Yalta at 70 and the end of the Second World War

151 posts / 0 new
Last post
ikosmos ikosmos's picture
Yalta at 70 and the end of the Second World War

An interesting discussion took place on Peter Lavelle's Crosstalk this week on Yalta at 70.

Yalta was the location for the 2nd of three conferences of the "Great Powers" (Tehran, Yalta, and Potsdam were the 3) regarding the situation in WW2 and in the "peace" thereafter.

The contributors included Geoffrey Roberts (U of Cork, Ireland) , Michael J. Carley (U de Montreal, Quebec) , and Dmitry Babich (Russian Federation academic).

The show is an interesting historical summary and good for that reason and others. I will get into that in the second post.

 

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

I don't want babblers to think that I'm only interested here in discussion of Lavelle's show. This year is the 70th anniversary of the end of WW2, and,  given the civil war in Ukraine, the interpretation of events from 70 years ago are, and will be, interpreted in widely divergent ways. But the past still bites us on the ass if we ignore it. So, generally any discussion about the end of WW2 is fine by me, within reason.

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

oops - fyi the ‘Big Three’ refers to Roosevelt (USA), Churchill (UK) and Stalin (USSR).

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

Anyway, I have found Babich interesting in previous discussions in that he has very helpfully shown how, in the West, the narrative of the Second World War has been, to a large degree, turned into a conflict against anti-Semitism, and the racist ideology, white supremacy, "Master" race, etc., trivialized and swept under the rug. For those who have a more recent version of such ideologies, used to justify present-day colonialism (Israel a good example here) , this makes perfect sense. Anyway, only a minor point.

In this show, however, Babich notes a recent book with a novel perspective. The book is Alexander Shipkov's "Traditionalism, Nationalism, and Neo_Nazism. (nothing on google so far)

What provokes the reference by Babich is itself interesting. He addresses that claim, made often by those trying to re-write the history of WW2, that Hitler and Stalin were essentially and much the same, etc.  Babich notes "similarities" and then draws attention to some significant and fundamental differences.

Anyway, Shipkov in his book characterizes Hitler as someone who introduced colonialism into Europe, when it already existed elsewhere in the colonies of the great powers (UK, France, etc. but not Germany which was "deprived" of colonies by the other imperial powers) . India is specifically mentioned. The shock was appalling for Europeans, used to treating others in this way, but, not used to being treated themselves in this way. Fascinating.

Now Babich discusses here the differences between Hitler and Stalin: the former, introduces colonialism into Europe itself. Stalin, otoh, is as an advocate of "spheres of influence". Now the latter is still not good for those affected by it; Bablich notes the truncation of sovereignty, "limited sovereignty" he calls it, but this is not the plunder of resources [and human beings] as represented by Hitler.

Well put, I think.

 

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

Moscow condemns EU attempts to use Victory Day anniversary for attacks on Russia

It's pretty despicable but hardly surprising. The same EU spokesperson raised objections to the de-Nazification motion at the UN that the US, Canada, and the Ukrainian junta all voted against.

Quote:
Attempts to distort the truth about World War II are an insult to the memory of the victims of Nazism and millions of Soviet soldiers who died for the liberation of Europe, Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevich told a briefing on Thursday. "We condemn the desire of the European Union to use the upcoming VE-Day anniversary for new attacks on Russia," he said....

Lukashevich drew attention to the statement by a European Union representative at the UN General Assembly session, adopting the resolution on the 70th anniversary of the end of World War II, alleging that this event brought not freedom to many European countries, but new crimes against humanity. The Russian diplomat said that EU representatives had made such statements before, in particular, during the November 2014 vote in the UN General Assembly on the resolution against the glorification of Nazism and during adopting the declaration on the 79th anniversary of the end of World War II at a meeting of the OSCE Council of Ministers in Basel in December 2014.

A final note. "

"It should be emphasised that the principles enshrined in the UN Charter and decisions of the Nuremberg Tribunal are recognized by the UN General Assembly as the principles of international law, so any EU attempts to distort the truth about World War II or the Nuremberg Tribunal decisions are an insult to the memory of millions and millions of Soviet soldiers who sacrificed their lives for the liberation of Europe, innocent victims of the Nazi regime."."


ikosmos ikosmos's picture

More of the same.

City Hall in the Latvian capital Riga has issued permission to Latvia’s extremist organizations to hold public events on March 16, which is observed unofficially as the day of commemoration of the Latvian Waffen SS legion.

Waffen SS.

At least the government isn't sending any official representatives.

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

Quote:
EU Reichs-Chancellor Merkel joins Obama, Poland, ‪#‎Lithuania‬ in refusing to attend 70th anniv of WWII Victory Day over German fascism in ‪#‎Russia‬

Merkel declines to attend Victory over Nazis parade in Moscow

That's pretty rich - the North Korean leader, Kim Jong Un is more enlightened on this issue that the leader of an important "democracy".

Quote:
This year‘s parade marks the 70th anniversary of the capitulation of Nazi Germany, but few Western leaders are expected to attend because of the Ukraine conflict and the ensuing crisis in Moscow‘s relations with the West.

And some, like Canada, would rather oppose anti-Nazi resolutions at the United Nations than attend events commemorating the military defeat of the Nazis. uh huh.

supplemental:

Quote:
Instead, Merkel and Putin have agreed to attend a wreath laying ceremony at a Moscow war memorial the next day, the spokesman said in Berlin

 

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

US Ambassador is banned from Prague Castle over his oafish Yanqui remarks about how the Czech President should conduct himself.

The Empire's usual hubris, mind you. "Obey!" Says the Empire, and, most European vassals, and Canada of course, snap their heels to attention.  Good little doggies.

So, in addition to Greece and Cyprus, the Czech Republic will also send reps to the celebration of the liberation of Europe by the Red Army (and some other guys).

Too bad, Uncle Sam. Eat sh*t and die.

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

Kiev Threatens to Blacklist World Leaders Who Head to Moscow for Victory Day.

I guess they'll be celebrating 4 20 instead. Sieg Heil.

Quote:
Over the weekend, Kremlin Chief of Staff Sergei Ivanov noted that the leaders of at least 25 states from across the world will attend Moscow's celebrations May 9th. The leaders of China, Vietnam, the Czech Republic, Cuba and North Korea have confirmed their attendance. Meanwhile, the leaders of Germany, Britain, Poland, the Baltic States and the United States have confirmed that they won't be attending.

Slumberjack

Were it not for the Soviet war effort, it would not have been possible to conduct successful Allied landings in North Africa, Sicily, or Normandy.  In fact, the British would have been driven out of the Middle East long before any of that.  The Allied strategic bombing campaign woud have failed even more miserably than it did if German airpower was exclusively directed against it.  Without the Soviets the liberation of Europe would have had to await and correspond to the atomic incineration of European cities starting in 1945.  Ordinary rank and file western war veterans who made it out alive from the European Theatre of WWII owe a debt of gratitude to the ordinary Soviet conscripts who perished.

Slumberjack

ikosmos wrote:
I guess they'll be celebrating 4 20 instead.

I know I plan to, but in an entirely different context.

6079_Smith_W

Slumberjack wrote:

The Allied strategic bombing campaign woud have failed even more miserably than it did if German airpower was exclusively directed against it.

Except that that is not what happened when there was only one focus of the air campaign - Britain.

And has anyone said the Soviets did not make a great contribution to the campaign, once they themselves were attacked?

 

 

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

6079_Smith_W wrote:
And has anyone said the Soviets did not make a great contribution to the campaign, once they themselves were attacked?

Yeah, the Yatseniuk putsch regime has noted the Soviet "invasion" of Ukraine and Germany. Not exactly a ringing endorsement.Plus they are now honouring some of the odious so-called "nationalist" organizations responsible for mass slaughter of Poles, Jews, etc. with full public support, pensions, etc. Talk about honouring those who defeated the Nazis. Not.

 

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

Ukrainian putsch President Poroshenko:

RT wrote:
Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin were equally blamed for setting off World War II by Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko on Thursday. Both the Nazi and Soviet leaders were behind the “massacre,” aiming at “splitting Europe,” Poroshenko lectured.

READ MORE: Ukraine bans Communism & Nazism, celebrates UPA nationalists as 'freedom fighters'

What a surprise. After all, the [OUN and/or UPA] butchers of Babi Yar are now being honoured by the same putsch regime with all sorts of social benefits.


ikosmos ikosmos's picture

Lowdown on the New Army Tech to Be Unveiled on V-Day (MASSIVE SPOILERS)

Rest assured that the political significance of V-Day in Moscow will be erased and/or trivialized in Western MSM while the military display emphasize as an indicator of "aggressive" intentions, etc. ,etc., etc. 

Personally, I'd like to see the Russians collect a big pile of Nazi memorabillia and make a nice bonfire on Red Square, but then I'm partial to spectacles ....

Slumberjack

About as interesting as a parade of Sherman tanks down the Warshington Mall, followed up with the latest offerings from the American military industrial complex.  Yawn.

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

Yeah, for you and me, true, but lots of people like a parade. And the sound of tank tracks on cobblestones is unforgettable.

There's always an anti-war component in such events over there ... a component which we could use a lot more of over here. Then again, no one ever invaded Canada except ... hmm. What about a FN day, an anti-Columbus sort of thing .... ?

6079_Smith_W

He's sending his biker/cirque du soleil troupe on a european tour. I wonder if Steven Seagal will be along for the ride.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/apr/14/vladimir-putin-to-join-nigh...

Slumberjack

ikosmos wrote:
Yeah, for you and me, true, but lots of people like a parade. And the sound of tank tracks on cobblestones is unforgettable.

I know.  When we would conduct a road move out of Petawawa to an annual regimental gun camp at the Meaford ranges people along the way seemed like they were impressed with our AFVs.  For parades, depending on the occasion, we would sometimes do a feu de joie that even impressed us as we stood in the turrets.

NDPP

Guess Who's Coming To the Moscow Parade?

http://www.boilingfrogspost.com/2015/04/17/bfp-exclusive-guess-whos-comi...

"In my opinion, the examination of who is and who is not going to the Victory Day parade in Moscow, provides a good litmus test of the extent to which the US-NATO Empire exercises firm control over the elites in the Balkans.

In this analysis, I will look at the political dynamics with regards to this issue in each country of the region."

NDPP

Guess Who's Coming To the Moscow Parade?

http://www.boilingfrogspost.com/2015/04/17/bfp-exclusive-guess-whos-comi...

"In my opinion, the examination of who is and who is not going to the Victory Day parade in Moscow, provides a good litmus test of the extent to which the US-NATO Empire exercises firm control over elites in the Balkans.

In this analysis, I will look at the political dynamics with regards to this issue in each country of the region."

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

More good commentary from Peter Lavelle.

Murdering Memory and the Cult of Historical Victimization

Peter Lavelle wrote:
It is unfortunate that a new discursive pathology has come into vogue. Many feel that the sole way to prove their historical legitimacy and virtue is by casting themselves in the role of victim. This is history gone wrong. All too often a person's national identity is defined by how someone else wronged him or her.

Post modernist politics is a truly endless and rich motherlode of such victimization. But that is just an aside.

Quote:
As the 70th anniversary of fascism’s demise in Europe approaches, history is being re-cast, particularly events before, during, and after World War II. This history is being reinterpreted and even rewritten in a ;number of post-Soviet and Eastern European states. This approach often undermines, or even denies, the role the Soviet Union (its peoples and ;soldiers) played in the defeat of Nazi Germany. This has less to do with historical knowledge than it does with scoring cheap geopolitical points in the present at Russia’s expense.

Russia is not the liberator of Europe from the Nazi scourge. Oh, no. What 27 million dead? But this odious erasing of history also erases those in eastern Europe, other than Russians/Sov nationalities, who also played a significant role in liberating Europe from the Nazis.

Quote:
In some Baltic republics and quite openly today in Ukraine, Nazi collaborators are honored as war veterans, while Soviet war memorials are moved, dismantled and in some cases publicly destroyed with great media fanfare. Most in Russia consider this not only insulting, but also a dangerous rehabilitation of ideas that their citizens paid such a high price to eliminate. This is especially painful when the people of Ukraine’s Donbas remain the subject of assault and punishment by the western-backed regime in Kiev that openly celebrates Nazi collaboration.

Forget the past and you'll lose both eyes.

Todrick of Chat...

Yes, we should remember all Soviet accomplishments in WW2.

1. The joint invasion of Poland in 1939 with the Nazis.

2. The Katyn Massacre of Polish Army Officers. (This occurred on the 3rd of April 1940.)

3. The invasion of Finland in 1939. (The Winter War of 1939/40)

4. The numerous war crimes against the German population in 1944/45.

Of course the remaining allies all committed various war crimes, however to sing the praise of the Red Army as glorious heroes maybe be an unrealistic and unhistorical. 

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
In some Baltic republics and quite openly today in Ukraine, Nazi collaborators are honored as war veterans, while Soviet war memorials are moved, dismantled and in some cases publicly destroyed with great media fanfare.

What do you have to do to be less popular than Nazis?

My (Estonian) wife warned me, many years ago, to never mention the Russians around my in-laws.  Nothing about the Nazis, though.

6079_Smith_W

ikosmos wrote:

Many feel that the sole way to prove their historical legitimacy and virtue is by casting themselves in the role of victim.

Wonder how that would fly over in the Russophobia thread.

sherpa-finn

And the Finnish half of my family seem to have a quite distinct memory of the Red Army, too. Odd that, seeing as the Red Army was apparently god's (or perhaps Stalin's) gift to humanity, according to our friends up thread.  Aaah, the happy obliviousness of a selective memory.

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

Bwa ha ha ha. Talk about forgetting. Those of you who are into discussing the Winter War should also try not to erase the Continuation War (June 1941 - Sept 1944).

You know. The war in which Finland, allied with Nazi Germany, attacked the Soviets. You know. The reason why Canada declared war on Finland in December 1941. That war.

Yes, forgetting can be very convenient. For some.

 

Quote:
Winter War

Finland-Soviet Union
30 November 1939 to 13 March 1940

- began with Soviet attack
- ended with Moscow Peace Treaty

- huge Soviet losses in war: ~ 65 000 Finnish losses to ~ 392 000 Soviet losses
- contributed to Hitler's decision to attack SU later on
- followed horrific purge in the Soviet military (50% of its officers executed) in 1937
- Finland ceded 9% of its territory and 20% of its industrial capacity to SU in the Moscow Peace Treaty

- 6 Dec 1917 Finland independent following GOSR and support for national self-determination

- In April 1938, or possibly earlier, the Soviet Union began diplomatic negotiations with Finland, trying to improve their mutual defence against Germany. The Soviets were mainly concerned that Germany or France and Great Britain would use Finland as a bridgehead for an attack on Leningrad, and demanded a territorial swap to move the border farther away from the city. More than a year passed, with little progress, and the political situation in Europe worsened.

- the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, on 23 August 1939 conceded Finland to "Soviet sphere of influence"

- In the autumn of 1939, the Soviet Union demanded that Finland agree to move the border 25 kilometres (16 miles) back from Leningrad. It also demanded that Finland lease the Hanko Peninsula to the USSR for 30 years for the creation of a naval base there. In exchange, the Soviet Union offered Finland a large part of Karelia (more than twice the size). This offer was referred to in Finland as "two pounds of dirt for one pound of gold".

- in the Continuation War (June 1941 - Sept 1944) Finland, along with Nazi Germany, attacked the SU. The UK subsequently declared war on Finland on Dec 6 1941 (Canada declared war on Dec 7).

Slumberjack

ikosmos wrote:
Post modernist politics is a truly endless and rich motherlode of such victimization. But that is just an aside.

But it isn't really 'post-modern' politics if that is it's emphasis.

6079_Smith_W

ikosmos wrote:

You know. The war in which Finland, allied with Nazi Germany, attacked the Soviets. You know. The reason why Canada declared war on Finland in December 1941. That war.

Yes, forgetting can be very convenient. For some.

Are you really going to play that card? And you wonder why Yatseniuk talked about an invasion, and that Ukraine, Poland and the Baltics are far more wary of what is happening east of them.

Was the Indian self-rule movement Nazi too, because they had relations with the Nazis?

 

sherpa-finn

Yuk, Yuk, Yuk. Your hilarious, ikosmos.  But you should stick to reading Walt Whitman. Modern history obviously confuses you.

The Finnish people was caught between two vicious military super-powers. One that invaded them (The Soviets) and one that did not (The Germans). They made their choices, - fight the invader first, use the other to fight alongside, and when they were done with the invader, - boot the other guys out of the country too. Not a bad track record for a little country in the midst of a global conflagration I always thought.

And ikosmos, if your criteria is calling out the Finns because Canada went to war against them, I presume you think the same of the Libyans. And the Syrians. And the Iraqis.  And now the good folks of Eastern Ukraine.

How about you try and keep your principles straight: does Canada declare war only on The Good Guys? Or only on The Bad Guys? 

Oh - real life is just so complicated!!

Yuk. Yuk. Yuk.

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

So, even though Canada was AT WAR WITH FINLAND, which means that our country was Allies with the SovUnion, this is somehow "underhanded" to mention. OTOH, the Winter War, especially given the circumstances under which it took place [an imminent British, French, or Nazi attack] , is somehow supposed to introduce an element of "balance" into a discussion about the end and significance of WW2 today.

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

 

Both RT and Sputnik seem to have all sorts of plans for extra coverage of Victory Day related reporting starting May 1.  What I particularly like about most of the coverage I've seen from over there ... is that while every country honours their own, both Sov and present-day Russian media seems to be characterized by a genuine hatred of war and a determined effort to show the truth about the horrors of war.

This is in contrast to some reporting that I see here, especially in North America, never having been invaded, in which there is far too much glorifying war and far too little about the true costs of war for ordinary people.

Sometimes it's just the simple truths that bear repeating.

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

sherpa-finn wrote:
The Finnish people ... caught between two vicious military super-powers.

So was Switzerland which, somehow, managed to remain neutral militarily and invaded ... no one. 

I've actually read reports in which it is pointed out that during the Winter War Finland received military aid from both Nazi Germany and the United Kingdom at the same time. Go ahead and square that circle.

What's pretty clear from all this is that enormous efforts were put forward in the West to get Nazi Germany to fight a war against the SU and that the "outrage" at the time over the secret 1939 treaty was as much about scuttling these plans as it is about the "betrayal" of Poland, etc. Don't forget that Poland itself was involved in the dismemberment of Czechslovakia in 1938, approved by Britain and France, and suffered a similar fate not very much later.

The events of those years should draw the attention of all anti-war observers that indifference to the fate of others can wind up drawing all people into a conflict. Like the indifference to the brutal bombing in Donbass and eastern Ukraine by the putsch regime in Kiev may draw - HAS DRAWN - Canadian troops into a faraway conflict. And who knows where it will end up.

montrealer58 montrealer58's picture

The idea of a war against Russia is insane.

6079_Smith_W

montrealer58 wrote:

The idea of a war against Russia is insane.

Yes, and who is shouting the loudest about it?

 

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

Seriously Smith, the idea of war on Russia has gone from a subject of ridicule by you and some other babblers to a subject raised by the most distinguished scholars on both sides of the Atlantic. The very lengthy thread with innumerable links confirms that fact.

Meanwhile, you are still taking the same approach of yesterday.

sherpa-finn

That is an interesting (absurd?) little deflection to a comparison between Finland and Switzerland. So, exactly which superpower was it that invaded Switzerland in WW2? Remind me please...

Or perhaps I misunderstand and your point is that it was the Finns own fault that the Soviet Army invaded them?  That is just sooooo pitiful.

And on the subject of Switzerland, maybe some of our resident historians can correct me. But I believe that the most recent army to successfully invade Switzerland was in fact Russian, back around 1800 or so. Which suggests that the Russian imperialist tradition runs deep and wide, doesn't it.

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

Yes, and the next thing you will say is that the current Israeli settler state  is God's will as explained in religious texts.

6079_Smith_W

..and don't forget the Poles. They were asking for it. Does that mean ikosmos that you think the Nazis were justified in invading as well, since they did it in a signed agreement with the Soviets? And if they weren't justified, but Stalin was, then just what do you mean?

and while we're tallying up who was helping whom around that time it was just a few months after the winter war that Stalin helped Hitler move one of his ships right past Finland into the pacific through the northeast passage with the help of his icebreakers.

The most scholarly report I have read about world war three is the one on my facebook feed from the guy trying to sell me stocks and bonds that will get me through the crisis.

 

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

Ah, now it all makes sense.  Do you have a lot of shares in military contractors, Smith? What about Ukrainian chocolate monopolies? Israeli policing technology? Canadian overseas mining investments in the "stans" ? GMO-soaked corporations?

 

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

I'm going to make the argument, not my own original thesis at all, that the current political tensions are MORE serious than at virtually any other time since Yalta and the institutional and other arrangements after WW2.

That is, the current danger of war is maybe the greatest since the October Crisis of 1962. We now have the real possibility of direct confrontation between troops of the predatory NATO military alliance and the Russian Federation. During the (original phase of) Cold War I, the conflicts were always through proxies and other states. Not directly.

Therefore, the risk of escalation is much higher now.

Unionist

sherpa-finn wrote:

The Finnish people was caught between two vicious military super-powers. One that invaded them (The Soviets) and one that did not (The Germans). They made their choices, - fight the invader first, use the other to fight alongside, and when they were done with the invader, - boot the other guys out of the country too.

Holy fuck.

Slumberjack

Unionist wrote:
Holy fuck.

Yes, to the whole thread really.

josh

Todrick of Chatsworth wrote:

Yes, we should remember all Soviet accomplishments in WW2.

1. The joint invasion of Poland in 1939 with the Nazis.

2. The Katyn Massacre of Polish Army Officers. (This occurred on the 3rd of April 1940.)

3. The invasion of Finland in 1939. (The Winter War of 1939/40)

4. The numerous war crimes against the German population in 1944/45.

Of course the remaining allies all committed various war crimes, however to sing the praise of the Red Army as glorious heroes maybe be an unrealistic and unhistorical. 

The Third Reich would still be going strong without them. Just a little detail you left out.

6079_Smith_W

Not going to answer that question about the Poles deserving the Nazi invasion, eh?

And you should really work on your deflections, and get out of the mill more if you haven't seen that FB ad.

 

 

 

Todrick of Chat...

ikosmos wrote:

Bwa ha ha ha. Talk about forgetting. Those of you who are into discussing the Winter War should also try not to erase the Continuation War (June 1941 - Sept 1944).

You know. The war in which Finland, allied with Nazi Germany, attacked the Soviets. You know. The reason why Canada declared war on Finland in December 1941. That war.

Yes, forgetting can be very convenient. For some.

 

Quote:
Winter War

Finland-Soviet Union
30 November 1939 to 13 March 1940

- began with Soviet attack
- ended with Moscow Peace Treaty

- huge Soviet losses in war: ~ 65 000 Finnish losses to ~ 392 000 Soviet losses
- contributed to Hitler's decision to attack SU later on
- followed horrific purge in the Soviet military (50% of its officers executed) in 1937
- Finland ceded 9% of its territory and 20% of its industrial capacity to SU in the Moscow Peace Treaty

- 6 Dec 1917 Finland independent following GOSR and support for national self-determination

- In April 1938, or possibly earlier, the Soviet Union began diplomatic negotiations with Finland, trying to improve their mutual defence against Germany. The Soviets were mainly concerned that Germany or France and Great Britain would use Finland as a bridgehead for an attack on Leningrad, and demanded a territorial swap to move the border farther away from the city. More than a year passed, with little progress, and the political situation in Europe worsened.

- the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, on 23 August 1939 conceded Finland to "Soviet sphere of influence"

- In the autumn of 1939, the Soviet Union demanded that Finland agree to move the border 25 kilometres (16 miles) back from Leningrad. It also demanded that Finland lease the Hanko Peninsula to the USSR for 30 years for the creation of a naval base there. In exchange, the Soviet Union offered Finland a large part of Karelia (more than twice the size). This offer was referred to in Finland as "two pounds of dirt for one pound of gold".

- in the Continuation War (June 1941 - Sept 1944) Finland, along with Nazi Germany, attacked the SU. The UK subsequently declared war on Finland on Dec 6 1941 (Canada declared war on Dec 7).

Maybe you should try reading some history books at your public library or even on the internet.

The Winter War (1939-40) started almost 18 months before the German invasion into Russia (1941). That means your theory of Russia attacking a German Ally as defensive measure is a bit farfetched at best or just a pure outright lie.

It is also nice of you to forget the Soviets help defeat the Polish Army in 1939 as part of a Russian/German Alliance.

The Soviets/Russians Empire had been hostile to Finland since the 1800s, the Winter War was convenient excuse to attack Finland, even started with a nice false flag event to start the war. 

 

Todrick of Chat...

josh wrote:
Todrick of Chatsworth wrote:

Yes, we should remember all Soviet accomplishments in WW2.

1. The joint invasion of Poland in 1939 with the Nazis.

2. The Katyn Massacre of Polish Army Officers. (This occurred on the 3rd of April 1940.)

3. The invasion of Finland in 1939. (The Winter War of 1939/40)

4. The numerous war crimes against the German population in 1944/45.

Of course the remaining allies all committed various war crimes, however to sing the praise of the Red Army as glorious heroes maybe be an unrealistic and unhistorical. 

The Third Reich would still be going strong without them. Just a little detail you left out.

 

You seem to not grasp the fact the Russians helped out the Germans out pretty much for the first 2 years of the war.

montrealer58 montrealer58's picture

I am not saying that warnings of an impending war with Russia are insane. What I meant was the idea of waging war on Russia is insane. Sorry if there was any misunderstanding...

Indeed I am afraid that it is more likely than it should be.

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

josh wrote:
Todrick of Chatsworth wrote:

Yes, we should remember all Soviet accomplishments in WW2.

1. The joint invasion of Poland in 1939 with the Nazis.

2. The Katyn Massacre of Polish Army Officers. (This occurred on the 3rd of April 1940.)

3. The invasion of Finland in 1939. (The Winter War of 1939/40)

4. The numerous war crimes against the German population in 1944/45.

Of course the remaining allies all committed various war crimes, however to sing the praise of the Red Army as glorious heroes maybe be an unrealistic and unhistorical. 

The Third Reich would still be going strong without them. Just a little detail you left out.

 

aha ha ha ha. And Todrick is lecturing others on "doing some reading" of history. aha ha ha ha.

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

This thread is proof, if proof were needed, that the sharp debates about events from 7 decades ago still have powerful bearing on the present. Today, with the frothing Russophobia reaching levels of rabidness not seen since the era of Dr. Strangelove, missiles removed in Turkey and Cuba, and so on, we see views that re-write the history of World War II effectively erasing the enormous and pivotal contribution of the Soviet regime to the military defeat of the Nazi Reich.

The cultivation of hate, born in part from legitimate historical grievances and crimes, contributes to an atmosphere of war preparation. In the past it was the Soviets, today the Russian Federation and its President. Articles appear is respectable Psychology journals purporting to show that the latter suffers from some mental defect. The lessons of World War II, that the countries with different systems were able to work together in common cause, and others, are being erased and replaced with the white foam of the rabid dog.

josh

Todrick of Chatsworth wrote:

josh wrote:
Todrick of Chatsworth wrote:

Yes, we should remember all Soviet accomplishments in WW2.

1. The joint invasion of Poland in 1939 with the Nazis.

2. The Katyn Massacre of Polish Army Officers. (This occurred on the 3rd of April 1940.)

3. The invasion of Finland in 1939. (The Winter War of 1939/40)

4. The numerous war crimes against the German population in 1944/45.

Of course the remaining allies all committed various war crimes, however to sing the praise of the Red Army as glorious heroes maybe be an unrealistic and unhistorical. 

The Third Reich would still be going strong without them. Just a little detail you left out.

 

You seem to not grasp the fact the Russians helped out the Germans out pretty much for the first 2 years of the war.

And what was Munich? And the financial support the West gave the Germans throughout the 30s.

Todrick of Chat...

ikosmos wrote:

josh wrote:
Todrick of Chatsworth wrote:

Yes, we should remember all Soviet accomplishments in WW2.

1. The joint invasion of Poland in 1939 with the Nazis.

2. The Katyn Massacre of Polish Army Officers. (This occurred on the 3rd of April 1940.)

3. The invasion of Finland in 1939. (The Winter War of 1939/40)

4. The numerous war crimes against the German population in 1944/45.

Of course the remaining allies all committed various war crimes, however to sing the praise of the Red Army as glorious heroes maybe be an unrealistic and unhistorical. 

The Third Reich would still be going strong without them. Just a little detail you left out.

 

aha ha ha ha. And Todrick is lecturing others on "doing some reading" of history. aha ha ha ha.

Are you saying none of those 4 events happened?

Todrick of Chat...

josh wrote:

And what was Munich? And the financial support the West gave the Germans throughout the 30s.

 

Most of the allies are equally as guility for committtiing war crimes and supporting the Germans at some point in time.  All I am saying let's not whitewash the Soviets intentions in WW2.

Pages