Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Russia's War-Blood Upon The Snow...Any Good?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 1st cavalry
    replied
    Originally posted by Artyom_A View Post
    The declaration was made several hours after the start of military actions. So attack started without a declaration indeed. Don't take it personally but after "NSDAP were nazists not fascists" it's the second in the top of most meaningless and irritating remark about WW2. I remember already 50 or 60 guys before you who tried to enlighten ignorant masses in exactly the same way and unfortunately there is on way to escape from hearing the same number in the future.
    did I try to enlighten ignorant masses ?
    I lie trough omission is still a lie, the documentary has no excuses . It even goes to say that Molotov found out that there is war going on from foreign press reports...
    This is what Molotov said :
    Citizens of the Soviet Union:
    The Soviet Government and its head, Comrade Stalin, have authorized me to make the following statement:

    Today at 4 o'clock a.m., without any claims having been presented to the Soviet Union, without a declaration of war, German troops attacked our country, attacked our borders at many points and bombed from their airplanes our cities; Zhitomir, Kiev, Sevastopol, Kaunas and some others, killing and wounding over two hundred persons.

    There were also enemy air raids and artillery shelling from Rumanian and Finnish territory.

    This unheard of attack upon our country is perfidy unparalleled in the history of civilized nations. The attack on our country was perpetrated despite the fact that a treaty of non-aggression had been signed between the U. S. S. R. and Germany and that the Soviet Government most faithfully abided by all provisions of this treaty.

    The attack upon our country was perpetrated despite the fact that during the entire period of operation of this treaty, the German Government could not find grounds for a single complaint against the U.S.S.R. as regards observance of this treaty.

    Entire responsibility for this predatory attack upon the Soviet Union falls fully and completely upon the German Fascist rulers.

    At 5:30 a.m. -- that is, after the attack had already been perpetrated, Von der Schulenburg, the German Ambassador in Moscow, on behalf of his government made the statement to me as People's Commissar of Foreign Affairs to the effect that the German Government had decided to launch war against the U.S.S.R. in connection with the concentration of Red Army units near the eastern German frontier.

    In reply to this I stated on behalf of the Soviet Government that, until the very last moment, the German Government had not presented any claims to the Soviet Government, that Germany attacked the U.S.S.R. despite the peaceable position of the Soviet Union, and that for this reason Fascist Germany is the aggressor.

    On instruction of the government of the Soviet Union I also stated that at no point had our troops or our air force committed a violation of the frontier and therefore the statement made this morning by the Rumanian radio to the effect that Soviet aircraft allegedly had fired on Rumanian airdromes is a sheer lie and provocation.

    Likewise a lie and provocation is the whole declaration made today by Hitler, who is trying belatedly to concoct accusations charging the Soviet Union with failure to observe the Soviet-German pact.

    Now that the attack on the Soviet Union has already been committed, the Soviet Government has ordered our troops to repulse the predatory assault and to drive German troops from the territory of our country.

    This war has been forced upon us, not by the German people, not by German workers, peasants and intellectuals, whose sufferings we well understand, but by the clique of bloodthirsty Fascist rulers of Germany who have enslaved Frenchmen, Czechs, Poles, Serbians, Norway, Belgium, Denmark, Holland, Greece and other nations.

    The government of the Soviet Union expresses its unshakable confidence that our valiant army and navy and brave falcons of the Soviet Air Force will acquit themselves with honor in performing their duty to the fatherland and to the Soviet people, and will inflict a crushing blow upon the aggressor.

    This is not the first time that our people have had to deal with an attack of an arrogant foe. At the time of Napoleon's invasion of Russia our people's reply was war for the fatherland, and Napoleon suffered defeat and met his doom.

    It will be the same with Hitler, who in his arrogance has proclaimed a new crusade against our country. The Red Army and our whole people will again wage victorious war for the fatherland, for our country, for honor, for liberty.

    The government of the Soviet Union expresses the firm conviction that the whole population of our country, all workers, peasants and intellectuals, men and women, will conscientiously perform their duties and do their work. Our entire people must now stand solid and united as never before.

    Each one of us must demand of himself and of others discipline, organization and self-denial worthy of real Soviet patriots, in order to provide for all the needs of the Red Army, Navy and Air Force, to insure victory over the enemy.

    The government calls upon you, citizens of the Soviet Union, to rally still more closely around our glorious Bolshevist party, around our Soviet Government, around our great leader and comrade, Stalin. Ours is a righteous cause. The enemy shall be defeated. Victory will be ours.
    Last edited by 1st cavalry; 01 Nov 12, 06:32.

    Leave a comment:


  • Artyom_A
    replied
    Originally posted by 1st cavalry View Post
    2. Germany attack with declaration of war .
    this sound like a declaration of war to me:
    The declaration was made several hours after the start of military actions. So attack started without a declaration indeed. Don't take it personally but after "NSDAP were nazists not fascists" it's the second in the top of most meaningless and irritating remark about WW2. I remember already 50 or 60 guys before you who tried to enlighten ignorant masses in exactly the same way and unfortunately there is on way to escape from hearing the same number in the future.

    Leave a comment:


  • 1st cavalry
    replied
    1.the difference is that France and Britain did not march into Belgium and Holland uninvited, nor did they deport their citizens or murdered their officer core.
    2. than i recommend you watch part 3 of the documentary before commenting on it, nowhere does it say that Germany declared war a few hours late, it clearly states : without a declaration of war.
    3 . no, reread my initial post, I was pointing out the old repeat of tired excuses justifying the defeats of 1941 .

    Leave a comment:


  • ShAA
    replied
    Originally posted by 1st cavalry View Post
    1 . That would be 17 days after the Germans, but planed in advance,
    which highlights the sincerity of the collective security talk.
    The collective security was buried by France and, first and foremost, Britain in 1938 - 1939 when they surrendered Czechoslovakia to Hitler and when they did not want to sign an agreement with the Soviet Union, despite its persistent proposals for a joint pact.

    2. the declaration of war was delivered in the first hours of the attack.
    Yes, and? Do you know what a declaration of war is and when it must be presented?

    3. it is not about the purge itself but blaming of all soviets defeats upon it or Stalin.
    Yeah, the lack of initiative is a direct result of the purge, so it's fine to say it was "because of the purge" in a general study of the conflict unless it's a paper directly dealing with the history of the Soviet officers coprs in minute detail. I see that you're splitting hairs bit time here.

    Leave a comment:


  • 1st cavalry
    replied
    1 . That would be 17 days after the Germans, but planed in advance,
    which highlights the sincerity of the collective security talk.

    2. the declaration of war was delivered in the first hours of the attack.

    3. it is not about the purge itself but blaming of all soviets defeats upon it or Stalin.

    Leave a comment:


  • ShAA
    replied
    Originally posted by 1st cavalry View Post
    1. Peace loving SU in her quest for collective security has invaded 6 neutral countries , yet the only explanation given was : spoils of war , keeping options open ...blah, blah.
    You should read up more on Litvinov's collective security efforts and you should look when exactly the Soviet Union invaded.

    2. Germany attack with declaration of war .
    this sound like a declaration of war to me:
    http://www.pbs.org/behindcloseddoors...eclaration.pdf
    Yeah, and when was it made?

    3. The purges that ruled out any initiative in the armed forces :
    (there were plenty of initiative left as illustrated by reorganization of the tank forces, just not very bright )
    The book mentioned the purges a lot. Can't believe they weren't mentioned in the documentary.
    So how about dealing with that for a start.
    Done.

    BTW : your choice of words might need some fine tuning...
    Sorry, I call BS when I see it.

    Leave a comment:


  • 1st cavalry
    replied
    Originally posted by ShAA View Post
    What I wanted to say is that if you can't state what exactly you don't like about the subject, don't poo in the thread.
    there so many issues with the documentary i do even know where to begin

    1. Peace loving SU in her quest for collective security has invaded 6 neutral countries , yet the only explanation given was : spoils of war , keeping options open ...blah, blah.

    2. Germany attack with declaration of war .
    this sound like a declaration of war to me:
    http://www.pbs.org/behindcloseddoors...eclaration.pdf

    3. The purges that ruled out any initiative in the armed forces :
    (there were plenty of initiative left as illustrated by reorganization of the tank forces, just not very bright )

    So how about dealing with that for a start.

    BTW : your choice of words might need some fine tuning...

    Leave a comment:


  • ShAA
    replied
    Originally posted by 1st cavalry View Post
    Do you mean after Nikita took the helm ? nevermind It was a rhetorical question .
    The constant blaming of Stalin does not excuse the rest of the party.
    What I wanted to say is that if you can't state what exactly you don't like about the subject, don't poo in the thread.

    Leave a comment:


  • 1st cavalry
    replied
    Originally posted by R. Evans View Post
    This isn't a new documentary. It's from the mid-90s. I just hadn't seen it before.
    New as in post cold war, and in fact the book is not much better when it comes to dealing with soviet prewar agenda.

    Leave a comment:


  • R. Evans
    replied
    Originally posted by 1st cavalry View Post
    some.
    we have bean receiving this propaganda for almost 45 years , just that now
    it comes from the impartial " western " author Overy.
    This isn't a new documentary. It's from the mid-90s. I just hadn't seen it before.

    Leave a comment:


  • 1st cavalry
    replied
    Do you mean after Nikita took the helm ? nevermind It was a rhetorical question .
    The constant blaming of Stalin does not excuse the rest of the party.

    Leave a comment:


  • ShAA
    replied
    Originally posted by 1st cavalry View Post
    some.
    we have bean receiving this propaganda for almost 45 years , just that now
    it comes from the impartial " western " author Overy.
    Care to elaborate, or it's just a fart in the wind? I wonder if you had that much propaganda against Stalin all these years as in this documentary - or from Overy. He pulls no punches describing Stalin's repressions in detail.

    Leave a comment:


  • 1st cavalry
    replied
    Originally posted by R. Evans View Post

    Any thoughts?
    some.
    we have bean receiving this propaganda for almost 45 years , just that now
    it comes from the impartial " western " author Overy.

    Leave a comment:


  • R. Evans
    replied
    I did notice in the 1st episode that it claimed that a German intelligence operation was the main reason for Marshal Tuckachevsk's arrest, trial, and subsequent "disappearance". I thought this had largely been discreditted and that the Marshal was going down anyway. The German plot being gratuitous to the entire affair.

    Leave a comment:


  • ShAA
    replied
    Originally posted by Slim Fan View Post
    It depends what you are looking for with regard to 'the Eastern Front': combat operations, the Soviet perspective, the German perspective, books, documentaries?
    The documentary series you cite, on which Richard Overy was a consultant, was the basis of Overy's book, Russia's War. If you are looking for an account of combat operations during the war, you will probable find this series to be something of a disappointment since it deals with events largely from the Soviet perspective, lacks detail and contains errors.
    I've read Overy's book myself, but I haven't seen this documentary. I'm surprised you called its "Soviet focus" a disappointment - after 50 years of exclusively pro-German POV documentaries and narratives, it is like a breath of fresh air. ("Battlefields" being an excellent example of this) This is considering the documentary follows the book closely, of course. I did find a few errors in the book, mainly connected with the dates and numbers, but none of a really critical nature. I'd say his unquestioning acceptance of Baltic nationalists' claims for the scale of Soviet reprisals in the early war period is what ticked me off a bit, but otherwise it's a pretty good book.

    Yet as an overview of the impact of the war on the Soviet people, and more specifically as an account of the impact on the Soviet people of Stalin's actions and decisions from 1928 until his death, it is much more impressive. There is, however, a lack of emphasis on the positive achievements, of Stalin's policies, in particular of the leap forward in industrialisation during the 1930s, without which the Soviet Union would probably not have survived the war. Of Stalin's complex character, the series tends to focus heavily on the psychopathic aspects (the dishonest, power hungry, paranoid and immensely callous Stalin), though it is perhaps more balanced in dealing with Stalin's complex and paradoxical relationship with the Soviet people.
    This is interesting, as I haven't noticed any strongly pronounced anti-Stalin bent in the book beside what is usually said about him in the Western histories of the war. I suspect it's the TV guys who wanted to tell the audience what they wanted to hear.

    I'm not aware of any equivalent Soviet documentary series dealing with the Great Patriotic War that has English subtitles. There is an American series 'The Unknown War' but it is from the '80s, difficult to obtain and also contains errors of fact. Perhaps the best English language documentary is the BBC production, War of the Century, but it is less than three and a half hours long and the editors have had to be highly selective about what to include.
    There are, of course, numerous documentary programmes that deal with specific aspect of the war on the Eastern Front, particularly Stalingrad, and once you have a grasp of the ebb and flow of events overall, they can be useful.
    That's strange, I've posted this at least a couple of times but nobody seems to have taken note of it.

    Trailers:





    Sample episodes:



    Leave a comment:

Latest Topics

Collapse

Working...
X