The BEST Guide to POLAND
Unanswered  |  Archives 
 
 
User: Guest

Home / News  % width posts: 274

RUSSIA TO MAKE PUBLIC THE KATYN FILES...


Bratwurst Boy 6 | 10,592
28 Apr 2010 #31
Certainly grates on my ears. I only cherish a hope that this piece of art is not what they write in your press.

I apologize!
But there is a certain amount of puzzlement in Germany, especially as in recent times (as the media reported) a kind of white washing of Stalin and his era in the history books and national discourse seems to take place.

I especially became puzzled as in the build up to the coming May party there were shown and interviewed people who had no problems to praise and to adore Stalin and his deeds, many of them old veterans. Excuse me for getting ideas...

(And you need more than just a handful of NKVD's to kill and to deport MILLONS!)

We are talking here a regime which killed MILLIONS of your own people Sasha.

ROA - Russian Liberation Army - colaborated to Nazis and were our enemies.

Were they?

They wanted to remove Stalin and his regime, didn't they....
Sasha 2 | 1,083
28 Apr 2010 #32
ROA - Russian Liberation Army - colaborated to Nazis and were our enemies. As these they were prisoners of war and found their right palce after the war.

BB, Bandera and UPA is a good illustration of how things end up. Betrayed, going on killing spree... Slava Ukraine! *here's a gesture that's prohibited in Germany AFAIK*
Jed - | 165
28 Apr 2010 #33
They wanted to remove Stalin and his regime, didn't they....

Partly true. Unfortunately they signed a contract with even worse devil.
Bratwurst Boy 6 | 10,592
28 Apr 2010 #34
Well, I personally don't think Hitler was worse than Stalin....he didn't prey on his own people at least and Stalin killed many more people!

But then...it's a matter of perception....
Crow 139 | 8,666
28 Apr 2010 #35
RUSSIA TO MAKE PUBLIC THE KATYN FILES

finally

[said while eating pizza and drink LAV bier]
Seanus 15 | 19,706
28 Apr 2010 #36
BB, Hitler started WWII. Stalin merely reacted later and joined the war to tan Nazi hide.

The doctored files will be released soon ;)
Bratwurst Boy 6 | 10,592
28 Apr 2010 #37
BB, Hitler started WWII. Stalin merely reacted later and joined the war to tan Nazi hide.

I thought they met in Poland...
Seanus 15 | 19,706
28 Apr 2010 #38
I meant that he reacted to the fact that a war was waging and that he had plans of his own and reacted accordingly later.
Jed - | 165
28 Apr 2010 #39
Well, I personally don't think Hitler was worse than Stalin...

Well, for you - may be. I don't know who are you but it's even possible Hitler would be even good for you – if you belong to the right race from Hitler’s point of view (nothing personal).

Personally for me and for all other Russians and Slavs Hitler name means death or slavery without any hope. With Stalin we somehow survive and may now talk to you.

They both were devils but they had different criteria for mass murders - race and nationality for Hitler and economic classes without any relation to nationality for Stalin. The last one was easier for us to survive. But too many people died for nothing.
Bratwurst Boy 6 | 10,592
28 Apr 2010 #40
Well, for you - may be. I don't know who are you but it's even possible Hitler would be even good for you – if you belong to the right race from Hitler’s point of view (nothing personal).

Of course...;)

But then I would not have liked to live as entrepeneur, academic or well off peasant under Stalin, it would have been very probably a miserable and short life.

Personally for me and for all other Russians and Slavs Hitler name means death or slavery without any hope. With Stalin we somehow survive and may now talk to you.

Honestly I don't think so....it's a big "what if" and the Nazis used Slavs as helpers and willing collaborateurs too.

They both were devils but they had different criteria for mass murders - race and nationality for Hitler and economic classes without any relation to nationality for Stalin.

Agreed!
Jed - | 165
28 Apr 2010 #41
it's a big "what if" and the Nazis used Slavs as helpers and willing collaborateurs too.

I think the key words here "Nazis used" - we had no opportunity to know what they would do with this "used" people.

Hitler plans for Slavs and other "lower" race people are in his published books and he had no opportunity to complete his plans. But his failed start was very impressive.
Bratwurst Boy 6 | 10,592
28 Apr 2010 #42
Hitler plans for Slavs and other "lower" race people are in his published books and he had no opportunity to complete his plans. But his failed start was very impressive.

He was very sick at '45 already...he would had died soon and another one (more sane) would had taken over.

I don't think this "all Slavs would be killed" scenario would had come through...

There were to much initial support and collaboration only Hitlers madness failed to utilize but the commanders on the front had no problems to work with anti-soviet/anti-stalinist fighters, Slavs or not!

When you look at german propaganda of that time you will always read only about the fight against Bolshevism, not so much against an slavic "Untermensch"...

Victory or Bolshevism

Europes victory - your prosperity

Europes victory - your prosperity
Olga 1 | 330
28 Apr 2010 #43
Little more than a manipulative ploy from the masters of propaganda to placate Poland and deflect attention from the fact that the investigation is being stalled and Poland still has not received the black boxes and, from all accounts, will not receive them in the forseeable near future.

Genius. So long as there are naive fools (AKA "cielęta") to eat it all up.
Sasha 2 | 1,083
28 Apr 2010 #44
BB, no problem. That's just a discussion.

especially became puzzled as in the build up to the coming May party there were shown and interviewed people who had no problems to praise and to adore Stalin and his deeds, many of them old veterans. Excuse me for getting ideas...

That's a completely different question. There always be kind of those who are admired by the SU. It's actually as pointless as trying to convince one who's had only bad experience with Russians (put here any nationality), that Russians may be nice. You can't change their stance once they've only had positive personal experience (if that promoted their welfare or gave the opportunity to educate oneself which is often the case, etc). Is there a need to do that? Why not just wait till the problem resolves itself? The people who you mentioned were raised with a belief that they were doing it right and the most of them did that right with the only slight remark of loving the SU and Rodina. One's deeds this is what actually matters. As long as they're clean of innocents' blood, I'm fine with not bugging them about stalin. Yes they were brainwashed up to a point but can we blame them for that since each of us is (more or less)?!
Seanus 15 | 19,706
28 Apr 2010 #45
Olga, Zbigniew Rzepa and Andzrej Seremet have had ample access to them. They are just working out the best way to wangle the findings to best fit.
Jed - | 165
28 Apr 2010 #46
When you look at german propaganda of that time you will always read only about the fight against Bolshevism, not so much against an slavic "Untermensch"...

He used any human resourses he could find especially at the end of the war. As you know Stalin also wasn't young and died in 1953. Next one (Khrushchev) was already much better compared to Stalin.

Hitler's main mistake was that WWII became a national patriotic war for Russians. And we just couldn't lost - doesn't matter how heavy losses we had. WW1 was quite different for us and lead to revolution and civil war. Nobody yet successfully won against Russia in patriotic war - we lost only to ourselves.
Bratwurst Boy 6 | 10,592
28 Apr 2010 #47
Is there a need to do that?

If history books for the young ones are changed and rewritten to paint a white washed, sanitized picture, then yes.

Would you accept if Germans would start differentiate the Nazi history and point out that most people liked actually living in the Nazi era and that Hitler had so much support till to the end and why? Officials praising Hitler in the media???

If Swastikas would be allowed etc.?

I could see Germany's neighbours getting nervous...so Russia must accept that their neighbours watch modern Stalin-praise equally suspicious.
Jed - | 165
28 Apr 2010 #48
so Russia must accept that their neighbours watch modern Stalin-praise equally suspicious.

Yes, we accept it. But we can't change the history - and we can't change ourselves too fast.

And you know that Germans lost independence and were forced for changes. They already paid their heavy price and now should be free.

We are trying to do the same without external force by ourselves.
Bratwurst Boy 6 | 10,592
28 Apr 2010 #49
We are trying to do the same without external force by ourselves.

Good luck...:)

(It's quite nice and refreshing to talk to some real Russians instead of getting all the info solely from the media - the image one gets can become skewed easily)
Paulina 9 | 1,448
28 Apr 2010 #50
We are trying to do the same without external force by ourselves.

I hope you'll succeed :) I really do.
Sasha 2 | 1,083
28 Apr 2010 #51
If Swastikas would be allowed etc.?

Do you consider it's a measure? If so, then measure to what? You can't forbid people's thoughts, that's as a matter of fact the best way to make people think of it. Forbidden fruit is sweet. There're still lots of open and latent admirers of Hitler in Germany. So what is this measure for? If you impose ban on an idiocy, an idiot won't cease to be one.

I actually think that ban on swastikas and some certain gestures is undemocratic and in a way harmful. That only makes certain people groups disguise their action, which in a turn makes them more dangerous.
guzzler 1 | 88
28 Apr 2010 #52
Russians in Afghanistan were the same like Americans in Vietnam,

I wish you guys would stop believing everything you read in your respective newspapers, I was in Vietnam. The crap I have read in books, and what was reported by the Magazines and newspapers at the time was fantasy. I served with the Australian Army in the Phuoc Tuy Province, we also served with the Yanks during the Tet Offencive. I never saw any women raped, there was no need the bars were full of girls. We had rules of engagement if we went outside them or anyone in your section, he would get his head kicked in. As regards Katyń Stalin was a vicious count, with everyone around him scared for their lives. Maybe Jed can tell me if this is true Stalin was dead twenty four hours because his aides could pluck up enough courage to knock at his bedroom door. (most likely a lie)
Sasha 2 | 1,083
28 Apr 2010 #53
I wish you guys would stop believing everything you read in your respective newspapers,

It takes two to tango. :) Seriously it's the same the other way around. How many of you guys ever been to Russia to perfectly know how things here are?

Most of my friends are used to read both Russian and Western press to compose the final opinion.
Paulina 9 | 1,448
28 Apr 2010 #54
Do you consider it's a measure? If so, then measure to what?

Well, is a Mayor of Moscow with his plans to honour Stalin with posters in the city during the 9th of may the same as some anonymous, marginalized neonazi in Berlin...?

The second one is more creepy, for sure, but the first one is more important...
Darun 1 | 55
28 Apr 2010 #55
BB, Hitler started WWII. Stalin merely reacted later and joined the war to tan Nazi hide.

Seanus, Hitler and Stalin started WWII. For western Europeans it was Hitler, ask the Baltic states who started WWII from their point of view.
They both had their own agenda, and knew that in the end they will confront but each wanted to dominate first his part of Europe. Nazi Germany waged war with the West while Soviet Russia was occupying the Baltic States. Ask Finland, Latvia, Lithuania and most of all ask Poland.

You know, Europe is not only Western Europe, it's the whole bloody continent, and Eastern Europe has a history which for so long you didn't want to hear about it.

In the end Stalin went on the side of the Allies, but this only because Hitler was too much trouble for him. You know, when there was this Anticomintern pact, Hitler and Stalin were in such good relations that a joke circulated around that Stalin was about to join the Anticomintern side.
Seanus 15 | 19,706
28 Apr 2010 #56
No, Hitler started it by declaring it. The Soviets joined later.
Bratwurst Boy 6 | 10,592
28 Apr 2010 #57
I don't think banning symbols and certain topics is a good thing either.
But the allies started it during the occupation and later there was not much will/interest to go through the moves to "re-allow" it again.

I don't believe there exist a group which really could become dangerous, with Swastikas or without.
Not many people left who believe Hitler was a good thing for Germany in the end.
Without him we would had very probably reached our current status much earlier and more peacefully.

No, Hitler started it by declaring it.

Well, GB and France started it with declaring war on Germany. YOU started the war Seanie! So...there...
Darun 1 | 55
29 Apr 2010 #58
Well, GB and France started it with declaring war on Germany. YOU started the war Seanie! So...there...

Actually it could be painfully fun to analyze this.
So, Seanus, I take it that the one who speaks first, is the looser... well considering a game. So, Stalin didn't say anything, simply invaded thus he didn't start the war. But the same did Hitler, he didn't declar it, BB is write, France and GB declared it, so they've started the war if you follow the same logic.

If you follow Churchill's logic, GB through Chamberlain is at fault for this, and so on and so forth...
Seriously, invading without declaring is not waging war is just a walk in the park... both Hitler and Stalin would have been proud.
guzzler 1 | 88
29 Apr 2010 #59
Correct me if I'm wrong I read that Hitler held referendums regarding his handling of Germany's affairs, and each time had a 98% yes vote from the public. During the war in Britain Stalin and the Red Army were hailed as the saviours of the free world. After the war they were the devils incarnate ready to conquer and enslave the West. whose interests are we serving.
Bratwurst Boy 6 | 10,592
29 Apr 2010 #60
Correct me if I'm wrong I read that Hitler held referendums regarding his handling of Germany's affairs, and each time had a 98% yes vote from the public.

I never heard of that but I would distrust any outcome that high...it doesn't sound democratic.

During the war in Britain Stalin and the Red Army were hailed as the saviours of the free world.

War time propaganda..isn't it lovely. But once the West accepted that they needed Stalin, what else should they have told their soldiers? It was a crazy time...


Home / News / RUSSIA TO MAKE PUBLIC THE KATYN FILES...
BoldItalic [quote]
 
To post as Guest, enter a temporary username or login and post as a member.