The myths of WWII (Eastern Europe)

My friend I believe I understand what you are trying to say but none was the case on the Ost front. Slave labor eradicated any business ventures (railroad workers etc.) and no civilians wanted to or were permitted to visit the Ost front. I have only read several accounts of family members visiting there loved ones and they were high ranking officers. This occurred rarely and far away from the front lines. Claiming "none" might very well be an understatement as I'm sure a few paid the price. From research, however; I have failed to stumble upon any material stating that any had met such fate.

 

Yes there were indeed Finnish civilians in Finland!

The only difference is that the civilians helping partisans were Russians. These people were helping their own ( family members in many cases). The civilians being discussed here would have came to Russia uninvited and only to support those who wanted to exterminate or enslave the people.

 

I have seen these photos and have read the stories I'm sorry that such had occurred. However, you would be seriously mistaken if you are the impression that they were just carrying out orders from the Soviet High Command. While unfortunte, I believe it would also be a mistake to place the criminal label on the partisans as a whole based on a handful of crimes committed by a handful of criminals.

 

I don´t know if the Partisan movement´s only aim was to cause havoc and bring the Finnish morale down. War is hard and that´s what they did, in their way. Wiki might not be the most correct source but anyway:

"In East Karelia, most partisans attacked Finnish military supply and communication targets, but inside Finland proper, almost two-thirds of the attacks targeted civilians."

People must themselves decide whether that is the correct way to go to war.

Soviet partisans - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

I must admit that I am not as familiar with the Partisans in Finland vs the groups operating on the Eastern front. As previously said, generally when speaking of partisan activities they are almost always referred to the East. The partisan movement in Finland was far smaller and insignificant in comparison to similar groups operating elsewhere.

Clearly anyone who deliberately targets civilians is a war criminal, bandit etc. and should be punished accordingly but to denigrate the entire group and it's movement solely on the actions of such a few would (IMO) be a mistake.

The partisans were by no means angels and the hardships they endured were unimaginable, yet still; their cause was just and I do consider them heroes (at least 90% of them or so).

It must also be mentioned that the partisans did not chose to go to war but were forced into it by the enemy's brutal policies geared towards the civilian populations.

 

I never said or meant, that anything excuses the killings of innocent children - or adults for that matter. On the other hand not everybody killed by Germans was "an innocent civilian", which seems to be your thinking. I wish you would finally stop putting your words or meanings to my mouth. Please read my posts (more) carefully!

 

Was this meant for me? Your example is not equivalent to mine, since it was not the previous doings of those civilians I was referring to but their actions during the occupation.

You seem to forget, that I was just commenting Sloniksp's statement of German (and non-existing Finnish) civilians in Belarus or Ukraine not being civilians any more. Think!

 

Which were raped and murdered by Russian partisans.

Mostly Byelorussians and Ukrainians, I presume...

The civilians I was discussing about never went to Russia - uninvited or not. On the other hand there were plenty of Russians who came to Finland (and to many other countries as well already well before the Barbarossa) uninvited wanting to exterminate and enslave the local people. The saddest part is that many of them stayed e.g. in Finnish Karelia (or 6 feet under...)

 

I'm under the impression that all the havoc possible was ordered by the soviet regime. But of course mostly concentrating on attacks against defenceless small civilian villages and then lying about them was not ordered from above but was the choice of the commanders of those criminal gangs.

My point is not to place the criminal label on all partisans but to show, that there can not be any general glorification of all partisans either.

In Finland the partisans were generally criminals doing generally only crimes, which had no real military value.

 

That depends on one's point of view. In Finland the word partisan brings first to mind their atrocities in Finland, although I can understand your thinking too.

As I wrote on my previous post I'm not trying to label the hole group of partisans. I'm only against the general rosy picture of the "holy" partisans.

Their cause was not always just and sometimes their hardships were meaningless compered to the pointless destruction they caused. In general I consider them maybe 55 % heroes and 45 % foes, but that's just me. In Finland they were 90 % criminals.

It must also be mentioned that Finland and the Finnish civilians did not choose to go to war but were forced into it by the enemy's brutal policies also geared towards the civilian populations.

 

Ah, never mind.

 

We maybe haveing a sematinc problem. I was includeing pretty much everything East of the German border in the "Easter Front". In that regard I beleive the German railroads were still run by civilians and most German industry even with slave laborers was also headed by civilians was it not? Now I have read that the German railway workers were uniformed (indeed on GI commented that they were told to quit shooting them because they were civilians and not some branch of the German military).

 

From “Oil of Russia” magazine in the net

The fuel problems that had arisen compelled the Soviet Government to take prompt action. As early as June 29, 1941, just a week after the war had broken out, V. Molotov, People's Commissar of Foreign Affairs, flashed a cable to the U.S. Ambassador in the USSR saying: "Please see Roosevelt or Hull (or Welles) about the possibility of shipping to the USSR the following supplies by way of war aid: 1) single-engine fighter planes - 3 thousand, 2) bomber planes - 3 thousand.., 5) cracking and other plant for making high-grade aviation fuel and aviation oil. A five-year credit line to finance the purchase of these items would be welcome. Please telegraph results".

Making arrangements to keep the Soviet Army, Navy, factories and organizations supplied with armaments and industrial plant under lend-lease was a tall order. A military mission led by Lieutenant-General Filipp Golikov (a would-be Marshal) went to the United States via Great Britain to negotiate the details. The mission included Major-General A. Repin (Air Force).

By the summer of 1941, the Soviet-American Amtorg Trading Corporation, incorporated under New York State law, was seven years old. The USSR had no official trade mission in the United States, therefore Amtorg acted as the main procurement organization. After the outbreak of the war, Amtorg became the Soviet Government's purchasing agent in the United States.

Early in wartime, Amtorg set up specialized departments given over to the supply of armaments, raw materials, food, uniforms and other items to Soviet Union. Amtorg carried on this effort throughout the war. Over the initial eight months of the war, Amtorg handled the bulk of the military supplies flow. In four months, from June 23 to late October 1941, Amtorg paid its providers $92 million in cash for the shipments made - and kept their order books full. The amount included payments for 130,340 long tons of petroleum products (one long ton equals 1,016,047 kg). Just to compare: in 1929-30, 1,700 American companies sold only 94.5 million dollars' worth of goods through Amtorg.

The matter of petroleum products supply, in particular, was discussed by specialists at 11 a.m. on September 30, 1941, with People's Commissar Anastas Mikoyan attending. The Moscow Protocol provided for the deliveries of petroleum products (aviation gasoline, its components, oils, lubricants, motor gasolines and gasoil) at a rate of 20,000 tons a month.

The First Protocol was to run for nine months, therefore we were to receive 180,000 tons of petroleum products. The supplier hit the target with some allowances made for losses inevitable in transportation during wartime. By June 21, 1942, we received 167,995 tons; altogether, the Allies supplied 298,349 tons of petroleum products over the first year of the war.

Over the period of June 22, 1941 to September 20, 1945 the USSR received a total of 2,113,409 long tons of petroleum products. Another 572,979 tons arrived from the refineries of Canada, Great Britain and Iran. All in all, Lend-Lease petroleum product supplies added up to 2,686,388 long tons.

Considering that the hostilities at the Soviet-German front lasted for 1,320 days, and at the Soviet-Japanese front, for 24 days, which makes a total of 1,344 days, and that average gasoline consumption per sortie constituted about a third of a ton, simple arithmetic will show that the amount of gasoline supplied under lend-lease was enough to fly 3.92 million combat missions (1,305,518/0.333), i.e. to send 3,000 aircraft on combat missions daily (3.92 million sorties/1,344 days). According to historical statistics, from 6,500 to 18,800 planes were committed to action simultaneously on Soviet and German sides in the course of hostilities, i.e. an average of 3,250 to 9.400 planes on each side. That means that aviation gasoline supplied under Lend-Lease could satisfy from 33% to 90% of the entire Soviet Air Force's requirements in various periods of the war.

Consequently, the amount of aviation gasoline supplied under Lend-Lease over the war years was comparable with the output of all the Baku refineries.

The Allies supplied to the USSR nearly 145 million dollars' worth of petroleum products - or an estimated $1,586,000 in mid-2004 prices with regard for the average 4% annual inflation rate.