All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 34 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: The War in Europe - WW2 versus The Great Patriotic War
Post Number:#21  PostPosted: 18 May 2011 07:07 
Offline
Admin
User avatar

Joined: 28 Oct 2008
Last Visit: 30 Dec 2020 14:27
Posts: 3641
Location: Surrey UK
Gender: Male
Status: Married
Her/His Country: Russia
RW_here_since: July 2008
Times_to_FSU: Too many to remember
Typical Russian attitute, attack and divert attention from the main issue. [sarcastic.gif]

  1. wiz wrote:
    In actual fact with your comments you just confirmed what I did say, in the first part of my comments.

    The non aggression pact between Germany and Russia was mentioned BUT the important details of the secret pact that was agreed that Russia will supply Germany with raw materials and other supplies, oil etc, between Molotov–Ribbentrop (Stalin and Hitler) thus making Russia an ally of the Nazi's was omitted. The fact that Stalin and Hitler agreed to carve Poland and the Baltic countries it was not known to anybody that I spoke in Russia of certain age......... including my own wife, who watched in amazement the BBC documentary about the pact!
    From Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pact

    Denunciation of the pact

    For decades, it was the official policy of the Soviet Union to deny the existence of the secret protocol to the Soviet-German Pact. It was only after the Baltic Way demonstrations of 23 August 1989, where two million people created a human chain set on the 50th anniversary of the signing of the Pact that this policy changed. At the behest of Mikhail Gorbachev, Alexander Nikolaevich Yakovlev headed a commission investigating the existence of such a protocol. In December 1989, the commission concluded that the protocol had existed and revealed its findings to the Soviet Congress of People's Deputies. As a result, the first democratically elected Congress of Soviets passed the declaration confirming the existence of the secret protocols, condemning and denouncing them.

    Both successor-states of the pact parties have declared the secret protocols to be invalid from the moment they were signed. The Federal Republic of Germany declared this on September 1, 1989 and the Soviet Union on December 24, 1989, following an examination of the microfilmed copy of the German originals.

    The Soviet copy of the original document was declassified in 1992 and published in a scientific journal in early 1993.

    In August 2009, in an article written for the Polish newspaper Gazeta Wyborcza, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin condemned the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact as "immoral."


    You know perfectly well that the Russian media is controlled by the Kremlin, so the discovery of the document was not widely published OTHERWISE the russian people would have been made aware of it! (I do not blame the Russian people for their ignorance!)

  2. Posting links to various articles to point out ignorance of History by the Brits is nothing more than a tactic to divert attention from the main issues.

    The fact remains that in the west we do have more liberal and independent media than in Russia and I noticed that you read a lot of the BBC website........ which all the world respect as more independent source of information. I did say before that I do not trust neither bother reading the American Media because it's full of crap and American propaganda. Be assured that not all our media here in the UK is independent and Liberal and yes we do have many of them spewing out propaganda and lot of crap, but we are fully aware of them!

    Please remember that this is "Russian World Forums" and we mostly discuss subjects about Russia and not about American Politics, as in other boards! Take a look at the top of the board! [veryhappy.gif]

  3. wiz wrote:
    The other day watching the 9th May on RT TV one of the commentators said:
    "It was Russia that was fighting in Europe where the Allies came late into the war and were fighting in Africa!" [surprised.gif]
    We watched the parade LIVE on our TV and there were 3 commentators in the Studio, one of them was the well known American Peter Lavelle and also a very beautiful presenter on the ground in Red Square!

    You obviously watched the edited version and did not hear that comment ..... but my wife did, and I pointed out to her the comment as propaganda. [wink.gif]

  4. London Can Take It! was not only brilliantly effective propaganda at a time when American aid to Britain was vitally needed and American isolationism was still running strong: it made money to boot.

    From the beginning of World War II to well after its end, the British government carried out a massive propaganda offensive designed to sway popular opinion in the United States. The MOI and other agencies recruited and mobilized hundreds of British writers, actors, lecturers, labor leaders, filmmakers, religious figures—and not a few American journalists, radio executives, and Hollywood moguls—to help bring the British message to America.


    We all know about Churchill's propaganda efforts to convince the public opinion of USA to help and join the war BECAUSE Britain and it's allies without the American's could not win the war on their own and the same applies for the Russians. Without American supplies would not have been able to attack the Germans.

    As about the Russian complain that if the American's had joined a year earlier ....... it is very clear in the article the reasons why they did not! USA was not threatened by Germany, so why they should get involved?

  5. By laurence rees | World War II | page 5 wrote:
    Stalin was possibly the least sentimental leader in history. Deep down he did not care—as almost all democratic politicians do—whether people liked him. Ultimately, he was not interested in forming personal relationships with other world statesmen. He saw the world as a brutal place in which individuals did not really matter. What mattered was geopolitics and the protection of the interests of the Soviet Union as he saw them.
    It is very clear that Russia did not win the WWII on its own [nono.gif] ... but in a common effort with the Western alliance and support.

    It is also very clear that Russia lost many millions of men in this war (unfortunately), which has affected every family in the country and destabilised the demographics of the country and still can't recover from it. [sad.gif]

    That was down to the tactics used by Stalin to achieve his aims no matter what the human cost, something that western Politicians would not even have contemplated
    .

The fact remains that Stalin has signed the secret agreement in 1939, with Hitler, to partition and occupy the East European countries, and in return supplied the Nazi Germany with plenty of raw material!


The question remains:

If Stalin had not collaborated with Hitler until he was attacked and changed sides, would Hitler had managed to make so many gains and occupy so many countries killing so many millions of people and destroying so many countries?




I expect you managed to sleep well after clearing up all my puke [tonque.gif]

Time to go to my garden to take care of my roses and flowers! [hi.gif]

_________________
.
Image


 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The War in Europe - WW2 versus The Great Patriotic War
Post Number:#22  PostPosted: 18 May 2011 15:47 
Offline
Expert Member

Joined: 29 Sep 2009
Last Visit: 04 Jul 2011 13:01
Posts: 324
Gender: Female
Status: Married
Her/His Country: USA
RW_here_since: 2006
wiz wrote:
Typical Russian attitute, attack and divert attention from the main issue. [sarcastic.gif]



What in my post is a typical Russian attitude? I just say that people from the former Soviet Union are just people as everywhere.

wiz wrote:
Please remember that this is "Russian World Forums" and we mostly discuss subjects about Russia and not about American Politics, as in other boards! Take a look at the top of the board! [veryhappy.gif]


I'm not against criticism. Last time I had to put one man of a Russian Caucasian origin in the "black list" on a Russian website who saw my residence and started to throw the Soviet phrases on "Imperialistic grin of the West" at me, so I had to reminded him about Imperialistic grin of Russian Empire and USSR, he did not know what to say and called me different name including "feminist" that was very funny.

Unfortunately most of discussions you bring to the pukes and it really does leave a bad smell.
A member posts all the negatives sides of his wife and writes that he can do what he wants only when his is alone without his wife. And all that automatically attributed to the typical Russian. Actually the same about politics, economics and whatever. It more looks like all about pukes and animosity than just as criticisms.

Wiz, I really wish you good luck on your discussions about Russia, Russian and Russians [happy.gif]


 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The War in Europe - WW2 versus The Great Patriotic War
Post Number:#23  PostPosted: 18 May 2011 21:14 
Offline
Admin
User avatar

Joined: 28 Oct 2008
Last Visit: 30 Dec 2020 14:27
Posts: 3641
Location: Surrey UK
Gender: Male
Status: Married
Her/His Country: Russia
RW_here_since: July 2008
Times_to_FSU: Too many to remember
Olga wrote:
wiz wrote:
Typical Russian attitute, attack and divert attention from the main issue. [sarcastic.gif]

1. What in my post is a typical Russian attitude? I just say that people from the former Soviet Union are just people as everywhere.

wiz wrote:
Please remember that this is "Russian World Forums" and we mostly discuss subjects about Russia and not about American Politics, as in other boards! Take a look at the top of the board! [veryhappy.gif]

2. I'm not against criticism. Last time I had to put one man of a Russian Caucasian origin in the "black list" on a Russian website who saw my residence and started to throw the Soviet phrases on "Imperialistic grin of the West" at me, so I had to reminded him about Imperialistic grin of Russian Empire and USSR, he did not know what to say and called me different name including "feminist" that was very funny.

3. Unfortunately most of discussions you bring to the pukes and it really does leave a bad smell.
A member posts all the negatives sides of his wife and writes that he can do what he wants only when his is alone without his wife. And all that automatically attributed to the typical Russian. Actually the same about politics, economics and whatever. It more looks like all about pukes and animosity than just as criticisms.

Wiz, I really wish you good luck on your discussions about Russia, Russian and Russians [happy.gif]

1. Olga, just take a look at your own posts on this thread, were you started attacking everybody's comments and then threw in the pile various links to prove that English people are ignorant of their own history, with an article dated 2002............and so on.

I have been around these boards for long time and I have seen the same tactics used by many Russian women, and as you know always clashed with them because in their view I don't know anything about Russia neither have the right to criticise, only Russians know and can do that! Nothing new about this attitude.

2. That kind of behaviour is the result of the constant internal propaganda in Russia to present the West and specially America in the worst possible picture for internal consumption. Of course now you and many other Russian women that have moved abroad can see much clearer such propaganda.

3. Obviously you don't like the discussions on this board because we don't sugar coat our opinions about Russia, Russian people and other subjects in fear of offending Russian people. These are our our views and experiences from Russia and are not directed to a particular person. You take the view that our discussions are puke because you don't like what we say!

Can you please show me where have I posted negative comments about my wife?

Twisting my comments to suit your attack on me is not what I have posted. All I said while my wife is around I have not much free time to post freely because I have to attend to her and our family life, but when I am alone then I can do whatever I want, without disruptions.

Many people do criticise Greece and it's people but I do not take their comments as Personal offence as you do with critical comments about Russia and Russian people.

Your latest action reminds me of a young child that can't do whatever it likes and then turn around and take it's toys and go home.

Never mind, the few of us here can continue talking and criticise Russia and Russian people!

_________________
.
Image


 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The War in Europe - WW2 versus The Great Patriotic War
Post Number:#24  PostPosted: 18 May 2011 22:01 
Offline
Expert Member

Joined: 29 Sep 2009
Last Visit: 04 Jul 2011 13:01
Posts: 324
Gender: Female
Status: Married
Her/His Country: USA
RW_here_since: 2006
wiz wrote:
1. Olga, just take a look at your own posts on this thread, were you started attacking everybody's comments and then threw in the pile various links to prove that English people are ignorant of their own history, with an article dated 2002............and so on.


Yes, I did. Where do you see an attack? That I posted link to the articles about Katyn that Russia acknowledged the Katyn Massacre?

Yes, I posted links to some Western surveys just to show that people are people everywhere. Yes, I said the majority of Russian do not interested in the history, but the same in other countries. And you see it as an attack.

Quote:
Can you please show me where have I posted negative comments about my wife?


Please, show me where I posted such things about you? I said "a member".

Quote:
Twisting my comments to suit your attack on me is not what I have posted.


On this forum only you are twisting the comments. Honestly with you constant repetition "A Typical Russian" you remind me that man from a Russian website I placed in the black list, but he was repeating "A typical Western" with a negative meaning. Him and you are on the same page only in different camps.

Whatever, Wiz. I already rarely come here to read about "A typical Russian" as it is getting just too boring and hackneyed like a broken record. When I have time I visit other forums because I find more interesting discussions on that forums than to suck all over again and again "Typical Russian" I have my Russian friends to talk about events in Russia and no, we don't sugarcoat. Every time when you place your "pukes" in the posts along with your infamous "typical Russian" it breads more animosity and prejudices among readers towards Russia and Russian people than the balanced and constructive criticism would do.

As I said Wiz, you can see my posts as attacks or what ever else but I really don't care any more. Call me and my post as you wish. [hi.gif]

Good luck.


 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The War in Europe - WW2 versus The Great Patriotic War
Post Number:#25  PostPosted: 01 Jun 2011 19:28 
Offline
Been there - Done That & Got the T-shirt
User avatar

Joined: 09 Jun 2010
Last Visit: 13 Feb 2013 11:20
Posts: 131
Status: Married
Her/His Country: Russia
Times_to_FSU: more than 10
Olga wrote:
While you are talking about Russian ignorance in history.

Britons' ignorance of their heritage consigns history to history
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/ho ... 53352.html

01/14/2005
Britain's Nazi Mess
Prince Harry Isn't Alone in Needing a History Lesson
http://www.spiegel.de/international/0,1 ... 39,00.html

History has never been so unpopular
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/201 ... ted-events

Why to blame the Soviets who had less information avaliable [wink.gif]


[rolleyes.gif]

The information was available. Some didn't want it to be seen and some didn't want to see it.

So you equate the vaguely amusing newspaper reports that some English people don't know where The Globe Theatre is and the similarly jocular admonishment of Prince Harry for dressing up as a Nazi at a fancy dress party reported in an occasionally questionable German magazine (the magazine that published what they really believed were Hitler's Diaries) with the average Russian's grasp and aknowledgement of historical fact, such as the Katyn massacre and Stalin's programmes of genocide that lasted for decades?

Yep, that's about the size of the problem Olga.

As the proverb says: "Forget the past and you'll lose both eyes"


 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The War in Europe - WW2 versus The Great Patriotic War
Post Number:#26  PostPosted: 03 Jun 2011 07:49 
Offline
Hero Member

Joined: 12 Apr 2009
Last Visit: 18 Oct 2014 23:34
Posts: 1234
Location: Mainly Sakhalin Island (Russian Far East)
Gender: Male
Status: Married
Her/His Country: Russia/UK
RW_here_since: She lives in Russia
Times_to_FSU: Ya ne mogu soschitatʹ
Key European points in the Second World War
Part 4


North Africa June 1940 to May 1943

A see-saw series of battles for control of Libya and parts of Egypt followed, reaching a climax in the Second Battle of El Alamein when British Commonwealth forces under the command of Lieutenant-General Bernard Montgomery, delivered a decisive defeat to the Axis forces and pushed them back to Tunisia. After the late 1942 Allied Operation Torch landings in North-West Africa, and subsequent battles against Vichy France forces (who then changed sides), the Allies finally encircled Axis forces in northern Tunisia and forced their surrender.


The main Axis objectives were to get control of the Middle East oil fields and to create a second front in Russia.

The invasion of Russia was inevitable.
As early as 1925, Hitler suggested in Mein Kampf ("My Struggle") that he would invade the Soviet Union, asserting that the German people needed Lebensraum ("living space", i.e. land and raw materials) and that these should be sought in the east. Nazi racial ideology cast the Soviet Union as populated by "Untermenschen" ethnic Slavs ruled by their "Jewish Bolshevik" masters. Mein Kampf said Germany's destiny was to turn "to the East" as it did "six hundred years ago" and "the end of the Jewish domination in Russia will also be the end of Russia as a State."

Thereafter, Hitler spoke of an inescapable battle against "pan-Slav ideals", in which victory would lead to "permanent mastery of the world", though he said they would "walk part of the road with the Russians, if that will help us." (Molotov-Ribentrop)

Accordingly, it was Nazi stated policy to kill, deport, or enslave the Russian and other Slavic populations and repopulate the land with Germanic peoples


Supplies sent to Russia by the Western Allies
Dating from Russia's forced entry into the allied camp because of the Nazi Invasion of Russia until the end of the war.

There were serious concerns among the Western Allies that Soviet Russia would not survive the results of Operation Barbarosa or the inevitable German Summer Offensive in 1942.
Therefore the Western Allies supplied Soviet Russia with materiel.

The Allied supply efforts were enormous. The Americans alone delivered 175.5 million long tons (178.3 million metric tonnes) to the Soviets during the war, via numerous routes, including Arctic convoys of World War II to the ports of Murmansk and Archangelsk. Also, Soviet shipping carried supplies from the west coast of the United States and Canada to Vladivostok in the Far East, since the Soviet Union was not at war with Japan at that time (not until August 1945). The Persian Corridor was the route for 4,159,117 long tons (4,225,858 metric tonnes) of this cargo. However, this was not the only American contribution via the Persian Corridor - and now to mention the contributions of all the other Allies like Great Britain, British India, South Africa, British East Africa, Australia, Bahrain and numerous other nations, colonies, and protectorates of the Allied nations. All told, about 7,900,000 long tons (8,000,000 metric tonnes) of shipborne cargo from Allied sources were unloaded in the Corridor, most of it bound for Russia - but some of it for British forces under the Middle East Command, or for the Iranian economy, which was sustaining the influx of tens of thousands of foreign troops and Polish refugees. Also, supplies were needed for the development of new transportation and logistics facilities in Persia and in the Soviet Union. The tonnage figure does not include transfers of warplanes via Persia, nor cargo delivered by air, which amounted to several millions of tons more.




The Arctic Convoys August 1941 .-. End of the war

The Arctic convoys of World War II travelled from the United Kingdom and North America to the northern ports of the Soviet Union—Arkhangelsk and Murmansk. There were 78 convoys between August 1941 and May 1945 (although there were two gaps with no sailings between July and September 1942, and March and November 1943). About 1400 merchant ships delivered vital supplies to the Soviet Union under the Lend-Lease program, escorted by ships of the Royal Navy, Royal Canadian Navy, and the U.S. Navy. Eighty-five merchant vessels and 16 Royal Navy warships (two cruisers, six destroyers, eight other escort ships) were lost.
The Nazi German Kriegsmarine lost a number of vessels including one battleship, three destroyers and at least 30 U-boats as well as a large number of aircraft.




The Persian Corridor, American Convoys to Vladivostok

The Persian Corridor was the name for a supply route through Iran into Soviet Azerbaijan by which British aid and American Lend-Lease supplies were transferred to the Soviet Union during World War II.

American convoys to Vladivostok.In 1942-1944 the Soviet Union chartered about 120 American ships and 50 U.S. tankers, and to protect these vessels from attack by Japan in the wake of its December 1941 strafing of Pearl Harbor, American crews sailed under the Soviet hammer and sickle flag. When lend-lease shipments arrived at Vladivostok they were stored both in port terminals and in warehouses on Portovaya and Verkhne-Portovaya streets, then they were conveyed by train along the Trans-Siberian Railroad to points west. During the war the port of Vladivostok handled four times more cargo than Murmansk and Far Eastern railroad traffic was four times greater than the rest of nation.

_________________
If told to jump always ask why and never how high..Image


 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The War in Europe - WW2 versus The Great Patriotic War
Post Number:#27  PostPosted: 03 Jun 2011 07:50 
Offline
Hero Member

Joined: 12 Apr 2009
Last Visit: 18 Oct 2014 23:34
Posts: 1234
Location: Mainly Sakhalin Island (Russian Far East)
Gender: Male
Status: Married
Her/His Country: Russia/UK
RW_here_since: She lives in Russia
Times_to_FSU: Ya ne mogu soschitatʹ
Key European points in the Second World War
Part 5


Text to be inserted later

_________________
If told to jump always ask why and never how high..Image


 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The War in Europe - WW2 versus The Great Patriotic War
Post Number:#28  PostPosted: 03 Jun 2011 07:51 
Offline
Hero Member

Joined: 12 Apr 2009
Last Visit: 18 Oct 2014 23:34
Posts: 1234
Location: Mainly Sakhalin Island (Russian Far East)
Gender: Male
Status: Married
Her/His Country: Russia/UK
RW_here_since: She lives in Russia
Times_to_FSU: Ya ne mogu soschitatʹ
Key European points in the Second World War
Part 6


Text to be inserted later

_________________
If told to jump always ask why and never how high..Image


 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The War in Europe - WW2 versus The Great Patriotic War
Post Number:#29  PostPosted: 03 Jun 2011 07:51 
Offline
Hero Member

Joined: 12 Apr 2009
Last Visit: 18 Oct 2014 23:34
Posts: 1234
Location: Mainly Sakhalin Island (Russian Far East)
Gender: Male
Status: Married
Her/His Country: Russia/UK
RW_here_since: She lives in Russia
Times_to_FSU: Ya ne mogu soschitatʹ
Key European points in the Second World War
Part 7


Text to be inserted later

_________________
If told to jump always ask why and never how high..Image


 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The War in Europe - WW2 versus The Great Patriotic War
Post Number:#30  PostPosted: 27 Jun 2011 07:07 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: 25 Oct 2008
Last Visit: 23 Jan 2020 07:24
Posts: 807
Location: UK
Gender: Male
Status: Married
Her/His Country: UK
Times_to_FSU: Many times
Who Really Won World War II?

Russians react nervously to any narrative about World War II that differs from their own. When the United States, Britain or France pay tribute to their countrymen who fought and defeated Adolf Hitler, it is seen in Moscow as an attempt to diminish Russia’s contribution. Russians hold it as self-evident that they bore the brunt of Hitler’s fury and did the lion’s share of fighting with only minimal support from the Allies.

It is a remarkably ungenerous attitude. On the 70th anniversary of the Soviet Union’s entry into the war, Russians should acknowledge the contribution of its allies. Britain in particular can — and rightly does — claim a very special role in standing up to Germany.

Let’s rewind the clock to June 21, 1941, and see how the situation looked from London. By then, Britain had been at war for nearly two years. Its two allies, Poland and France, had been defeated and dismembered. All of Europe was either under German occupation or hostile to Britain. British cities had been severely bombed by the Luftwaffe, and a land invasion was still a strong possibility.

While Britain faced Germany in the west, Hitler and Josef Stalin concluded an unholy alliance in the east that lasted for nearly two years, attacking and occupying several nations. The Soviet Union had put its vast natural resources at Hitler’s disposal, helping Germany wage its war and rendering useless Britain’s sole weapon, its naval superiority.

Many Russian historians still claim that the Molotov-Ribbentrop nonaggression pact, signed Aug. 23, 1939, was an alliance of convenience. Stalin had been given a cold shoulder by Britain and France when he proposed an antifascist alliance. Moreover, since the Soviet Union was not prepared to fight Hitler, he had no choice, we are told, but to delay the war by feigning friendship with Germany.

But compare this with what Britain and France did in 1939. They were also unprepared to fight, but they ended the policy of appeasement that surrendered Czechoslovakia in 1938 and came to the defense of Poland.

Russians inflicted more casualties on Germans than other allies and suffered more casualties than all other countries combined. But that was, in a large measure, the result of Stalin’s disastrous preparations. Britain suffered far fewer losses and less destruction, but you can’t blame it for maintaining a strong navy and mobilizing for the defense of the home islands, thus discouraging Hitler from ordering a land invasion.

When the Soviet Union entered the war 70 years ago, it never had to stand alone. It was supported by Britain — despite Stalin’s previous alliance with Hitler — and the United States promptly established a program to supply Moscow with war materiel, food and clothing. In reality, with the United States entering the war in December 1941, even the loss of Moscow would not have meant a Soviet defeat. While German supply lines were dangerously stretched, Soviet troops could have regrouped east of the capital thanks to a U.S. commitment to supply the Red Army through Northeastern Siberia.

Russians have every right to mourn their losses and be proud of the heroism of their people. But Russia should also acknowledge that all the allies of the anti-Hitler coalition made vital contributions and huge sacrifices to achieve victory. The war was fought, and won, by the entire alliance.

21 June 2011, MT, Alexei Bayer, a native Muscovite, is a New York-based economist.


 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 34 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Registered users: Bing [Bot]


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB