Yalta at 70 and the end of the Second World War

151 posts / 0 new
Last post
sherpa-finn

Holy fuck, back at you, Unionist.

Just for the record: THE TOTAL NUMBER OF JEWISH CIVILIANS FROM FINLAND THAT DIED IN THE HOLOCAUST: Zero. Nada. Not one.  

Absolutely, it is to be regretted that other peoples and nations were not as capable of managing the storms of war the way the Finns did. But that is no reason to begrudge or ridicule the Finns keen sense of realpolitik when it came to the imperial intentions of the Red Army.

The Finns do acknowledge handing over 8 Jewish Soviet refugees to the Germans in 1942, and these people were presumably murdered. At that  time, Finnish civil and church leaders said 'Never Again!" and it did not happen again.  And the Finnish Gov't officially apologised for this action in 2000.  An admirable history in difficult circumstances. Deal with it.

 

ygtbk

ikosmos wrote:

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

Do you ever listen to / read yourself? You are not doing your cause any favours.

Unionist

sherpa-finn wrote:

Just for the record: THE TOTAL NUMBER OF JEWISH CIVILIANS FROM FINLAND THAT DIED IN THE HOLOCAUST: Zero. Nada. Not one. 

Yeah, even Finnish Jews were not immune from the filthy little Finnish nationalism that led to collaboration with Hitler. Your comments are disgusting, and unfortunately they place a lot of your other opinions into a fresh perspective. This is unfortunate, because I respected your viewpoint.

[url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/museums/10682975/The-Jews-who-fought-... Jews who fought for Hitler: 'We did not help the Germans. We had a common enemy'[/url]

So, to be extremely clear:

FUCK the Finns, Ukrainians, Brits, French, Croats, Magyars, Indians, and all others who kissed Hitler's ass for whatever reason - because he'd help them fight the Bolsheviks, or help them secure their "independence", or wipe out the Jews and other such cancers from their midst. Very sweet of you to revive this murderous brutality in 2015 and paint it with some kind of enlightened and progressive brush. If any of these scum are still alive, they should be dragged in front of the courts and meted out the punishment they richly deserve.

 

6079_Smith_W

I think your point might be undercut by some major parties that are conspicuous by their absence from that list of yours.

Awareness and holding people to account for genocide and atrocities is important. Reducing it to a political foil? Not so much. For heaven's sake, the Russians didn't even want to talk about a lot of this history until the breakup of the Soviet Union because they wanted a happy family. Hauling it out now? You'll excuse me if I am skeptical.

Unionist

6079_Smith_W wrote:
For heaven's sake, the Russians didn't even want to talk about a lot of this history until the breakup of the Soviet Union because they wanted a happy family.

Sorry, I'm not Russian, and if they covered up Hitler's crimes for selfish nationalist motives, they should be dragged in front of the appropriate tribunals as well.

I've watched, without much comment, as Ukrainian followers of Bandera, the OUN, and the like are painted as heroes and victims in 2015. That's brutal enough. But to portray the actual Hitlerite allies of the 1940s as heroes of national liberation? "We'll use Hitler to fight the Soviets, then we'll boot Hitler out!" Such monstrosities can only pass when all sense of morality and all memory of history are erased.

 

 

ygtbk

Unionist wrote:

sherpa-finn wrote:

Just for the record: THE TOTAL NUMBER OF JEWISH CIVILIANS FROM FINLAND THAT DIED IN THE HOLOCAUST: Zero. Nada. Not one. 

Yeah, even Finnish Jews were not immune from the filthy little Finnish nationalism that led to collaboration with Hitler. Your comments are disgusting, and unfortunately they place a lot of your other opinions into a fresh perspective. This is unfortunate, because I respected your viewpoint.

[url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/museums/10682975/The-Jews-who-fought-... Jews who fought for Hitler: 'We did not help the Germans. We had a common enemy'[/url]

So, to be extremely clear:

FUCK the Finns, Ukrainians, Brits, French, Croats, Magyars, Indians, and all others who kissed Hitler's ass for whatever reason - because he'd help them fight the Bolsheviks, or help them secure their "independence", or wipe out the Jews and other such cancers from their midst. Very sweet of you to revive this murderous brutality in 2015 and paint it with some kind of enlightened and progressive brush. If any of these scum are still alive, they should be dragged in front of the courts and meted out the punishment they richly deserve.

Unionist, I'm sure that your feelings are heartfelt, but you know about the Molotov-von Ribbentrop pact, right? (Apologies to Smith if I am once again pointing out something previously pointed out.) Nobody can possibly defend Nazis, but pretending that the Russians didn't collaborate with them is ahistorical.

Unionist

ygtbk wrote:

Unionist, I'm sure that your feelings are heartfelt, but you know about the Molotov-von Ribbentrop pact, right? (Apologies to Smith if I am once again pointing out something previously pointed out.) Nobody can possibly defend Nazis, but pretending that the Russians didn't collaborate with them is ahistorical.

Yes I do know about that pact, extremely well. I am not defending and will never defend that dirty deal.

So now explain to me how self-styled decent folks in 2015, on this board, can defend monstrous deals between dirty little chauvinists of Finland and Ukraine and elsewhere with Hitler?

Yes, my feelings are heartfelt. Where do you stand? On Bandera and the OUN, for example? And would you like me to name all the other murderous bastards who are being revived and praised today?

 

ygtbk

Unionist wrote:

ygtbk wrote:

Unionist, I'm sure that your feelings are heartfelt, but you know about the Molotov-von Ribbentrop pact, right? (Apologies to Smith if I am once again pointing out something previously pointed out.) Nobody can possibly defend Nazis, but pretending that the Russians didn't collaborate with them is ahistorical.

Yes I do know about that pact, extremely well. I am not defending and will never defend that dirty deal.

So now explain to me how self-styled decent folks in 2015, on this board, can defend monstrous deals between dirty little chauvinists of Finland and Ukraine and elsewhere with Hitler?

Yes, my feelings are heartfelt. Where do you stand? On Bandera and the OUN, for example? And would you like me to name all the other murderous bastards who are being revived and praised today?

I do not support fascists, for the simple reason that I am a libertarian, and so fascists are abhorrent to me for multiple reasons. A minimal state is a beautiful thing.

But if it's true that Hitler and Stalin were for some period on the same side, then criticizing people for allying with Hitler (obviously a BAD THING) without noting that they could be implicitly allying with Stalin (I say that's a bad thing, others may differ), then there's at least a possible logical problem.

BTW, are you channelling Lillian Hellman?

sherpa-finn

"Filthy little Finnish nationalism".  Really Unionist, you have got to be kidding.

The Finns didn't kiss anybody's ass (as the article you linked to well shows). They used the Germans to fight the invading Red Army to a stalemate, - and only fell back on that unsavoury option once the Western Allies had broken their pledge to support Finland against the West's  newfound ally, the Soviet Union.  And when peace was eventually negotiated with the Russians in 1944, - the Finns promptly drove the Germans out of Finland.  

So, was the moral compromise worth it?  Lets just remember that of all the European countries adjoining the Soviet Union in 1939, Finland was the only one that by 1945 was not occupied by the Red Army.  And while every other nation from Estonia to Ukraine was condemned to 50 years of eastern / Soviet bloc realities, the Finns enjoyed 50 years of democracy, independence, economic modernisation and - heaven forbid - social democracy.

If European history teaches us anything - its that the Finns made the right choice for their country and their people. To their credit, they went into it with their eyes open and their principles firm.  The texts of the day make it clear: Finland was not an ally of Germany, it was a "co-belligerent."  As the old folk tale goes, they shook hands with the devil, and lived to tell the tale, - in their own free and democratic country, too. 

Given what happened elsewhere in Eastern Europe, and the real choices available to them at the time, - the Finns should have the respect of any reasonable person.  Your frothing at the mouth at their simple act of national self-preservation because "Look what happened elsewhere!"  seems rather sad and gratuitous. 

Unionist

ygtbk wrote:

But if it's true that Hitler and Stalin were for some period on the same side, ...

What the hell does that mean? The "same side"? Stalin thought he could avoid Hitler's aggressive appetite, so he did a non-aggression pact. It was a dirty deal. But Stalin didn't go to war with Britain, France, Canada... What "side" are you talking about??

 

ygtbk

Unionist wrote:

ygtbk wrote:

But if it's true that Hitler and Stalin were for some period on the same side, ...

What the hell does that mean? The "same side"? Stalin thought he could avoid Hitler's aggressive appetite, so he did a non-aggression pact. It was a dirty deal. But Stalin didn't go to war with Britain, France, Canada... What "side" are you talking about??

In my estimation you are generally quite intelligent. So I feel embarrassed spelling things out but here goes...

1) There is evidence that Germany and the U.S.S.R. were working together very shortly after the Night of the Long Knives (or even earlier). Painting Stalin as an ingenue is not convincing.

2) Finland was, under the Molotov-von Ribbentrop pact, under the Soviet sphere of influence, with Germany agreeing not to interfere. So if I were a Finn I would view both the Germans and the Russians as invaders (or, at the very least, inimical to me) and would, ideally, get them to kill each other.

You can take it from there.

6079_Smith_W

Unionist wrote:

6079_Smith_W wrote:
For heaven's sake, the Russians didn't even want to talk about a lot of this history until the breakup of the Soviet Union because they wanted a happy family.

But to portray the actual Hitlerite allies of the 1940s as heroes of national liberation?

Because they were fighting for their own country, Unionist.

How is it that they are somehow the worst of the worst even though they did not commit the atrocities that Bandera did? Didn't invade others' nations, and certainly didn't sign the agreements and give aid and military support  to Hitler on the scale that the Soviet Union did?

Again, I get your personal concern about this. That doesn't mean I am going to buy the double standard that is being passed off here.

And it was not simply a non-aggression pact. They actively aided the German war effort, carved up Poland with them, agreed to anti-Semitic suppression, helped move their ships, exchanged war materiel for weapons (which helped them fight against Finland), helped them break the allied blockade, entered into talks to join the axis. And committed atrocities of their own.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi%E2%80%93Soviet_economic_relations_%281...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German%E2%80%93Soviet_Axis_talks

In short, Hitler could not have conducted his war in western Europe without oil, rubber and other raw material supplied to him by Russia.

But sure. They were the only thing that stood between the rest of the western world and Nazi domination. Hasn't this been posted two or three times already?

 

ikosmos ikosmos's picture
ygtbk

I am also a fan of the Red Army:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jrg0X9H6FGU

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

The Russian government has decided to mark the 70th anniversary of victory in the Great Patriotic War (what they call WW2) by a massive amnesty. The lower house of the Russian Duma (Parliament) has passed a related bill and forwarded it to the President.

Quote:
The amnesty will apply to all suspects, defendants and first-time convicts guilty of minor crimes and crimes of medium gravity whose prison sentences do not exceed five years. There is no amnesty for those behind bars for grave crimes such as murder, terrorism, drug trafficking and kidnapping.

According to preliminary estimates, up to 60,000 convicts and up to 200,000 people under suspended sentences may be released during the six-month-long amnesty campaign.

While Russia can't be compared to the virtual police state in the USA, the truth is that they do have one of the largest prison populations in the world (according to TASS or their state media).

TASS - massive amnesty planned

There is no truth to the rumour that the USA is planning to mark the occassion by gunning down even more African-American males than usual.

Todrick of Chat...

http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2015/04/russia_twerking_arrests.html

Russian court sentences 3 women to jail time for twerking at World War II memorial

"MOSCOW — A court in southern Russia has sentenced three young women to brief jail terms for making a video showing them twerking next to a World War II memorial.

Russia celebrates the 70th anniversary of the Allies' victory in the World War II next month, an emotionally charged holiday the Kremlin has been using for propaganda purposes.

The sentencing in the Novorossiysk district court of a 19-year-old woman to 15 days in jail and two women in their 20s to 10 days comes after prosecutors launched a probe into a video showing a group of women twerking next to the memorial on the Black Sea. Twerking is a sexually provocative dance involving thrusting of the hips."

 

 

Slumberjack

Maybe when they get out of jail in Russia they can do a gig at the National War Memorial in Ottawa on top of the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier.  I'm sure the authorities there wouldn't be as anal about it as the Russians would they?

6079_Smith_W

The reason why there were guards posted at the war memorial in Ottawa is because of people pissing on it .

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=522fbf0c-e034-4e67-bbd8-a...

It would have been a $125 fine. Probably the same as if they had done it in any other public place.

Don't know about other places, but the cenotaph in Regina is in the middle of the folk festival site in summer. People dance next to it, sit on it, and lean on it while they have a beer.

Another question is if people here on this site would be quite so outraged about dancing next to one, or if they would consider the nature of laws criminalizing "hooliganism" and disrespect for the state and the military.

After all, the big line is that they died for freedom, right?

 

 

Slumberjack

6079_Smith_W wrote:
Another question is if people here on this site would be quite so outraged about dancing next to one, or if they would consider the nature of laws criminalizing "hooliganism" and disrespect for the state and the military. After all, the big line is that they died for freedom, right? 

Whether there should be punishment or not for disrespecting the trappings of state is a different topic from the segue we're actually in at the moment, which more involves scales of punishment.  Personally if the state wants to valorize the human sacrifices it has offered up to worship previous versions of corporatism, then it does seem fitting when such notions are pissed on.

montrealer58 montrealer58's picture

Slumberjack wrote:

Maybe when they get out of jail in Russia they can do a gig at the National War Memorial in Ottawa on top of the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier.  I'm sure the authorities there wouldn't be as anal about it as the Russians would they?

 

LOL!!!!

6079_Smith_W

@ SJ

Well it is both, actually. Though it seems from that article that this is more to do with policing morality, since it is part of a more general campaign of closing dance schools because of racy routines.

Here's the offending footage, which was not some drunken stunt, but intended to be a marketing tool. And as you can see from the pics, the idea that they did it next to the monument has to be put in the context of Soviet statuary which, like that one in Treptower Park, is the size of a football stadium.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3056282/Women-twerked-WW2-memori...

 

montrealer58 montrealer58's picture

It has become clear that everything has to be spelled out here. I said "LOL" to the last post because I found it to be funny.

That being said, this idea of jailing people for harmless free expression anywhere in the world is abominable. So long as you do not incite racial or theological hatred, or do not do the equivalent of shout "fire" in a crowded room (which are forbidden in existing criminal codes in reasonably civilized countries), you should be allowed to be as outrageous as possible.

For it is this kind of playful outrageousness which makes us think.

6079_Smith_W

ikosmos wrote:

Those brutal, incomprehensible Rooskies, though. Just uncivilized.

Not what I said, (though when it extends to passing laws that wouldn't allow Tolstoy to publish, you do have a point there) but it does raise the question of how much this has to do with the Second World War, and how much with the current government religious  policy of moral policing.

Perhaps Vlad doesn't like anyone looking prettier than him. They weren't wearing heels after all, so it can't be the height thing.

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

Brainwashed Europeans: Perverted history: Europeans think US army liberated continent during WW2

RT wrote:
As little as 13 percent of Europeans think the Soviet Army played the leading role in liberating Europe from Nazism during WW2, a recent poll targeting over 3,000 people in France, Germany and the UK reveals.

The majority of respondents – 43 percent – said the US Army played the main role in liberating Europe. The survey, carried out from March 20 to April 9, 2015, was conducted by the British ICM Research agency for Sputnik News.

Yanqui propaganda takes many forms. It is an ugly joke - but true! - that Philipinos are so brainwashed that they love the USA more than they love their own country. And their memory of the Spanish-American War - in which the US killed an enormous number of Philipinos - has been erased and replaced by a delusion of a "helpful" Yanqui Empire.

The propaganda is also in the form of "comedy". An elder once remarked to me, "If you watched Hogan's Heroes, then you might be forgiven for thinking that the USA single-handedly liberated Europe (and the rest of the world) from the Nazis.

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

Apparently the US IS planning to gun down more African-Americans. Just look at Baltimore.

What was that about the cruelty of fines and short jail terms for twerking at sacred Russian War Memorials [Memorials in which literally every inch of ground was soaked in blood] ? Gosh, brutal.

What the US does every day is fine. Those brutal, incomprehensible Rooskies, though. Just uncivilized. Maybe we've got a new Pussy Riot. If they could just shit on every sacred memorial, that would be, like, so "freedom".

sherpa-finn

Well, the problem in the survey cited could be more about the phrasing of the question than anything else. While most everyone surely recognizes the sacrifices made by the Red Army in WW2, - for whatever reason said Army was widely viewed by much of Europe as an occupying force as much as a a "liberating" force.

Can't imagine why. (Googles "Imre Nagy") 

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

sherpa-finn wrote:
While most everyone surely recognizes the sacrifices made by the Red Army in WW2 ...

Nice deflection. Who liberated Russia from the Nazis? Who liberated Ukraine from the Nazis? Who liberated Poland from the Nazis? Who liberated all these Concentration Camps like Treblinka, Auschwitz, etc? The argument about "sacrifice" is only a part of the argument. These countries and their peoples were saved by the Red Army from physical extermination by the Nazis who intended to "cleanse" the conquered territory of "untermensch" and re-populate the areas with "the master race". 

Try to get your priorities right.

 

Supplemental: Ulson Gunnar out of New York, who writes for the online magazine New Eastern Outlook, supplements this idea of mine with the following...

Quote:
...It is clear that the increasing animosity toward, and attempts to defile the sacrifices of millions of fallen Russian soldiers during World War 2 represents not only a temporary political row between the West and Russia, but a dangerous overwriting of history that attempts to obscure the crimes, atrocities and acts of aggression that led up to and lasted throughout the war. Obscuring the warnings taught by history invites history’s repeating itself.

Burying The Greatest Victory in Spite: Rewriting History to demonize Russia

bekayne

ikosmos wrote:

Who liberated Poland from the Nazis? 

Who colluded with the Nazis to carve up Poland in 1939?

sherpa-finn

Sorry, ikosmos.  But history seems to teach us a pretty compelling and universal lesson: people don't consider an army to be a "liberating" force if it simply replaces the nasty old bad guys with its own stooges and surrogates.

Deny it all you want.... wail about if you must. Or better yet, just go look up the definition of "liberation" in the dictionary.

Unionist

bekayne wrote:

ikosmos wrote:

Who liberated Poland from the Nazis? 

Who colluded with the Nazis to carve up Poland in 1939?

"Carve up Poland"? Who created "Poland" after WWI?

Interesting, allegedly progressive babblers that can't tell the difference between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union. This really becomes a question of "which side are you on". Thank God the world figured that one out.

 

6079_Smith_W

Unionist wrote:

 

Interesting, allegedly progressive babblers that can't tell the difference between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union.

You getting out that measuring stick again, Unionist? Do let us know when you figure out which pile was higher. Because no, I don't see the difference between Stalin's regime and Hitler's, especially in this endeavour. And also in their helping each other wage war right up until Barbarossa.

If I recall the Red Cross had the same problem figuring out the difference when they started pulling the bodies out of the Katyn forest.

 

 

Unionist

It's cool, you can take whatever side you want from the safe distance of history. Nuremburg is over and done with.

6079_Smith_W

What side would that be? They were both monsters who slaughtered millions of people.

It is the implication that there is a distinction to be made, and that one had a better reason than the other which I find absurd.

sherpa-finn

I wouldn't bother responding to Unionist on this one, Smith.  He is trolling.

Anyone who puts a country's name in italics, - as in his question above 'Who created "Poland" after WWI?" is questioning that country's right to exist.

So, the answer to Unionists' other question  is Yes, - we do know which side you are on.  And apparently its the side of imperial powers, not nation states. 

So much for "allegedly progressive babblers", indeed. (My italics.)

Webgear

 

 

Webgear

 

 

 

Slumberjack

Is this the ghost of Calvin Coolidge?

ygtbk

Slumberjack wrote:

Is this the ghost of Calvin Coolidge?

Well, silent anyway...

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

Perhaps it's a way of saying "Hello" without saying Hello. In the next few days the 70th Anniversary of Victory will take place.

Fewer and fewer of them remain. Perhaps we ought to put aside the sharp political differences of today and remember what a stupendous feat they all accomplished in defeating the military juggernaut of the Nazi regime.

Their glorious victory will live through the ages. 

William Shakespeare wrote:

This story shall the good man teach his son;
And Crispin Crispian shall ne’er go by,
From this day to the ending of the world,
But we in it shall be remembered-
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers ...

More than the Battle of Agincourt, the Victory of the Allies in WW2 shall be remembered ... to the ending of the world.

"From this day to the ending of the world..."

NDPP

70 Years Since Victory Over Nazi Germany

http://9may.rt.com

"In the Soviet Union, at least 27 million people were dead (out of a total of 55 million fatalities), while many cities, towns and villages lay in ruins. After the iconic parade in June, there were no celebratory marches for two decades. Yet the Great Patriotic War, which started for the Soviets in 1941, united the entire population and remains a centerpiece of Russia's consciousness..."

NDPP

The Haunt of History in Eurasia

http://thesaker.is/the-haunt-of-history-in-eurasia/

"Eurasia is on pace to become integrated like never before...The US understands the threat that this poses to its global hegemony, ergo the rolling out of its latest post modern weapon, the militarization of historical memory..."

NDPP

V-E Day Tarnished By New War of Words Between Russia, The West  -  by Brian Stewart

http://www.cbc.ca/news/ve-day-tarnished-by-new-war-of-words-between-russ...

"To get a sense of how far relations have soured, consider that a decade ago, then US president George W Bush made a point of flying to Moscow to stand with 'my friend' Vladimir Putin during the victory parade in order to thank the Russian people directly 'for their sacrifice.'

Such niceties already seem quaint, part of a brief interregnum before this new Cold War II that we seem to be entering. Given the current poor climate of East West antagonism, this infighting over VE day is a very worrying development..."

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

Some quotes from that Haunt of History in Eurasia piece by AK.

Quote:
The more subjectively (and in many cases, falsely) cited ‘facts’ that can divide Russia from Europe, the better, and since Eastern Europe is the most receptive to this type of information war, it makes sense that half of NATO’s ‘strategic communication centers’ are located in that area. It should be taken as a given that these entities are cranking out loads of revisionist World War II-era material in a frantic quest to rapidly rewrite history and imprint the US’ approved version of events into the minds of the regional majority. Only by planting the roots of intergenerational hate against Russia can the US feel assured that its regional vassals will remain under its sway for decades to come.

That's a very long term strategy, longer than the recent Cold War 2. Furthermore,

Quote:
... the effect of such a strategy is to strengthen the population’s commitment to NATO to the point where the people actually invite the US to deepen its occupation of their territories, as is already the case in the Baltics and Poland. Ukraine is the epistemological experiment underpinning the success or failure of US’ other European ventures in this regard, and thus far, this tactic has been a wild success in generating anti-Russian sentiment all throughout Europe, even penetrating into its Scandinavian and Western European periphery.

Finally,

Quote:
The US is experimenting with a novel method of warfare in its quest to contain and dismember Russia, China, and Iran, and that’s the militarization of historical memory. World War II has been reinterpreted in such a way as to fashion it as a weapon against Russia and China, while the Sunni-Shia split, which had been peacefully dormant for over a thousand years, has been reawakened with militant religious vigor unseen since the time of the Crusades.

Cultivating conflict among Muslims from 1,000 years ago is part of the plan. Truly, the American Taliban.

And with Harper we have the Canadian Taliban.

A very good article and worth reading carefully.

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

The link to this article could go in a number of threads. No matter.

A recent article from a high-ranking German official attempts to revive the doctrine of "Better Hitler than the Red Army". This is in the context of sabre-rattling in German military circles generally over the "need" for depleted uranium shells for German tanks to deal with "Russian aggression". And so on.

Quote:
"Seventy years after the end of World War II, there is a growing mood in the German elite that the real catastrophe of World War II was not the Holocaust and the war of annihilation in the east, but rather the victory of the Red Army. At a time when notorious Nazi apologist Ernst Nolte is being rehabilitated at Humboldt University in Berlin, Spiegel Online published a few days ago an interview with the “legendary journalist” Wolf Schneider under the provocative title “Better Hitler than the Red Army”.

The author of the Die Welt column on combat tanks is not just anybody. He is Hans Rühle, a ministry official and national security politician who enjoys the widest and most influential connections."

This also relates to war preparations against Russia.

Quote:
The provocations against Russia are not limited to the rewriting of history at the universities or rhetorical threats from politicians and the media. These provide merely the ideological background to the massive rearmament of NATO in eastern Europe, which increasingly takes the direct form of open war preparations against nuclear-armed Russia. Germany is playing a leading role in this development...

Denying that the imperialist powers are preparing for a war against Russia, or are at least willing to engage in one, would be closing one’s eyes to reality.... The military, as well as political and media elites, consider opposition from the population to be the major obstacle in the drive towards war.

Germany needs more effective tanks for war against Russia. “Feuer Frei!”

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

Let's be clear that the conflict over the meaning of WW2 began the moment the war ended. For example, just as Labour Day is celebrated in September, and not on May 1 by the organized labour movement in the US and Canada, so too the end of the war in Europe is celebrated on May 8 and May 9. This was not simply a time zone issue. It was a question of erasing one understanding of events and replacing that with another understanding. Even to argue that the two systems were able to work together for common cause meets frothing and snarling resistance. Today's re-writing of history is a full court press to impose the view that the Soviet and Nazi regimes were the same, to confuse people about who the Allies even were, and this re-writing has been going on since the 40th anniversary and even before that.

Just as some of the actions of the war were carried out with an eye on the post-war situation, such as the bombing of Dresden (Soviet zone so suitable for bombing), the unnecessary use of nuclear weapons over Hiroshima and Nagasaki (as a warning to Stalin and for "practice" [they were the most "studied" bombings in history]), the dividing line is not so sharp as we might think. War truly is the continuation of politics by other means.

 

Supplemental: more about the May 8 and May 9 (and May 5 = Holland!) issue.

May 1945: Nazi Germany Surrenders, But… on May 7, 8, or 9?

Quote:

As far as the Soviets and the majority of Eastern Europeans were concerned, the Second World War in Europe ended with the ceremony in Berlin on May 8, 1945, which resulted in the arms being laid down the next day, on May 9. For the Americans, and for most Western Europeans, “the real thing” was and remains the surrender in Reims, signed on May 7 and effective on May 8. While the former always commemorate the end of the war on May 9, the latter invariably do so on May 8. (But the Dutch celebrate on May 5.) That one of the greatest dramas of world history could have such a confusing and unworthy end in Europe was a consequence, as Gabriel Kolko writes, of the way in which the Americans and the British sought to achieve all sorts of big and small advantages for themselves – to the disadvantage of the Soviets – from the inevitable German capitulation.[6]

 

As Kolko and other scholars point out, the US and the Brits allowed Nazi troops to "disperse" and flee behind their lines, allowed fragmented surrenders, and effectively violated the agreement with the Soviets not to arrange for separate surrenders by the Nazis. What is also remarkable is that with the establishment of 2 German countries (actually 3 if you include West Berlin) after WW2, the whole status was frozen until the fall of the Soviet Union led to the re-unification of Germany and so the 2nd World War really "ended" in  1990!!

Quote:
That made the “Two-plus-Four” negotiations of the summer and fall of 1990 possible, negotiations whereby on the one hand the two German states found ways to reunify Germany, and whereby on the other hand the four great victors of the Second World War – the United States, Great Britain, France, and the Soviet Union – imposed their conditions on the German reunification and cleared up the status of the newly reunited country, taking into account not only their own interests but also the interests of other concerned European states such as Poland. The result of these negotiations was a convention that was signed in Moscow on September 12, 1990, and which, faute de mieux, can be viewed as the peace treaty that put an official end to the Second World War, at least with respect to Germany.[7]

So May 7 8 or 9?

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

Russian diplomat: "Attempts to falsify and rewrite the history of World War II are a dangerous path, a top Russian diplomat has warned, stressing that it is important to remember that the victory belongs to all the allies who fought Nazism."

The Russian Federation has also produced a 121-page report on the dangerous threat of Neo-Nazism, [unfortunately stoked with loving attention by the Western jackboot regimes]. 

Quote:
Ahead of the 70th anniversary of the end of the World War II, Russia’s Foreign Ministry has published a report: “Neo-Nazism – a dangerous threat to human rights, democracy and the rule of law.” Dolgov stressed that one of the aims of the report is to raise awareness of the rise of neo-Nazi ideology and call for other countries to find ways to battle the trend.

“This report is just a milestone in the overall work that is being done, and not only by Russia but by other bodies including human rights groups and other public organizations. We hope that the report will be an additional factor in changing people’s perception of what’s going on,” he concluded.

Problem is, countries like Canada seem more concerned to fawn over today's neo-Nazis, like those in Ukraine, lavishing them with buckets of money, loving attention, and disgraceful votes at the UN , etc, etc, etc. It will probably be civil society organizations and not governments, like the militaristic Harper regime, that will pay attention to the lengthy report by the Russian Federation.

 

Permanent Mission of the Russian Federation to the EU and link to the report

Bec.De.Corbin Bec.De.Corbin's picture

I think some people have neo-Nazis on the brain way to much these days.

6079_Smith_W

I guess. Perhaps that's why Putin is bankrolling far-right racist parties in Europe and giving them free trips to Crimea.

NDPP

May 9th: Russian Victory, NATO Defeat  -  by Christopher Black

http://journal-neo.org/2015/05/07/may-9th-russian-victory-nato-defeat/

"The whole world owes the peoples of the Soviet Union, of the Russian Federation, a debt that can never be repaid for their defeat of fascism in Europe. They suffered the heaviest losses, the most destruction, the heaviest burden of fighting the Nazi war machine.

The refusal of NATO leaders to attend the Moscow ceremonies on May 9th is an insult to history..."

Slumberjack

Zinoviy Grigor'evich Kolobanov

Quote:
Twenty-two German tanks and two towed artillery pieces were knocked out by Kolobanov's tank before it ran out of ammunition.  Kolobanov ordered in another KV-1, and 21 more German tanks were destroyed before the half-hour battle ended. A total of 43 German tanks had been destroyed by the five Soviet KV-1s.

Pages