RE: Semi OT: How Russia is trying to "falsify/alter/modify" the history and their role at the start of

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: Semi OT: How Russia is trying to "falsify/alter/modify" the history and their role at the start of

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: Semi OT: How Russia is trying to "falsify/alter/modify" the history and their role at the start of

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Semi OT: How Russia is trying to "falsify/alte... - 9/2/2019 5:17:43 PM

Zorch

Posts: 7087
Joined: 3/7/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fishbed

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorch

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fishbed

quote:

ORIGINAL: fcooke

I can live with the ideas you all expressed, it's fine. Strangely enough, apart from Warspite, you can't seem to bear mine.
But nevermind

For me, it's not just your views that I object to; but also the way you evade facts and distort events in your arguments.

Well I don't see what sort of right or legitimacy you have of objecting to anything at all, but that's another story... So be it I guess, I suppose free speech doesn't apply the same way to everybody...?

Besides, I'd love not to twist the facts - thing is, the only fact Ive seen brought up so far against whatever I've been stating is an anti-war music album... Color me a bit unimpressed, if you will, but fine by me...

Strange how in 2019, saying that the Soviets were in the business of containing the Fascists in the later part of the 30s all the way up to the point they went completely to bed with them at the expense of everybody else seems to be particularly controversial
Not saying we should glorify the Soviets, but countering their self-loathing of their own past by negating their role entirely just isn't right, whether their policy was the result of cynical, calculated pragmatism or not (spoilers: it certainly was in 1936, so was it more than ever in 1939, and there it was again when we suddenly became BFF in 1941).

sophism noun
soph�ism | \ ˈs�-ˌfi-zəm \

Definition of sophism

1 : an argument apparently correct in form but actually invalid
especially : such an argument used to deceive

2 : SOPHISTRY sense 1

(in reply to Fishbed)

Post #: 31

RE: Semi OT: How Russia is trying to "falsify/alte... - 9/2/2019 5:27:33 PM

fcooke

Posts: 1156
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Boston, London, Hoboken, now Warwick, NY
Status: offline

FB - completely false logic. France was not in good military shape in 1939. Army was sound, if unmotivated. A lot more armor (and better) than the Germans. Navy was trying to upgrade. German Navy had gained on them from 36 to 39. Air Force was trying to modernize but had really only just started. And then declaring war and sitting on hands while 90ish percent of the German military was rolling into Poland made the leaders - well look clueless. Poland was a 'back up against the wall moment'? No - and if it was France could have done something about it. If the West really were not navel gazing during the Czech scenario that would have been the time for action. To have any interpretation that the USSR was some stalwart against Nazi Germany during WW2 is just plain revisionist history.

As for your assertion that nobody has brought up any facts - you have already granted that Katyn happened, though you have conveniently ignored the Warsaw rising episode. I guess those are not facts.

The USSR suffered horribly during WW2, and that should not be forgotten, but a bunch of it was due to poor leadership. Even after the purges of the 30s, Stalin was having many of his most experienced leaders executed when the Germans invaded, while he was 'nowhere to be found'.

Or is that not a fact either?

(in reply to warspite1)

Post #: 32

RE: Semi OT: How Russia is trying to "falsify/alte... - 9/2/2019 5:29:55 PM

fcooke

Posts: 1156
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Boston, London, Hoboken, now Warwick, NY
Status: offline

And for the record - the Poles fought tooth and nail, and continued to until the end of the war.

(in reply to fcooke)

Post #: 33

RE: Semi OT: How Russia is trying to "falsify/alte... - 9/2/2019 5:32:42 PM

fcooke

Posts: 1156
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Boston, London, Hoboken, now Warwick, NY
Status: offline

Thanks Sard and Warspite - Amazon and Google are my next stops.

Best,
Frank

(in reply to warspite1)

Post #: 34

RE: Semi OT: How Russia is trying to "falsify/alte... - 9/2/2019 5:42:12 PM

fcooke

Posts: 1156
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Boston, London, Hoboken, now Warwick, NY
Status: offline

Thanks again gents - just picked up both.

(in reply to fcooke)

Post #: 35

RE: Semi OT: How Russia is trying to "falsify/alte... - 9/2/2019 5:43:36 PM

warspite1

Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Apollo11

Hi all,

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fishbed

quote:

ORIGINAL: Apollo11

Semi OT: How Russia is trying to "falsify/alter/modify" the history and their role at the start of WW2...

Original:

https://tass.ru/interviews/6631297

English translation:

https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ru&u=https://tass.ru/interviews/6631297&prev=search

"Sergei Ivanov: the USSR did not find support from Europe to create an anti-Hitler coalition"

Sergey Ivanov is chairman of the board of trustees of the Russian Military Historical Society (RVIO), the special representative of the President of Russia on environmental protection, ecology, spoke and transport.

Well, being in bed already I can't really enjoy this slice of post-Pravda State poetry, but I fail to see what is wrong (beyond the obvious bitchin') in the passage you quoted, Apollo.

Yes, by all means, the USSR tried to favour the emergence of an anti-Nazi coalition with Western Democracies as partners for the latter part of the thirties, and our complete failure at honouring our agreements, especially towards Czechoslovakia eventually convinced Stalin that he was better off with an uneasy peace with his mortal enemy than an uneasy alliance with us weary weaklings. Can't really blame him... And maybe it eventually saved us from a WW2 in reverse with the Soviets on the wrong side of the aisle against the holy alliance made of the Locarno nations.

Does this ring any bells?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franco-Soviet_Treaty_of_Mutual_Assistance

Any French history teacher worth his salt knows (and teaches) that our Soviet bride went to share Poland with the other guy because time and time again in the Rhineland, in Spain, in Munich and elsewhere, the only thing we and our British friends never failed at was showing our complete lack of resolve and reliability as allies. I am surprised it comes to some of us as news

For me the biggest "problem/issue" with justifying the Molotov�Ribbentrop Pact from Soviet/Russian side (then and now) is very simple...

On 03.09.1939. UK and France declared war on Germany!

In my eyes all previous diplomatic mistakes (i.e appeasement) were "erased" with that declaration of war - the western powers decided to stand up firmly to German dictator Hitler and they declared war on invading enemy!

But what did SSSR and Stalin do?

Did they join the anti-Hitler coalition (UK/France/Poland) and stopped the war at the start?

Nope.

They were 100% opportunists who backed up what Hitler was doing and they went on persuading their own aggressive invasion politics... Poland, Finland, Baltic states...

Leo "Apollo11"

warspite1

Hi Apollo11. This is a fascinating discussion. I think that blaming Stalin for doing what he did would be wrong.

All governments have a duty to their own people - the Soviets were no exception.

I take with a large chunk of salt the idea that Stalin wanted an anti-German alliance, and the claims now that they did - and the only reason this wasn't achieved was because of Chamberlain/Daladier - can equally being taken less than seriously.

But as much as I hate to admit it, Stalin's thinking was shrewd. I mean seriously what was to lose?

- Sign the pact and get a free hand in the Baltics, Finland, Eastern Poland and Bessarabia/Northern Bukovina
- Sign the pact and allow the Germans and the Western Allies to beat each other into submission (just like WWI)
- Sign the pact and then sit back and pick up the spoils.

But you seem to be saying that Stalin should have immediately (as soon Germany crossed the line in the sand that the Western Allies drew) dropped the pact and join in a war against Germany. Why would he do that? Sure it makes sense to us, and it makes sense to the USSR given what ultimately happened - but at the time?

Stalin was paranoid on a good day so why would he trust the British and French? And if we are blaming Stalin for acting in the USSR's own interests then why isn't that charge levelled at Holland, Belgium, the Scandinavian states, Switzerland, Yugoslavia and Greece? Yes they were small nations but their political class had the same access to the lessons of 1936-1939 that the rest of the continent had? Well of course the answer is that they too were acting in their own self interest (and hoping that they would stay out of any future conflict).

Let's suspend disbelief for the moment. In 1938 Poland don't take the action they took in real life. Instead, when Germany approached them about an anti-Soviet alliance, Poland saw the writing on the wall and said sure, we'll give up some territory in the west and take some from Byelorussia and the Ukraine. After taking the Czech rump Hitler turns east. Do we really think that Britain and France are going to declare war on Germany to assist the Soviets? I don't know for sure but I'd bet no.

< Message edited by warspite1 -- 9/3/2019 6:38:27 AM >

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805

(in reply to Apollo11)

Post #: 36

RE: Semi OT: How Russia is trying to "falsify/alte... - 9/2/2019 5:47:46 PM

Fishbed

Posts: 1822
Joined: 11/21/2005
From: Beijing, China - Paris, France
Status: offline

quote:

FB - completely false logic. France was not in good military shape in 1939. Army was sound, if unmotivated. A lot more armor (and better) than the Germans. Navy was trying to upgrade. German Navy had gained on them from 36 to 39. Air Force was trying to modernize but had really only just started. And then declaring war and sitting on hands while 90ish percent of the German military was rolling into Poland made the leaders - well look clueless. Poland was a 'back up against the wall moment'? No - and if it was France could have done something about it. If the West really were not navel gazing during the Czech scenario that would have been the time for action. To have any interpretation that the USSR was some stalwart against Nazi Germany during WW2 is just plain revisionist history.

quote:

And for the record - the Poles fought tooth and nail, and continued to until the end of the war.

?
You are deeply troubled my friend, you're imagining things between my lines, I am afraid...
Saying we thought we French were as ready as we could be doesn't mean that we actually were, or saying that nobody expected Poland to fall like she did doesn't mean she didn't give as good a fight as she could (and being French I obviously know what a K.O. and a government-in-exile mean). Either you take me for the Devil, or for a second grade schoolkid here

Truth be told I don't even understand what your point is, I think I made my own clear enough over the last posts - and it clearly isn't the one you seem to condemn... Where did I say that the USSR was stalwart against the Nazi in WW2? I probably said already twice in that very topic that they went to bed with them in 1939... or did I dream my own words?

quote:

you have already granted that Katyn happened, though you have conveniently ignored the Warsaw rising episode.

I am sorry, but again, is that a second grade quizz or what? Maybe my way of expressing myself is losing you somewhere along the way, but I did say that the reduction or even deletion of Poland as a concept has been a leitmotiv of Russian foreign policy over the centuries (and I will add, to some extent, from the early days of the rise of Moscovia) - that was the point of my remark about Realpolitik and the fact that the only way the Soviet Union innovated in regard of Russian-Polish relations beyond a will to erase the Polish state out of existence was its uncommon savagery while doing so (someone with a large moustache obviously did hold a grudge from his early days - but I am not sure you'll even get the reference here). Again, with my Latvian heritage do you actually expect me to be oblivious to what the Soviet Union did out there? Are you convinced I am learning about the Warsaw uprising only just now, or that I am refuting it?

Take a deep breath my friend

And buy yourself new glasses, or somethin'. Before reading about the Winter War, reading what you're replying to might be a good start.

< Message edited by Fishbed -- 9/2/2019 6:01:01 PM >

(in reply to fcooke)

Post #: 37

RE: Semi OT: How Russia is trying to "falsify/alte... - 9/2/2019 5:52:58 PM

Apollo11

Posts: 24082
Joined: 6/7/2001
From: Zagreb, Croatia
Status: offline

Hi all,

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

quote:

ORIGINAL: Apollo11

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fishbed

quote:

ORIGINAL: Apollo11

Semi OT: How Russia is trying to "falsify/alter/modify" the history and their role at the start of WW2...

Original:

https://tass.ru/interviews/6631297

English translation:

https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ru&u=https://tass.ru/interviews/6631297&prev=search

"Sergei Ivanov: the USSR did not find support from Europe to create an anti-Hitler coalition"

Sergey Ivanov is chairman of the board of trustees of the Russian Military Historical Society (RVIO), the special representative of the President of Russia on environmental protection, ecology, spoke and transport.

Well, being in bed already I can't really enjoy this slice of post-Pravda State poetry, but I fail to see what is wrong (beyond the obvious bitchin') in the passage you quoted, Apollo.

Yes, by all means, the USSR tried to favour the emergence of an anti-Nazi coalition with Western Democracies as partners for the latter part of the thirties, and our complete failure at honouring our agreements, especially towards Czechoslovakia eventually convinced Stalin that he was better off with an uneasy peace with his mortal enemy than an uneasy alliance with us weary weaklings. Can't really blame him... And maybe it eventually saved us from a WW2 in reverse with the Soviets on the wrong side of the aisle against the holy alliance made of the Locarno nations.

Does this ring any bells?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franco-Soviet_Treaty_of_Mutual_Assistance

Any French history teacher worth his salt knows (and teaches) that our Soviet bride went to share Poland with the other guy because time and time again in the Rhineland, in Spain, in Munich and elsewhere, the only thing we and our British friends never failed at was showing our complete lack of resolve and reliability as allies. I am surprised it comes to some of us as news

For me the biggest "problem/issue" with justifying the Molotov�Ribbentrop Pact from Soviet/Russian side (then and now) is very simple...

On 03.09.1939. UK and France declared war on Germany!

In my eyes all previous diplomatic mistakes (i.e appeasement) were "erased" with that declaration of war - the western powers decided to stand up firmly to German dictator Hitler and they declared war on invading enemy!

But what did SSSR and Stalin do?

Did they join the anti-Hitler coalition (UK/France/Poland) and stopped the war at the start?

Nope.

They were 100% opportunists who backed up what Hitler was doing and they went on persuading their own aggressive invasion politics... Poland, Finland, Baltic states...

Leo "Apollo11"

warspite1

Hi Apollo11. This is a fascinating discussion. I think that blaming Stalin for doing what he did would be wrong.

All governments have a duty to their own people - the Soviets were no exception.

I take with a large chunk of salt the idea that Stalin wanted an anti-German alliance, and the claims now that they did - and the only reason this wasn't achieved was because of Chamberlain/Daladier - can equally being taken less than seriously.

But as much as I hate to admit it, Stalin's thinking was shrewd. I mean seriously what was to lose?

- Sign the pact and get a free hand in the Baltics, Finland, Eastern Poland and Bessarabia/Northern Bukovina
- Sign the pact and allow the Germans and the Western Allies to beat each other into submission (just like WWI)
- Sign the pact and then sit back and pick up the spoils.

But you seem to be saying that Stalin should have immediately (as soon Germany crossed the line in the sand that the Western Allies drew) dropped the pact and join in a war against Germany. Why would he do that? Sure it makes sense to us, and it makes sense to the USSR given what ultimately happened - but at the time?

Stalin was paranoid on a good day so why would he trust the British and French? And if we are blaming Stalin for acting in the USSR's own interests then why isn't that charge levelled at Holland, Belgium, Scandinavia, Switzerland, Yugoslavia and Greece? Yes they were small nations but their political class had the same access to the lessons of 1936-1939 that the rest of the continent had? Well of course the answer is that they too were acting in their own self interest (and hoping that they would stay out).

Let's suspend disbelief for the moment. In 1938 Poland don't take the action they took in real life. Instead, when Germany approached them about an anti-Soviet alliance, Poland saw the writing on the wall and said sure, we'll give up some territory in the west and take some from Byelorussia and the Ukraine. After taking the Czech rump Hitler turns east. Do we really think that Britain and France are going to declare war on Germany to assist the Soviets? I don't know for sure but I'd bet no.

I think we misunderstood... I was only saying that Soviets were opportunists just like the Adolf Hitler and Germany!

The point I made that Stalin and Soviets should have declared war on Germany on 03.09.1939. if they were really sincere that they wanted broad anti-Hitler coalition was only in comment to current Russian history narrative where they boldly claim that what they did in 1939 and 1940 was all OK, moral and 100% pure and clean...

Leo "Apollo11"

_____________________________

Prior Preparation & Planning Prevents Pathetically Poor Performance!

A & B: WitW, WitE, WbtS, GGWaW, GGWaW2-AWD, HttR, CotA, BftB, CF
P: UV, WitP, WitP-AE

(in reply to warspite1)

Post #: 38

RE: Semi OT: How Russia is trying to "falsify/alte... - 9/2/2019 5:56:12 PM

Fishbed

Posts: 1822
Joined: 11/21/2005
From: Beijing, China - Paris, France
Status: offline

quote:

Let's suspend disbelief for the moment. In 1938 Poland don't take the action they took in real life. Instead, when Germany approached them about an anti-Soviet alliance, Poland saw the writing on the wall and said sure, we'll give up some territory in the west and take some from Byelorussia and the Ukraine. After taking the Czech rump Hitler turns east. Do we really think that Britain and France are going to declare war on Germany to assist the Soviets? I don't know for sure but I'd bet no.

That makes for a fascinating and scary scenario though.

(in reply to Apollo11)

Post #: 39

RE: Semi OT: How Russia is trying to "falsify/alte... - 9/2/2019 5:58:55 PM

Zorch

Posts: 7087
Joined: 3/7/2010
Status: offline

Fishbed,

You shift your position with every post, and deliberately misinterpret other poster's statements.
You have failed to respond to the specific points made by other posters.
You proceed from dubious general statements to specific ones that are not supported by the facts.

(in reply to Fishbed)

Post #: 40

RE: Semi OT: How Russia is trying to "falsify/alte... - 9/2/2019 6:03:23 PM

warspite1

Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorch

Fishbed,

You shift your position with every post, and deliberately misinterpret other poster's statements.
You have failed to respond to the specific points made by other posters.
You proceed from dubious general statements to specific ones that are not supported by the facts.

warspite1

Which comments in particular Zorch ol' fruit? I must confess I am losing some of the thread of some of the posts (although that may be because I am old and warty)

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805

(in reply to Zorch)

Post #: 41

RE: Semi OT: How Russia is trying to "falsify/alte... - 9/2/2019 6:07:42 PM

warspite1

Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Apollo11

....current Russian history narrative where they boldly claim that what they did in 1939 and 1940 was all OK, moral and 100% pure and clean...

warspite1

Sure - and I agree on that - but then I was brought up on Britain went to war (First) to aid the brave Belgians and (Second) to aid the valiant Poles.

The truth is a tad more complex

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805

(in reply to Apollo11)

Post #: 42

RE: Semi OT: How Russia is trying to "falsify/alte... - 9/2/2019 6:10:17 PM

Fishbed

Posts: 1822
Joined: 11/21/2005
From: Beijing, China - Paris, France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorch

Fishbed,

You shift your position with every post, and deliberately misinterpret other poster's statements.
You have failed to respond to the specific points made by other posters.
You proceed from dubious general statements to specific ones that are not supported by the facts.

I am sorry. Please go ahead with a question, I'll give an answer. But - Heavens! - please read what's been written first... And be specific with your questions/remarks/reproaches!

Again, I don't nearly sound as categorical as you do when it comes to branding other fellow posters as sneaky snakes just like you did there, but I wish to be proven wrong. Again, I don't see how general or non-factual can my own statements be when I mention actual treaties signed in the 1930s that nobody seems to know of in order to explain that, yes, the USSR tried unsuccessfully an alternate foreign policy in the late 30s until they decided to align themselves with the Nazis in a spectacular window of opportunity

If by "dubious general statements not supported by facts" you just mean answers that don't fit your own opinions and vision, that's on you mate. The world is big enough for us all - or at least I have the weakness to believe so

< Message edited by Fishbed -- 9/2/2019 6:12:16 PM >

(in reply to Zorch)

Post #: 43

RE: Semi OT: How Russia is trying to "falsify/alte... - 9/2/2019 6:14:16 PM

Zorch

Posts: 7087
Joined: 3/7/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fishbed

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorch

Fishbed,

You shift your position with every post, and deliberately misinterpret other poster's statements.
You have failed to respond to the specific points made by other posters.
You proceed from dubious general statements to specific ones that are not supported by the facts.

I am sorry. Please go ahead with a question, I'll give an answer. But - Heavens! - please read what's been written first... And be specific with your questions/remarks/reproaches! You can't be serious, reproaching me with the very kind of arguments you claim to denounce!

Again, I don't nearly sound as categorical as you do when it comes to branding other fellow posters as sneaky snakes just like you did there, but I wish to be proven wrong. Again, I don't see how general or non-factual can my own statements be when I mention actual treaties signed in the 1930s that nobody seems to know of in order to explain that, yes, the USSR tried unsuccessfully an alternate foreign policy in the late 30s until they decided to align themselves with the Nazis in a spectacular window of opportunity

If by dubious general statements not supported by facts you just mean answers that don't fit your own opinions and vision, that's on you mate. The world is big enough for us all - or at least I have the weakness to believe so

I feel you're simply jerking us around without engaging on the specifics of what happened back then. Your use of ad hominem and non-sequitur remarks demonstrates that.

(in reply to Fishbed)

Post #: 44

RE: Semi OT: How Russia is trying to "falsify/alte... - 9/2/2019 6:32:54 PM

fcooke

Posts: 1156
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Boston, London, Hoboken, now Warwick, NY
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fishbed

quote:

FB - completely false logic. France was not in good military shape in 1939. Army was sound, if unmotivated. A lot more armor (and better) than the Germans. Navy was trying to upgrade. German Navy had gained on them from 36 to 39. Air Force was trying to modernize but had really only just started. And then declaring war and sitting on hands while 90ish percent of the German military was rolling into Poland made the leaders - well look clueless. Poland was a 'back up against the wall moment'? No - and if it was France could have done something about it. If the West really were not navel gazing during the Czech scenario that would have been the time for action. To have any interpretation that the USSR was some stalwart against Nazi Germany during WW2 is just plain revisionist history.

quote:

And for the record - the Poles fought tooth and nail, and continued to until the end of the war.

?
You are deeply troubled my friend, you're imagining things between my lines, I am afraid...
Saying we thought we French were as ready as we could be doesn't mean that we actually were, or saying that nobody expected Poland to fall like she did doesn't mean she didn't give as good a fight as she could (and being French I obviously know what a K.O. and a government-in-exile mean). Either you take me for the Devil, or for a second grade schoolkid here

Truth be told I don't even understand what your point is, I think I made my own clear enough over the last posts - and it clearly isn't the one you seem to condemn... Where did I say that the USSR was stalwart against the Nazi in WW2? I probably said already twice in that very topic that they went to bed with them in 1939... or did I dream my own words?

Read between the lines.

quote:

you have already granted that Katyn happened, though you have conveniently ignored the Warsaw rising episode.

I am sorry, but again, is that a second grade quizz or what? Maybe my way of expressing myself is losing you somewhere along the way, but I did say that the reduction or even deletion of Poland as a concept has been a leitmotiv of Russian foreign policy over the centuries (and I will add, to some extent, from the early days of the rise of Moscovia) - that was the point of my remark about Realpolitik and the fact that the only way the Soviet Union innovated in regard of Russian-Polish relations beyond a will to erase the Polish state out of existence was its uncommon savagery while doing so (someone with a large moustache obviously did hold a grudge from his early days - but I am not sure you'll even get the reference here). Again, with my Latvian heritage do you actually expect me to be oblivious to what the Soviet Union did out there? Are you convinced I am learning about the Warsaw uprising only just now, or that I am refuting it?

I had no idea you are Latvian...I asked a question about Soviet motives with the Warsaw uprising and their blatant choice not just to not help but to clearly block the attempts of others. Clear enough now? And the Annexation of the three Baltic nations doesn't exactly give the USSR any 'good actor' credit.

Take a deep breath my friend
And buy yourself new glasses, or somethin'. Before reading about the Winter War, reading what you're replying to might be a good start.

Personal attacks are generally not accepted on this forum. As much as I hate them my glasses work fine.

(in reply to Fishbed)

Post #: 45

RE: Semi OT: How Russia is trying to "falsify/alte... - 9/2/2019 6:42:08 PM

jagsdomain

Posts: 197
Joined: 7/4/2019
Status: offline

Some of the massacre blamed on thr Germans were dont by the Russians.

(in reply to warspite1)

Post #: 46

RE: Semi OT: How Russia is trying to "falsify/alte... - 9/2/2019 6:46:32 PM

L0ckAndL0ad

Posts: 183
Joined: 4/13/2018
From: Pale Blue Dot
Status: offline

Hey folks.

Can't get myself to finish my WITP AE campaign/AAR, but I still do read the forums.. occasionally. Did not expect to see such a thread around here, and it's been a long time since I participated in such a thread, but I've got a couple of minutes I can spend on it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy
-snip-
since 2014 in an effort to deflect from their abominable international conduct in seizing Crimea
-snip-

As someone who happens to be "fortunate" enough to be living there (and not being able to escape), I can give some personal comments. RangerJoe's and Zorch's first posts in this thread are pretty spot on.

It doesn't matter to Pu and his cronies what people around discuss, as long it's not something about the fact that he's a deek-head (actually, there were already some cases opened against people who wrote such stuff on the walls on the streets, thanks to yet another of their "laws"; dude is getting sensitive by the year) and not talking about their crimes. Talking about the past, especially things that can keep perpetually heat up conversations, creating endless opportunities for keeping the least intelligent and most numerous portion of the population busy. And yeah, when most of your populace is poor and/or works for government, they don't have much time to protest or object in any other way.

Bottom line, I wouldn't listen to what any of their talking heads say. They are criminals and the only thing that is worth discussing is how to get rid of them, and make them pay. But it's kinda hard, when it's a country-sized crime syndicate run by a guy with a red button.

Alright, I gotta go. Hope their usual net-sniffing dogs aren't very well versed in English and I ain't going to be redflagged or anything. Competence isn't their strong side, that's the only thing one can rely on around here, ha-ha.

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 47

RE: Semi OT: How Russia is trying to "falsify/alte... - 9/2/2019 6:53:16 PM

fcooke

Posts: 1156
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Boston, London, Hoboken, now Warwick, NY
Status: offline

fair enough....but Katyn was. And neither Germany nor the USSR had a great record on returning POWs.

(in reply to jagsdomain)

Post #: 48

RE: Semi OT: How Russia is trying to "falsify/alte... - 9/2/2019 6:54:53 PM

Fishbed

Posts: 1822
Joined: 11/21/2005
From: Beijing, China - Paris, France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorch

feel you're simply jerking us around without engaging on the specifics of what happened back then. Your use of ad hominem and non-sequitur remarks demonstrates that.

You know, using latin or greek ain't gonna make an argument sound smarter.

Give an example, write a simple question/answer situation, I don't know, do something bro! I can play ball only if there's a ball.

Fast rewind.

I got jumped on by Dili after I mentioned to Apollo that the passage he quoted

"Sergei Ivanov: the USSR did not find support from Europe to create an anti-Hitler coalition"

had, beyond "the obivous bitchin'" (my words) *some* merit, for it is what the Soviets tried for a time in the late 1930s.
I wasn't snarky in my remarks, I wasn't teasing anybody. Just, well, the guy is an arse but what he says is kinda true when it comes to the late 1930s.

Since then I've hold this ground. I didn't say they weren't opportunists, I didn't say they didn't have other plans, I didn't say they were honest folks led by some righteous leader. I said we didn't take this opportunity at that time, and only woke up when, after failing to find our support, they went for the next best thing for them, aka sleeping with the Nazis (which also happened to be the worst thing that could happen to us AND the worst thing that was to happen to them, but they thought they knew better). The fact both France and the UK were absolutely flabbergasted by the move in August 1939 should tell enough about what people thought of the on-going political spectrum then.

Once the whole thing digressed on the after-pact era itself, people started to brand every single Communist as a collaborationist. I cared to differ. Situation was way more complex than that, and the infiltration of the anti-war movement in the US doesn't tell the whole story. I said Fascists and Communists were in an ideological competition because they address the same audience, and as such on a collision course. It ended up with Dili saying that the Fascists were the moderate in this story (his words). Being from a country where we actually had a Communist Party before and after the war, you might understand that it is a bit too much to absorb at once - that "the Fascists kept the King while the Communists killed their Tzar" argument, oh well, then I should consider myself lucky that French Communist delegates accepted to siege in the lower chamber of my Republic without trying to overturn my government every now and then, right?

By then it seemed obvious there would be no ground for discussion with Dili, considering he seemed not very willing to involve himself in the complexity of the politics of the 3rd Republic (which obviously had their repercussions on our foreign policy too) and the peculiar role the French Communist Party played, especially in the awkward times of the post-Pact/pre-Barbarossa, so I gave up on the whole "they were all traitors" topic. What was I supposed to do, summon February 1934 to trump his Songs for John Doe argument? We're literally living on two different planets in here.

Then now I see people telling me that I am eulogizing the conduct of the Soviet Union and refuting their crimes. I am not. I won't. My whole family went through these crimes and suffered enough from them for me to have ample knowledge. But Family ain't a badge I can waive freely so that I can decide to let my supposed grudges affect the facts. I have all the reasons to resent the Soviets for things they did, but a fact is a fact: in the late 1930s, they were on the frontlines of the anti-fascist camp and we (France & the UK) were on the sidelines watching, and the demerit of a biased Russian so-called analyst trying pitifully to have an ounce of this so-called past glory anachronistically give the current regime some luster doesn't change a thing (or, at the most, makes it look worse than it should). At the end of the day, what more can I say?

So, apologies are in order if you're not considering me as a reliable interlocutor or if some of my remarks could be taken the wrong way. I can be sorry about not being understood because of my questionable grammar, and as such seen as being of bad faith. But don't expect me to apologize for what I am or what I think. I am the last man that has any reason to defend the Soviets in this story (that is, again, that late 1930s pre-Pact anti-fascist stance controversy) but I will make sure as hell that I remain so if need be.

< Message edited by Fishbed -- 9/2/2019 8:04:57 PM >

(in reply to fcooke)

Post #: 49

RE: Semi OT: How Russia is trying to "falsify/alte... - 9/2/2019 7:59:22 PM

fcooke

Posts: 1156
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Boston, London, Hoboken, now Warwick, NY
Status: offline

While I do not disagree with Zorch's comment, ascribing it to me is a bit misleading at best, as it was not my post. And your latest post claiming pretty much everyone is mis-interpreted your statements is beyond the pale.

And nobody else fell to the level of personal attacks in this thread. And your English skills and grammar are better than a substantial number of US citizens, so that dog doesn't hunt.

And I do have 5 years of Latin schooling under my belt, but no Greek. But I can read church windows. Perhaps not in Greece or Russia (Cyrillic and all).

Regards,
Frank

(in reply to Fishbed)

Post #: 50

RE: Semi OT: How Russia is trying to "falsify/alte... - 9/2/2019 8:04:32 PM

Fishbed

Posts: 1822
Joined: 11/21/2005
From: Beijing, China - Paris, France
Status: offline

Ah oops, apologies. Edited!
That was an honest-to-God mix up, I don't really see clearly who's who by now...

Although, if I may say so, it's yet another case where you seem to assume the worst a bit too easily... No harm intended at all, it's just getting late in here.

And btw thanks for the kind words

< Message edited by Fishbed -- 9/2/2019 8:07:00 PM >

(in reply to fcooke)

Post #: 51

RE: Semi OT: How Russia is trying to "falsify/alte... - 9/2/2019 8:05:19 PM

fcooke

Posts: 1156
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Boston, London, Hoboken, now Warwick, NY
Status: offline

And happy 65th birthday - for the Fishbed/Mig-21. Last time I saw one (it could have been a J-7) was in Beijing in 1991.

(in reply to fcooke)

Post #: 52

RE: Semi OT: How Russia is trying to "falsify/alte... - 9/2/2019 8:28:55 PM

Zorch

Posts: 7087
Joined: 3/7/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fishbed

Ah oops, apologies. Edited!
That was an honest-to-God mix up, I don't really see clearly who's who by now...
Although, if I may say so, it's yet another case where you seem to assume the worst a bit too easily... No harm intended at all, it's just getting late in here.

And btw thanks for the kind words

+1
Likewise, I sometimes assume the worst.

(in reply to Fishbed)

Post #: 53

RE: Semi OT: How Russia is trying to "falsify/alte... - 9/2/2019 8:42:58 PM

fcooke

Posts: 1156
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Boston, London, Hoboken, now Warwick, NY
Status: offline

For clarity - directed to Fishbed. You are a piece of work. You apologize for YOUR error and then tell me I assume the worst? It's in black and white. I assumed nothing. Nice attempt at deflection.

(in reply to Zorch)

Post #: 54

RE: Semi OT: How Russia is trying to "falsify/alte... - 9/3/2019 2:58:01 AM

Fishbed

Posts: 1822
Joined: 11/21/2005
From: Beijing, China - Paris, France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: fcooke

For clarity - directed to Fishbed. You are a piece of work. You apologize for YOUR error and then tell me I assume the worst? It's in black and white. I assumed nothing. Nice attempt at deflection.

I don't know what to say...

I quote the wrong guy
(and when I'm at that, sorry to Zorch about being an arse there too, latin phrases are great...)

You reply

quote:

While I do not disagree with Zorch's comment, ascribing it to me is a bit misleading at best

I tell you that it's an honest mistake, that I am sorry, and that you're assuming the worst (that is, not giving me the benefice of the doubt, thinking instead that I must have done that on purpose and meant harm) but that it isn't what I meant or what I am.

And now I am a "piece of work" and I try to deflect... Hm... Yeah whatever, have it this way if it pleases you but know that I find no pleasure in smashing my head against that sort of language barrier.

A man can only apologize for so much, especially when he reaches a point when he doesn't know or understand what he is apologizing for anymore

Red button, here I come...

(in reply to fcooke)

Post #: 55

RE: Semi OT: How Russia is trying to "falsify/alte... - 9/3/2019 5:38:22 AM

warspite1

Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

That was a really interesting discussion - shame it all fell apart so quickly

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805

(in reply to Fishbed)

Post #: 56

RE: Semi OT: How Russia is trying to "falsify/alte... - 9/3/2019 6:56:23 AM

Dili

Posts: 4708
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fishbed

quote:

So what is it? The Italian Fascist-Soviet alliance was as brotherhood as pragmatic. The only problem between Fascism and Communist is that Fascists looked at Communists as extreme - there is a reason that the Italian Monarchy survived with Mussolini and the Czar was murdered - and Communists looked at Fascists as weak.

Ah come on
You just cherry-pick what you like in what I write, pull it out of its context and forget quickly about the rest - and then even start to show, erm.... questionable (?) political colors. Not once did you bounce on the few mentions I had of our own democracies' attempts to ally ourselves with one another. There's a reason I pretty much cited each and every bit of what you say. That's named intellectual honesty.
Don't wanna play by these rules, don't play at all

I will leave you with your fantasies - the fact you'd have to resort to American folk songs says it all about your level of knowledge of what actually happened in Europe back then. Watch out for dangerous Fifth columnists, they might still be out there.

Good Night, and Good luck!

Typical pro-Soviet crap . There is a name for that Newspeak. Artist have a social duty until that duty is diminished because turns out to be inconvenient...
The fact that Communists got their machine working to sabotage war effort against Nazis from factory interruptions, full propaganda artists declarations, Pacifism propaganda in newspapers is inconsequential to you.
I posted a couple of examples.

Your tactic is just to call it "pragmatic" to wave it a away and don't have to deal with it with honesty.

So for you there are some - the Communists - that have the full right to pragmatic but the others - the West have the duty to be moral and ethical.

You just showed your colors.

"It ended up with Dili saying that the Fascists were the moderate in this story (his words). Being from a country where we actually had a Communist Party before and after the war, you might understand that it is a bit too much to absorb at once - that "the Fascists kept the King while the Communists killed their Tzar" "

Your knowledge of European politics - even more funny is that you assume i am an American - is so much that in typical post WW2 you conflate Fascism directly with Nazism. How many millions of their own people Italian Fascists murdered compared to how many Soviet Communists were murdered by other Soviet Communists? note the dissimilar comparison i am making here, i am giving just the murdered Communists, while you can include all Italians...then who turns to be the moderate Socialists in the non-democratic part of the Socialist movement?

I let you with the title of Italian Communists Party appeal to "Fascist Brothers" in 1936

APPELLO AI FRATELLI IN CAMICIA NERA - does it show "seminal" Communist disagreement against Fascists?

and about this part: "I comunisti fanno proprio il programma fascista del 1919, che � un programma di pace, di libert�, di difesa degli interessi dei lavoratori..."

< Message edited by Dili -- 9/3/2019 7:44:01 AM >

(in reply to Fishbed)

Post #: 57

RE: Semi OT: How Russia is trying to "falsify/alte... - 9/3/2019 11:28:30 AM

fcooke

Posts: 1156
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Boston, London, Hoboken, now Warwick, NY
Status: offline

FB - please man up and admit you were out of line. Or don't.

Still waiting on your rebuttal to the Warsaw uprising. But facts don't seem to be your thing.

Still waiting for a REAL apology on your personal attacks on me. Ditto from above.

But I doubt you will. I won't use sarcastic smileys.

(in reply to Dili)

Post #: 58

RE: Semi OT: How Russia is trying to "falsify/alte... - 9/3/2019 11:44:23 AM

fcooke

Posts: 1156
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Boston, London, Hoboken, now Warwick, NY
Status: offline

yep - you did not post this.....

it's yet another case where you seem to assume the worst a bit too easily...

If you say so. Look at my posts - again if you will. No attacks, just facts. And you deflecting and quite honestly making stuff up is not in the spirit of this forum.

Best,
Frank

(in reply to Fishbed)

Post #: 59

RE: Semi OT: How Russia is trying to "falsify/alte... - 9/4/2019 6:53:03 AM

warspite1

Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

Well I finally read the piece Apollo11 posted. I have to say there is a lot of reasonable argument in terms of the actions the USSR took, what they thought was happening in the west, and so why they took the decisions they did. As ever, there is the over-arching reluctance to admit that the USSR did anything wrong which pervades the whole article and weakens the Soviet case.

As I said earlier (and we need to forget for the moment the hideous, brutal, inhumane Stalinist regime - that is a given) the fact is that the Soviet leadership were acting in what they thought was the best way possible.

Post Munich it was every man for himself. Both Stalin and Hitler needed the pact. They both got what they could from it. Nothing further need be said about German motivation, but Soviet action (creating buffer zones) was understandable as they knew there would be a day of reckoning with Hitler. The pact was one of convenience by two leaders doing what they believed was necessary for their countries at the time. As said, in order to properly understand their actions and dissect them, we need to put aside the hideous nature of these Totalitarian regimes because that can cloud the judgement.

Of course we do know what happened and what turns the stomach is the way in which the Soviets treated the populace - particularly of Poland, but that should be no surprise given the way Stalin treated Ukrainians pre-war and returning Soviet POW's and minority groups after the war. But for the purposes of what or who started the war that is a secondary issue.

Was this a friendly pact that saw these two regimes acting as Allies? I don't think so. I think there was pragmatism from both sides. The hatred was deep set and mutual - if the West did not finish off Hitler then there would only ever be one outcome - a clash between these two repulsive regimes at some point in the future. Both knew it. Both wanted to avoid it for only as long as they needed to avoid it. In order to avoid that day as long as possible they agreed to exchange raw materials, foodstuffs and technology. Compliance with the agreement ebbed and flowed along with the fortunes of each party.

Was it the actions of the Soviet Union (agreeing to the pact) that led to WWII? One could say yes as, without it, its not certain what Hitler would have done next. But at the same time one could say it was no more the cause than a host of other points in history: The German leadership making Hitler Chancellor so they could control him, the Rhineland, Munich, the failure of the German General Staff to grow a set and take unilateral action, Prague....

No one - Stalin, Chamberlain or Daladier - had the benefit of hindsight, the situation was evolving during the thirties and so many facets - the wish to right the wrongs of Versailles; the wish to avoid another 1914-18 hell; the fact that the first war, and then the Great Depression, left France and Britain in no state - financially or militarily - to fight a war; public opinion; fear and distrust of the Soviets by the West; fear and distrust of the West by the Soviets; a German leader that was mis-judged by EVERYONE - Germans, British, French, Americans alike; the rise of fascism elsewhere (Spain and Italy); the fear of Communism; American isolationism; a militaristic Japan - all in all what a devils brew.

I've always maintained that the French and British need to be cut some slack re their actions in the lead up to war - and in regard to the signing of the pact, so (as much as I hate to have to say it) does Stalin.

< Message edited by warspite1 -- 9/4/2019 7:13:59 AM >

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805

(in reply to fcooke)

Post #: 60

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 next > >>

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: Semi OT: How Russia is trying to "falsify/alter/modify" the history and their role at the start of