example think Basil is a smart guy and is capable of reading the sources and maybe, just maybe, Basil will one day say:
"I'm proud to be Russian but I'm ashamed of a lot of the things that my people have done to other people and I acknowledge that. I also know that other people acknowledge what Russians have gone through. I accept that Ukes, Finns and Balts are proud people too and they have all reasons in the world to be as proud as I am. And yes, I have a new Finnish friend in Motörhead Remember Me. Actually we took a few beers in St Pete and talked about tits and arses ..."

"Healthy"? When I see what I usually assume to be mature and intelligent people slinging bullshit personal attacks at one another? Yeah ok. My standards as to what constitutes "healthy" are different than yours I suppose.

It's still a bullshit thread started as an instigation only. I question the OP's motives for having posted it to begin with. But then again that shouldn't concern your pretty little head, MRM.

I'm just wondering where Hors is when a thread really needs him. :cool:

Svanhild

10-31-2010, 12:55 AM

But then again that shouldn't concern your pretty little head, MRM.
I don't think remarks like that are needed by someone in your position.

Motörhead Remember Me

11-01-2010, 06:57 AM

Why do you have reservations about how widespread the mass rapes, torture and violence were? Because the nazi-crimes got full attention year after year, and allied crimes simply did not exist?

Yes, I think it would be good to also expose other allied war crimes too. Like the murders and rapes comitted by French and American troops.

French Moroccan troops of the French Expeditionary Corps, known as Goumiers, committed mass crimes in Italy during and after the Battle of Monte Cassino[11] and in Germany. According to European sources, more than 12,000 civilians, above all young and old women, children, were kidnapped, raped, or killed by Goumiers

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied_war_crimes_during_World_War_II

A study by Robert J. Lilly estimates that a total of 14,000 civilian women in England, France and Germany were raped by American GIs during World War II.[77][78] It is estimated that there were around 3,500 rapes by American servicemen in France between June 1944 and the end of the war and one historian has claimed that sexual violence against women in liberated France was common.[

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_rape

Motörhead Remember Me

11-01-2010, 06:59 AM

But then again that shouldn't concern your pretty little head, MRM. Just for the record, my head is neither pretty or little.

I'm not sure, but I don't think I have been personally attacking anyone in this thread?

I'm just wondering where Hors is when a thread really needs him. :cool:There's a crucial difference here; Hors never argued with sources, did he?
And isn't it rather funny that you complain about the "low level" here but still ask for the member with the worst low brow record and most infantile arguments ever to take part..?

Pallantides

11-06-2010, 01:40 PM

Germans are evil and so are the Russians...

/the end :D

Don

11-06-2010, 02:01 PM

Germans are evil and so are the Russians...

/the end :D

I thought that the evil were the Spaniards, at least that is what says half of the world... :confused:

Svanhild

11-06-2010, 06:29 PM

I thought that the evil were the Spaniards, at least that is what says half of the world... :confused:
No harm intended Christiano Viejo, but I think our reputation as evil ones is worse than the Spanish reputation. :wink

poiuytrewq0987

11-06-2010, 07:12 PM

No harm intended Christiano Viejo, but I think our reputation as evil ones is worse than the Spanish reputation. :wink

You speak as if you were proud of this reputation you have.

Svanhild

11-06-2010, 10:21 PM

You speak as if you were proud of this reputation you have.
As a matter of fact, I'm proud of the generation of my grandparents and my country's history and I know that most of the horror stories about evil Germans are wrong and exaggerated. Vae victis: Woe to the defeated! History is written by the winners and they abused their situation like no one else.

If my people should vanish from this world one day, we'll be remembered. As the ones who tried to make a difference, as the ones who fought and stood up four ourselves, against adversarial ideologies and foreign influences. We lost the great war, but at least we tried to turn the tide with all of our heart and blood. Most peoples on the world will die out without any enduring memento.

You remember the ancient Egyptians with Rames or Tut Ench Amun. You remember Alexander the Great and his Macedonians. You remember Rome and Cäsar. And in millenias from now, people will remember the fierce Germans and our struggle for ethnic/spiritual survival and against servitude against half of the world! But will they remember the Kosovars or Albanians in 5000 or 10000 years from now?

Germany is already the most famous country on the world after the USA and maybe Britain.

Cheesypie

11-06-2010, 10:37 PM

Nothing explicitly (or arguably implicitly) has been found within any German documents regarding genocide.

Agreed.

Brynhild

11-06-2010, 11:20 PM

Agreed.

Would the pair of you care to disprove, then, that such atrocities didn't ever occur? What gets me about deniers is that they can't seem to ever do so.

Joe McCarthy

11-06-2010, 11:22 PM

Would the pair of you care to disprove, then, that such atrocities didn't ever occur? What gets me about deniers is that they can't seem to ever do so.

There is no need to disprove that something occurred. Proving a negative is unnecessary. In fact, it's a logical fallacy to ask someone to do it.

W. R.

11-06-2010, 11:26 PM

Soviet brutality is in a sense more justified, though, since it was revenge. Nazi brutality on the Eastern front is not something that can be explained away.As I see it:

Nazi Germany: Well, I know that it's XX century already and we are far too civilized for that but... do you mind if we wage this war like... savages? I mean real savages? :evil

Soviet Union: Well, if you wish so, I don't mind. :wink:biggrin:

Debaser11

11-07-2010, 01:36 AM

Would the pair of you care to disprove, then, that such atrocities didn't ever occur? What gets me about deniers is that they can't seem to ever do so.

That's because it's impossible to prove a negative. That's logic 101. The onus is always on the people making the positive claim.

Prove to me you're not a pederast. Prove it. I think you are. Your avatar looks pederasty. I think you probably are one. Why do I have prove that you are one? Why don't you disprove my claim?

I also think the U.S. committed a bigger Holocaust. They kill niggers in gas chambers and make them stupid. Disprove that. Until you do, that's what I will believe.

Brynhild

11-07-2010, 01:38 AM

That's because it's impossible to prove a negative. That's logic 101. The onus is always on the people making the positive claim.

Prove to me you're not a pederast. Prove it. I think you are. Your avatar looks pederasty. I think you probably are one. Why do I have prove that you are one? Why don't you disprove my claim?

Is this best you can do? :rolleyes2:

Debaser11

11-07-2010, 01:42 AM

Brynhild

11-07-2010, 01:47 AM

That's all I can do when speaking to someone who doesn't understand how logic works. Even Joe McCarthy tried to explain to you how you committed a basic logical fallacy. I tried to spell it out in an even more obvious manner and you're still oblivious.

And I will continue to be oblivious to know-it-all deniers whose sole aim is to antagonise members for no other reason except because they feel they are superior in some way. This is not the first time you've tried to draw me in in this fashion but I have replied now and as far as I'm concerned that is the end of it.

Loki

11-07-2010, 01:47 AM

Prove to me you're not a pederast. Prove it. I think you are. Your avatar looks pederasty. I think you probably are one. Why do I have prove that you are one? Why don't you disprove my claim?

This sounds to me like a personal insult. Keep this stuff off the forum. Play the ball, not the man (woman in this case).

Debaser11

11-07-2010, 01:50 AM

This sounds to me like a personal insult. Keep this stuff off the forum. Play the ball, not the man (woman in this case).

But given the context, my intent was clearly not to insult. Of course I don't think she's a pederast. I'll be mindful of your request, but do you not see where I was going with that?

Loki

11-07-2010, 01:53 AM

But given the context, my intent was clearly not to insult. Of course I don't think she's a pederast. I'll be mindful of your request, but do you not see where I was going with that?

No I don't see where you were going with that. Keep the debate clean. Thanks.

Debaser11

11-07-2010, 01:57 AM

And I will continue to be oblivious to know-it-all deniers whose sole aim is to antagonise members for no other reason except because they feel they are superior in some way.

Just explain to me how you prove a negative. The German people deserve the same benefit of the doubt that you do when it comes to outlandish charges that lack material evidence. Is that point STILL lost on you?

Furthermore, I don't think it's fair that you attribute my motive as being to antagonize others. I'd wager dollars to donuts I know much more about the subject than you do and I resent being told by someone that hasn't even attempted argue with previous points I have painstakingly laid out within this thread that my only motive is to antagonize. You're the one that came on this thread and started with the ad hominems against us so called "deniers." (That's another logical fallacy for you to look up.)

This is not the first time you've tried to draw me in in this fashion but I have replied now and as far as I'm concerned that is the end of it.

I'm not trying to resurrect old wounds. But I will defend myself if you persist.

Brynhild

11-07-2010, 02:23 AM

Just explain to me how you prove a negative. The German people deserve the same benefit of the doubt that you do when it comes to outlandish charges that lack material evidence. Is that point STILL lost on you?

I don't recall saying at any time that the Germans haven't been harshly treated, but it keeps being brought up ad absurdem that there was no such thing as a holocaust or anything else. My mother went out with a concentration victim who came from Austria. Who would I be to say to him that no such thing happened? When a person puts themselves in a position of argument, it's up to them in validating it, not continually throw questions and rhetorics as a means of defence.

Furthermore, I don't think it's fair that you attribute my motive as being to antagonize others. I'd wager dollars to donuts I know much more about the subject than you do and I resent being told by someone that hasn't even attempted argue with previous points I have painstakingly laid out within this thread that my only motive is to antagonize. You're the one that came on this thread and started with the ad hominems against us so called "deniers." (That's another logical fallacy for you to look up.)

Since when has the use of the word denier been an ad hominem? And as I've seen it so far, you've made every effort to antagonise me to the point that I've had no alternative but to pull you up for it, especially given the tactless remark about me being a pedarest. I was well aware of what you were trying to suggest, but you brought up a very bad example and you have a lot to learn about such matters if you think they won't offend. So, in that sense, I have the experience of pragmatism and diplomacy. In the end, there is a balancing out of what people know and what they don't.

I'm not trying to resurrect old wounds. But I will defend myself if you persist.

Well, then, I suggest, again, that you think before you post.

Piparskeggr

11-07-2010, 02:28 AM

Biggest thing I know about the Russian Revolution of 1917 is my mother-in-law's family left Odessa and landed in Istanbul...

I'd venture the guess that my Lithuanian relatives did not fare well, as one probable ancestor was a member of the Tsarist party in the Duma at that time...

(...and, if I'm way off topic, won't be the 1st time)

Debaser11

11-07-2010, 04:45 AM

I don't recall saying at any time that the Germans haven't been harshly treated,

Scroll back at the thread! Where did I say that you said that the Germans haven't been harshly treated? Our discussion was never about you saying that Germans weren't harshly treated. Now you're making a strawman argument.

I simply asked if you didn't think that the German people deserve the same benefit of the doubt about charges lacking material evidence that you do. The fact that you can't answer that question in a straight manner speaks volumes.

but it keeps being brought up ad absurdem that there was no such thing as a holocaust or anything else.

Well, there was an in depth discussion that you are free to join in on if you're so enlightened on the subject. Why not challenge some of my points instead of coming on this thread and complaining about people that you disagree with while committing one of the most basic logical fallacies in the book and then brushing it off when people explain this to you?

My mother went out with a concentration victim who came from Austria. Who would I be to say to him that no such thing happened?

Do you not understand that anecdotes are not reliable historical evidence? It's very likely this person your mother went out with did suffer. But TONS of people, in fact, more Germans than Jews suffered during this ghastly war. The fact that Jews suffered doesn't prove a Holocaust occurred. There is no demographic, forensic, or documentary evidence that an organized plan to liquidate Jews was ordered. Where do I go from here disproving the Holocaust? Do I overturn EVERY stone on the planet to make sure a few million people weren't buried somewhere that we overlooked? Do I search every file cabinet on the planet to make ABSOLUTELY sure there are no documents that order such a mass extermination? Would that be satisfactory? (And then would I need to repeat the process when trying to disprove any other historical claims that are not substantiated?) Then the Germans could have finally have some peace from this terrible slander? This flimsy charge has resulted in incalculable amounts of damage to them culturally and psychology not to mention provided justification for one group to displace another set of people in the Middle East.

And what did these terrible Germans all do? Use sign language or some esoteric code to avoid creating the inevitable incriminating paper trail that no other group in history would ever be so capable of utilizing? If you really believe that, you give a whole new meaning to German efficiency. They don't even need the written word to orchestrate a coordinated massive genocide while fighting a two front war! Did they engage in such a massive undertaking using innuendo and winks or something? Even more problematic is the conflicting material and anecdotal evidence concerning the major concentration camps like Dachau, Bergen Belsen, Buchenwald, and Auschwitz. Most of what Elie Wiesel has said we now know contradicts the material evidence gathered. Simon Wiesenthal has been exposed as a fraud. The 6 million claim (which the Jews are very insistent on) doesn't add up from a simple logistics standpoint which I've already explained on previous pages. Jews (and no I don't think all the Jews are evil) had a clear political motive to play up their suffering and the Allied forces (given the horrible bombing campaigns they started and perpetuated on the German people) had every incentive to play up German brutality. Concurrent interests. I mean, it's clear these Holocaust people don't want an open, fair debate. Just read about people like Ernst Zundel (who seems like a perfectly warm-hearted person who's much more patient than I am) and David Irving. People go to jail in Canada and Europe for even questioning this nonsensical propaganda mill. It's clear they have something to hide and an agenda to protect.

In fact, the Germans needed the Jews for labor. This is very documented. And it's also known that it took the Allies over six weeks to get the typhus epidemic under control once they liberated the camps. How were the Germans who were subjected to civilian bombings in Berlin, Hamburg, and Dresden supposed to control the situation any better with severed rail lines, highways, factories, and communication towers? The fact is, every primary document points to plans Germans had to relocate Jews. No other countries wanted them. What hypocrites! And Americans and Soviets also had concentration camps where they kept their politically liable groups of people. (Everyone knows about the Japanese camps in the U.S., but little mention is ever made of the Italian and German civilians the U.S. rounded up. What do you think those camps would have looked like had the Luftwaffe somehow been able to bomb the tar out of U.S. infrastructure? Furthermore, do you not think at least some priority would be given to citizens not in this camp?) The difference is that those countries didn't suffer from severe air raids for nearly three years. What do you think that's going to do to cities, let alone a concentration camp?

The fact of the matter is that the Holocaust (a word not even attached to WWII until the 70s--right around the time people began viewing Israel more unfavorably) has undergone many evolutions. It used to be 4 million people that were killed in gas chambers at Auschwitz. That plaque has been taken down and it now says 1.5 million, I believe. There were never even that many bodies found which is why the gas chamber story was concocted in order to explain the lack of evidence. As the evidence for gas chambers grows more thin upon harsher scrutiny that you are free to read, the story has switched to mass killings via firing squads because that has yet to be disproven the way the gas chambers have been. Still no evidence for the claim of millions of Jews being executed. And no longer do the main proponents of the Holocaust say Jews were gassed in Dachau as the main "gas chamber" is clearly a fumigation room. The "gas chambers" in Auschwitz are not even real. They are reconstructed and even there the story of massive genocide lacks any proof whatsoever.

I can go on and on. Unlike assuming that something is true just because my mother has some friend or acquaintance from a certain ethnic group that experienced something horrible during the largest and most terrible war in Europe's history like so many other groups, I actually try to learn German and read primary sources. And the best you can do is say I only aim to antagonize? Honestly...

When a person puts themselves in a position of argument, it's up to them in validating it, not continually throw questions and rhetorics as a means of defence.

This is some standard you've made up out of thin air. (It's easy to tell because the language you use is so unwieldy.) Go to your library or local used book store and buy or check out a book on logic. Hell, just google logical fallacies and start reading.

Since when has the use of the word denier been an ad hominem?

Uh, since I learned to put words into context? You were obviously not trying to flatter people with my point of view with that label. Then in the next post you implied that I was only arguing to antagonize people which is complete bollocks to anyone that reads the responses I have made in this thread on the subject. I care about the truth.

And as I've seen it so far, you've made every effort to antagonise me to the point that I've had no alternative but to pull you up for it,

:rolleyes2: So when you "pull" someone "up for it," you have "no alternative"?

especially given the tactless remark about me being a pedarest.

Right, because I was being totally serious instead of making a point about how it's not fair to expect someone to disprove open charges. Are we going to drown ourselves in a righteous sense of self-pity here?:cry2

I was well aware of what you were trying to suggest, but you brought up a very bad example and you have a lot to learn about such matters if you think they won't offend.

While I don't go out of my way to offend people (I really don't), I expect someone genuinely interested in the matter at hand to be more interested in the point I'm trying to make. You seem to care less about acknowledging the purpose behind these words that so terribly offended your sensibilities. If you disagree with my point, argue it. You clearly don't care what I think of you. That's clear. So why are you pretending that my words were so terrible? I obviously wasn't really charging you with being a pederast. It was pretty obvious and now you admit it. So really, what's the problem? You don't like "bad words" or something? Even if there is a clear point behind my using such a word (that you acknowledged you were aware of)? I guess everyone's a victim these days, but I have never heard of someone being victimized by obvious hyperbole.

So, in that sense, I have the experience of pragmatism and diplomacy. In the end, there is a balancing out of what people know and what they don't.

This sort of proclamation is cheap. Especially when you won't acknowledge logical fallacies. And if this were really so evident, you wouldn't have to point this out to anyone.

Well, then, I suggest, again, that you think before you post.

O RLY?! Read through this thread. It's full of detailed point/counter point arguments. Honestly, what are you adding by saying that people who disagree with you are wrong because of what someone your mother knows says?

Osweo

11-07-2010, 09:50 PM

Joe McCarthy

11-07-2010, 10:12 PM

RE the 'holocaust' - the only really significant thing is that you can GO TO PRISON for having the 'wrong' opinion on it. THAT is proof enough to me that there's some serious bullshit going on. End of story.

I tend to think the criminalization of Holocaust revisionism actually helps revisionism. If it were legalized people would likely pay it less attention.

Debaser11

11-07-2010, 10:17 PM

^That's a tough one to work out. On the other hand, we'd have more open debate. I think a lot of people still buy the "we have to because of Europe's history" on the matter. Over time, though, as we get more distant from the conflict, I tend to think the law will more clearly work against the interests of Zionists and their apologists. The question is, can Europe last that long?

Eldritch

11-07-2010, 10:29 PM

I'm not even interested in "Holocaust revisionism". I'm interested in allowing historians to do their work, without having to worry about going to prison for reporting their findings.

Debaser11

11-07-2010, 10:32 PM

I think that more or less is synonymous with revisionism these days.

Joe McCarthy

11-07-2010, 10:34 PM

I'm not even interested in "Holocaust revisionism". I'm interested in allowing historians to do their work, without having to worry about going to prison for reporting their findings.

Censorship often aids those being censored. Voltaire's career was actually helped by persecution. For one thing it got him the attention of Frederick the Great.

Whether this will ultimately aid revisionism in the public domain is hard to say. Recently Weber basically gave up on revisionism, saying its failed to sway the public.

Groenewolf

11-08-2010, 06:42 AM

RE the 'holocaust' - the only really significant thing is that you can GO TO PRISON for having the 'wrong' opinion on it. THAT is proof enough to me that there's some serious bullshit going on. End of story.

It is also a mayor part of the present political mythos that being European or decent is not something to be proud of, and if you are it will only lead to an other holocaust. The truth of it is irrelevant, since there where many genocides in history, but they receive a lot less attention, even if they have been more recent. But this one is being used to keep us down.

W. R.

11-08-2010, 09:43 PM

It´s about to show we got also victims.
Mostly in the World People think of Germans as Nazis.
But that´s not the whole Story.
These People weren´t Soldiers which had been killed..
They were helpless Females and Childs.
The Soviets behaved 10 times better in Germany except some fucked up bastards than the Germans did in the USSR. Period.Soviet crimes vs. Nazi crimes = Chaotiс Evil vs. Lawful Evil.

Surely there were lots of rapists, looters, and murderers among millions of Soviet soldiers. But I'm not sure that "war crimes" would be a legal term for what such people did. It were "crimes". While "crimes" of Nazis in the Soviet Union were nothing in comparison with their "war crimes".

By the way, is Pallantides reading this thread? I'd like to know how Soviet soldiers behaved in Norway. :sherlock:

Pallantides

11-11-2010, 02:24 PM

By the way, is Pallantides reading this thread? I'd like to know how Soviet soldiers behaved in Norway. :sherlock:

I think the view was mostly positive, also a few Russian soldiers settled in Norway after the war too, there are also several memorials to the Russian soldiers and prisoners of war who were killed by the Germans in Norway.
http://img703.imageshack.us/img703/1582/18616671dkblhclnmqfs.jpg
http://80.91.34.200/previews/w_sn/sy02608f.jpg
"Norway thanks you!"

Pallantides

11-11-2010, 10:25 PM

Tag:

norwegiians obsessed with ww 2 more than germans

Also many Norwegians especially older people dislike Germans with more fervour than any Pole or Russian, even though our casualties and sacrifices were far less.

Megrez

11-11-2010, 11:19 PM

norwegiians obsessed with ww 2 more than germans

Interesting website: http://www.thenewsturmer.com/norwegian%20ww2%20history/Norwegian.htm

Arne

11-11-2010, 11:22 PM

Tag:

Also many Norwegians especially older people dislike Germans with more fervour than any Pole or Russian, even though our casualties and sacrifices were far less.

It´s also called Lack of Intelligence..

Megrez

11-11-2010, 11:41 PM

Tag:

Also many Norwegians especially older people dislike Germans with more fervour than any Pole or Russian, even though our casualties and sacrifices were far less.

In a country where 11% of the population comprises immigrants of all sorts, mostly refugees and "asylum seekers" from the twentieth century onwards, no wonder why.

The Lawspeaker

11-11-2010, 11:43 PM

I love Norway but Jesus guys: it's almost seventy years ago- get over it !
Our country had a much tougher time and we got over the Germans a long time ago...*

*Except when playing football (that's WAR) but that has nothing to do with 1940-1945 but a lot more with those filthy schwalbe-making, cheating kraut bastards that stole a rightful victory from us in 1974. :tongue

Arne

11-11-2010, 11:47 PM

I love Norway but Jesus guys: it's almost seventy years ago- get over it !
Our country had a much tougher time and we got over the Germans a long time ago...

They seem to spend far too much Time thinking about how Bad every German is.. :rolleyes:

Osweo

11-11-2010, 11:51 PM

http://img703.imageshack.us/img703/1582/18616671dkblhclnmqfs.jpg
Interesting, thanks.
By the way, I can't make out the last line there in the Russian. The Norwegian is a bit clearer though.

"You fell dead in struggle with fascists, for the freedom and independence of your Motherland and for all Europe. Sleep, dear Comrades. R... of you will forever ... ?"

Pretty formulaic, but I just can't make it out... :ohwell:

By the way, believe it or not, but the entire memorial is kind of like a large scale version of a sort of grave marker that enjoyed some popularity in those days... A kind of hollow metal pyramid with a red star on top... :p Some people have since swapped the star for a cross, but quite a few remain intact. :D

Osweo

11-12-2010, 12:17 AM

"You fell dead in struggle with fascists, for the freedom and independence of your Motherland and for all Europe. Sleep, dear Comrades. R... of you will forever ... ?"

"You fell dead in struggle with fascists, for the freedom and independence of your Motherland and for all Europe. Sleep, dear Comrades. The Motherland will never forget you."

- Good eye, WR! :)

Osweo

11-12-2010, 01:49 AM

Mmm

Mmrhm?

Osweo

11-12-2010, 02:00 AM

Grrl

Hmmph

Pallantides

11-12-2010, 12:33 PM

In a country where 11% of the population comprises immigrants of all sorts, mostly refugees and "asylum seekers" from the twentieth century onwards, no wonder why.

A large portion of those immigrants are Swedes(52,125) and Polish(31,193) quest workers(Muslim immigrants only make up 3.4% of the population while in Germany 5.4% of the population are Muslims(thats about the size of the entire Norwegian population.)

There are almost as many Germans in Norway as there are Somalians.

:D

Svanhild

11-12-2010, 01:04 PM

Some Norwegians are rather ignorant about their situation during WW2. As a matter of fact, your country was just a playball. You had the ore and either side needed it for the own war industry. England planned to safeguard Norwegian ore deliveries so Germany had to invade Norway beforehand for strategical reasons. British and German soldiers were already fighting on Norwegian territory when the war on the continent started and England withdraw its units from Norway.

The Norwegians were not our enemies. But some groups decided to shoot at our forces and no army can tolerate that unanswered. Be that as it may, there were a lot of Norwegians who were inclined towards Germany and were friends with German troops in Norway.

The Ripper

11-12-2010, 01:09 PM

Pallantides

11-12-2010, 01:14 PM

there were a lot of Norwegians who were inclined towards Germany and were friends with German troops in Norway.

I'm from a family with NS ties myself.

I would never have collaborated or supported any occupation force be it British or German.

Megrez

11-12-2010, 01:38 PM

A large portion of those immigrants are Swedes(52,125) and Polish(31,193) quest workers(Muslim immigrants only make up 3.4% of the population while in Germany 5.4% of the population are Muslims(thats about the size of the entire Norwegian population.)

There are almost as many Germans in Norway as there are Somalians.

:D

Don't be an apologist. Give just ten years more for the current trend and the muslims, together with other asians, will outnumber the Teutonic groups by far.

W. R.

11-13-2010, 03:48 AM

those statues glorifying Stalinism and BolshevismYou didn't mean the statues pictures of which Pallantides posted, did you?

Brynhild

11-13-2010, 05:19 AM

Scroll back at the thread! Where did I say that you said that the Germans haven't been harshly treated? Our discussion was never about you saying that Germans weren't harshly treated. Now you're making a strawman argument.

I simply asked if you didn't think that the German people deserve the same benefit of the doubt about charges lacking material evidence that you do. The fact that you can't answer that question in a straight manner speaks volumes.

Well, there was an in depth discussion that you are free to join in on if you're so enlightened on the subject. Why not challenge some of my points instead of coming on this thread and complaining about people that you disagree with while committing one of the most basic logical fallacies in the book and then brushing it off when people explain this to you?

Do you not understand that anecdotes are not reliable historical evidence? It's very likely this person your mother went out with did suffer. But TONS of people, in fact, more Germans than Jews suffered during this ghastly war. The fact that Jews suffered doesn't prove a Holocaust occurred. There is no demographic, forensic, or documentary evidence that an organized plan to liquidate Jews was ordered. Where do I go from here disproving the Holocaust? Do I overturn EVERY stone on the planet to make sure a few million people weren't buried somewhere that we overlooked? Do I search every file cabinet on the planet to make ABSOLUTELY sure there are no documents that order such a mass extermination? Would that be satisfactory? (And then would I need to repeat the process when trying to disprove any other historical claims that are not substantiated?) Then the Germans could have finally have some peace from this terrible slander? This flimsy charge has resulted in incalculable amounts of damage to them culturally and psychology not to mention provided justification for one group to displace another set of people in the Middle East.

And what did these terrible Germans all do? Use sign language or some esoteric code to avoid creating the inevitable incriminating paper trail that no other group in history would ever be so capable of utilizing? If you really believe that, you give a whole new meaning to German efficiency. They don't even need the written word to orchestrate a coordinated massive genocide while fighting a two front war! Did they engage in such a massive undertaking using innuendo and winks or something? Even more problematic is the conflicting material and anecdotal evidence concerning the major concentration camps like Dachau, Bergen Belsen, Buchenwald, and Auschwitz. Most of what Elie Wiesel has said we now know contradicts the material evidence gathered. Simon Wiesenthal has been exposed as a fraud. The 6 million claim (which the Jews are very insistent on) doesn't add up from a simple logistics standpoint which I've already explained on previous pages. Jews (and no I don't think all the Jews are evil) had a clear political motive to play up their suffering and the Allied forces (given the horrible bombing campaigns they started and perpetuated on the German people) had every incentive to play up German brutality. Concurrent interests. I mean, it's clear these Holocaust people don't want an open, fair debate. Just read about people like Ernst Zundel (who seems like a perfectly warm-hearted person who's much more patient than I am) and David Irving. People go to jail in Canada and Europe for even questioning this nonsensical propaganda mill. It's clear they have something to hide and an agenda to protect.

In fact, the Germans needed the Jews for labor. This is very documented. And it's also known that it took the Allies over six weeks to get the typhus epidemic under control once they liberated the camps. How were the Germans who were subjected to civilian bombings in Berlin, Hamburg, and Dresden supposed to control the situation any better with severed rail lines, highways, factories, and communication towers? The fact is, every primary document points to plans Germans had to relocate Jews. No other countries wanted them. What hypocrites! And Americans and Soviets also had concentration camps where they kept their politically liable groups of people. (Everyone knows about the Japanese camps in the U.S., but little mention is ever made of the Italian and German civilians the U.S. rounded up. What do you think those camps would have looked like had the Luftwaffe somehow been able to bomb the tar out of U.S. infrastructure? Furthermore, do you not think at least some priority would be given to citizens not in this camp?) The difference is that those countries didn't suffer from severe air raids for nearly three years. What do you think that's going to do to cities, let alone a concentration camp?

The fact of the matter is that the Holocaust (a word not even attached to WWII until the 70s--right around the time people began viewing Israel more unfavorably) has undergone many evolutions. It used to be 4 million people that were killed in gas chambers at Auschwitz. That plaque has been taken down and it now says 1.5 million, I believe. There were never even that many bodies found which is why the gas chamber story was concocted in order to explain the lack of evidence. As the evidence for gas chambers grows more thin upon harsher scrutiny that you are free to read, the story has switched to mass killings via firing squads because that has yet to be disproven the way the gas chambers have been. Still no evidence for the claim of millions of Jews being executed. And no longer do the main proponents of the Holocaust say Jews were gassed in Dachau as the main "gas chamber" is clearly a fumigation room. The "gas chambers" in Auschwitz are not even real. They are reconstructed and even there the story of massive genocide lacks any proof whatsoever.

I can go on and on. Unlike assuming that something is true just because my mother has some friend or acquaintance from a certain ethnic group that experienced something horrible during the largest and most terrible war in Europe's history like so many other groups, I actually try to learn German and read primary sources. And the best you can do is say I only aim to antagonize? Honestly...

This is some standard you've made up out of thin air. (It's easy to tell because the language you use is so unwieldy.) Go to your library or local used book store and buy or check out a book on logic. Hell, just google logical fallacies and start reading.

Uh, since I learned to put words into context? You were obviously not trying to flatter people with my point of view with that label. Then in the next post you implied that I was only arguing to antagonize people which is complete bollocks to anyone that reads the responses I have made in this thread on the subject. I care about the truth.

:rolleyes2: So when you "pull" someone "up for it," you have "no alternative"?

Right, because I was being totally serious instead of making a point about how it's not fair to expect someone to disprove open charges. Are we going to drown ourselves in a righteous sense of self-pity here?:cry2

While I don't go out of my way to offend people (I really don't), I expect someone genuinely interested in the matter at hand to be more interested in the point I'm trying to make. You seem to care less about acknowledging the purpose behind these words that so terribly offended your sensibilities. If you disagree with my point, argue it. You clearly don't care what I think of you. That's clear. So why are you pretending that my words were so terrible? I obviously wasn't really charging you with being a pederast. It was pretty obvious and now you admit it. So really, what's the problem? You don't like "bad words" or something? Even if there is a clear point behind my using such a word (that you acknowledged you were aware of)? I guess everyone's a victim these days, but I have never heard of someone being victimized by obvious hyperbole.

This sort of proclamation is cheap. Especially when you won't acknowledge logical fallacies. And if this were really so evident, you wouldn't have to point this out to anyone.

O RLY?! Read through this thread. It's full of detailed point/counter point arguments. Honestly, what are you adding by saying that people who disagree with you are wrong because of what someone your mother knows says?

All of this because I didn't come up with the word refute? Dearie me. You will forgive me for not acknowledging your counter argument because the posts had already gone off-topic and I wished to not participate further and derail it. Don't be misled into thinking that whatever you have said hasn't been given any validity by me (just because I hadn't directly said so to you), as it's already been noted. I will, however, refuse to engage in any further conflict with anybody - and this applies to everyone on the forum - knowing that to further argue on such matters is futile. You've proven your intellect and knowledge, now be a man and end it, as I'm perfectly willing to yield.

Now, back to the matter at hand. I would like to clarify my stance on this. I grew up in a different era and I'm all for any new information which sheds new light on what really happened during that time. However, I will not kowtow to the opinions of a select few who think they know better. I prefer to do my own research and reserve my own judgement - in my own way. Germans were victims, so were Soviets, Brits, Australians, Japanese etc Just don't expect an old duck like myself to suddenly change my opinions on how I believe the holocaust and all the rest of it played out. For all I know, some members here have a propagandist agenda that I refuse to enter into. I've seen this time and time again.

Have fun with this debate, because to be frank, I've seen it too many times before, my views have continued to be screamed down as invalid - I'm over being treated like somebody who doesn't have a clue. I'm afraid I see a lot of things all too clearly, but it would be lost on some members here.