Russians 1941

[OZ77]

Originally posted by Grisha:

OZ77,

CM community has already discussed this issue in depth, and I believe the consensus was relatively unfavorable for Rezun and his fantastic version of reality.

OK, this is your opinion, but there are many people who don't know anything about his "fantastic version".

Of course you can't believe Rezun 100%. For example I don't believe Soviets were going to attack in July 1941, maybe later.But if he is essentially correct, as this reviewer believes, we have a perfect right to be bitter for having been misled and misinformed for decades. Especially relevant for CM community in Rezun's books are chapters about Russian early war weakness myth.

As for the "song of Nazis" Rezun has ANTICOMMUNIST

point of view certainly not pronazi and what Russian superiority has to do with Nazi propaganda? :confused:

All of us are intrested in WW2 history and want to know the truth so let's stop to call each other Nazi and etc.

[OZ77]

Originally posted by Mike:

If you've invaded Eastern Poland & various other places for defensive space then you might well choose to put yuor forces in those new territories - the more so to cow the inhabitants and keep tight control.

Given teh short range of soviet fighters and the almost complete lack of a proper co-ordinated air defence system you also hav to have youraircraft close to the border to keep up patrols.

Do you really believe Stalin amassed vast numbers of troops and stores of weapons to COW the inhabitants and keep tight control?

[Keke]

Originally posted by MickeeMao:

*Hmmm - okay, how much territory did the Soviet Union acquire before 1941 that wasn't part of their national territory in 1914?*

Baltic states, Eastern part of Poland, Karelian Isthmus and Bessarabia for starters. Soviet Union was formed after 1917, remember? Stalin dreamed about restoring the borders of Russian empire, but it doesn't make your question any more relevant.

Originally posted by MickeeMao:

*You've got it backwards - Poland invaded the Soviet Union in 1920 and was driven back to Warsaw. What justified this Polish 'back stabbing' of Russia?*

Yes you are right, Poland attacked first before Red Army troops, that were trying to conquer Poland and spread the revolution, were defeated. If that justified Soviet cooperation with Nazis, then what can I say...

Originally posted by MickeeMao:

I'll reiterate - all of this territory once belonged to Russia. The Soviet Union was taking back what they felt belonged to them.

In a sense you are right. The revolution didn't bring back any of the former provinces of Russian Empire, that bolshevist were expecting in the first place.

Originally posted by MickeeMao:

*I've never seen it documented that the Soviet Union's goal was to occupy all of Finland. This could just be my ignorance - where could I find this documentation?*

Go to Russia and find war diaries (and other documents I can't remember just now) of the Leningrad Front and the 30th Guards Rifle Corps, or learn Finnish and get hold of Niilo Lappalainen's book "Ihantala kesti" (in which those documents and others were used).

Edit: During my correspondence with Mr Glantz, he told that his new book about Leningrad has a chapter of Soviet operations against Finland 1944 (at Karelian Isthmus only though), and occupation of Finland in his view was one of the goals of Soviet Union. I haven't read the book myself so I cannot give any details.

Originally posted by MickeeMao:

**If a new Poland was to be created, I believe it would have been more just to create it from Germany - to reward Russia for its help in WWI by taking its land was unjust*

How the hell the fallen empire should be rewarded for its actions during WW1, and how did it legitimize aggressive foreign policy of Soviet Union? :confused:

[ May 01, 2003, 09:37 AM: Message edited by: Keke ]

[MickeeMao]

Originally posted by Keke:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by MickeeMao:

*Hmmm - okay, how much territory did the Soviet Union acquire before 1941 that wasn't part of their national territory in 1914?*

Baltic states, Eastern part of Poland, Karelian Isthmus and Bessarabia for starters. Soviet Union was formed after 1917, remember? Stalin dreamed about restoring the borders of Russian empire, but it doesn't make your question any more relevant.

**So you're saying that because a country changes its style of government, its no longer entitled to its former borders? That doesn't make any sense.**

Originally posted by MickeeMao:

*You've got it backwards - Poland invaded the Soviet Union in 1920 and was driven back to Warsaw. What justified this Polish 'back stabbing' of Russia?*

Yes you are right, Poland attacked first before Red Army troops, that were trying to conquer Poland and spread the revolution

**You're indulging in speculation**

Originally posted by MickeeMao:

*I've never seen it documented that the Soviet Union's goal was to occupy all of Finland. This could just be my ignorance - where could I find this documentation?*

Go to Russia and find war diaries (and other documents I can't remember just now) of the Leningrad Front and the 30th Guards Rifle Corps, or learn Finnish and get hold of Niilo Lappalainen's book "Ihantala kesti" (in which those documents and others were used).

**If this is all you have to offer, you'll have to forgive my skepticism.**

Edit: During my correspondence with Mr Glantz, he told that his new book about Leningrad has a chapter of Soviet operations against Finland 1944 (at Karelian Isthmus only though), and occupation of Finland in his view was one of the goals of Soviet Union. I haven't read the book myself so I cannot give any details.

**I was going to pick up this one anyway - I'll give it a read**

Originally posted by MickeeMao:

**If a new Poland was to be created, I believe it would have been more just to create it from Germany - to reward Russia for its help in WWI by taking its land was unjust*

How the hell the fallen empire should be rewarded for its actions during WW1, and how did it legitimize aggressive foreign policy of Soviet Union? :confused: </font>

[Keke]

Originally posted by MickeeMao:

**So you're saying that because a country changes its style of government, its no longer entitled to its former borders? That doesn't make any sense.**

Ofcourse it does, if the new government has made peace agreements that define its borders. So in your opinion FE Germany is entitled to her pre-WW1 borders, although there have been many regime and border changes?

Originally posted by MickeeMao:

**You're indulging in speculation**

And what was the speculation part?

Originally posted by MickeeMao:

**If this is all you have to offer, you'll have to forgive my skepticism.**

The history of the Continuation War is not very well known outside Finnish borders and Russian archives.

Originally posted by MickeeMao:

****I was going to pick up this one anyway - I'll give it a read** .**

Certainly in my 'must-read' list also.

Originally posted by MickeeMao:

***They were trying to get land back that was unfairly taken from them.**

Now you have to define what is and what is not unfair in power politics of the world...

[PzKpfw 1]

It's amazeing to see how some Russian & German revisionist historians, jumped on the Surorov (Victor Rezun) bandwagon, after Ledokol& Den'-M, hit the stands.

The books are extremely popular with anti-Stalinist revisionist & German revisionist historians as well who prefer an myth to what actualy occured.

Anyway, if you have a serious intrest in te true state of the Red Army in June 1941 read :

Glantz David M. Stumbling Colossus

It takes Rezuns books to task, useing actual declassed archival material etc.

Regards, John Waters

[Keke]

Originally posted by PzKpfw 1:

Anyway, if you have a serious intrest in te true state of the Red Army in June 1941 read :

Glantz David M. Stumbling Colossus

Seconded.

[MickeeMao]

I've already explained in previous posts why I didn't think Russia should be punished (co-belligerent).

I may have mis-read the part of your post where I said you were speculating. I'll leave it at this -Poland started the war with Russia in 1920 by attacking the Red Army. The Poles drove far into Soviet territory before they were stopped. The Red forces counter-attacked and drove the Poles back to Warsaw. Poland started the war.

I get the feeling, however, that our discussion is beginning to bog down - it's getting circular in nature with us making the same points over and over - no doubt we'll soon be arguing over what the defintion of 'is' is (to quote an American ex-president).

I applaud your stamina and, feeling that I've made my point, respectfully yield the field to you.

Originally posted by Keke:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by MickeeMao:

**So you're saying that because a country changes its style of government, its no longer entitled to its former borders? That doesn't make any sense.**

Ofcourse it does, if the new government has made peace agreements that define its borders. So in your opinion FE Germany is entitled to her pre-WW1 borders, although there have been many regime and border changes?

Originally posted by MickeeMao:

**You're indulging in speculation**

And what was the speculation part?

Originally posted by MickeeMao:

**If this is all you have to offer, you'll have to forgive my skepticism.**

The history of the Continuation War is not very well known outside Finnish borders and Russian archives.

Originally posted by MickeeMao:

****I was going to pick up this one anyway - I'll give it a read** .**

Certainly in my 'must-read' list also.

Originally posted by MickeeMao:

***They were trying to get land back that was unfairly taken from them.**

Now you have to define what is and what is not unfair in power politics of the world... </font>

[Keke]

Originally posted by MickeeMao:

I've already explained in previous posts why I didn't think Russia should be punished (co-belligerent).

I may have mis-read the part of your post where I said you were speculating. I'll leave it at this -Poland started the war with Russia in 1920 by attacking the Red Army. The Poles drove far into Soviet territory before they were stopped. The Red forces counter-attacked and drove the Poles back to Warsaw. Poland started the war.

I get the feeling, however, that our discussion is beginning to bog down - it's getting circular in nature with us making the same points over and over - no doubt we'll soon be arguing over what the defintion of 'is' is (to quote an American ex-president).

I applaud your stamina and, feeling that I've made my point, respectfully yield the field to you.

OK. I was just amazed that in your opinion Soviet Union had the rights for borders of the Russian Empire, just because Russia, until its own destruction, was allied to the winning side of WW1.

[Grisha]

OZ77,

I believe in a more recent publication of Rezun's in Russia, he implies that the Jews had much to blame for Russia's woes in WWII. Just so you know where Rezun is really coming from.