Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

different points of view


  • Please log in to reply
26 replies to this topic

#1 uffandr

uffandr

    Dishonorably Discharged

  • Dishonorably Discharged
  • Pip
  • 2 posts

Posted 21 July 2008 - 01:03 PM

can I ask? - Topic Powered by eve community

Here is the discussion iniciated by Russians on American forum.
As you see, some difference in informational boards.
As for me, i can say that
I was educated in Russia’s military high-school.

And, for example, we were said there that USA and Great Britain could open the Second front line in Europe against Germany already in 1942. Because the Athlantic Border of Nazis was a mythe. And both the USA and Great Britain were ready anough to catch Germany in twistle while Soviet Army was finishing with them near the Stalingrad. But Mr.Churchill and Rusvelt preferred to have some new colonies in Africa. And the British Prime-Minister even sacrificed two thousand soldgiers while attacking Djepp – the most fortificated point on the European sea-bank – in order to show that there is no perspective.
The popular Soviet definition: Western leaders were looking for further weakening both Soviet Union and Nazi Germany.

#2 JCFalkenbergIII

JCFalkenbergIII

    Expert

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,479 posts

Posted 21 July 2008 - 05:54 PM

. But Mr.Churchill and Rusvelt preferred to have some new colonies in Africa.


Really and you have sources to back this up? What were those "Colonies" and where are they now?
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

For the first time I have seen "History" at close quarters,and I know that its actual process is very different from what is presented to Posterity. - WWI General Max Hoffman.

#3 Slipdigit

Slipdigit

    Good Ol' Boy

  • Administrators
  • 14,907 posts
  • LocationAlabama

Posted 21 July 2008 - 06:04 PM

And both the USA and Great Britain were ready anough to catch Germany in twistle while Soviet Army was finishing with them near the Stalingrad. .

How many divisions would have been enough to mount a successful foray onto Northwest Europe and how much shipping would be enough to land and support this force? How much of each did the the UK and US have during this time frame (1942)?

Does the US and UK ignore their obligation in other areas of the world and fight only one front, as the USSR was doing? At what point to we tell the Japanese "that's far enough," San Francisco or the Rocky Mountains? (I know, I know, I'm just using hyperbole)

Best Regards,  
JW :slipdigit:

SlidigitAxe.png


#4 Martin Bull

Martin Bull

    Acting Wg. Cdr

  • TrusteeOKF Trustee
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,793 posts
  • LocationLondon, England.

Posted 21 July 2008 - 06:14 PM

Because the Athlantic Border of Nazis was a mythe. .....And the British Prime-Minister even sacrificed two thousand soldgiers while attacking Djepp – the most fortificated point on the European sea-bank –


Well, you can't really have it both ways - if the Atlantic border was a myth, I cannot understand why 2000 soldiers would have been sacrificed against it. Dieppe was certainly not the strongest point, as anyone who has visited the Pas-de-Calais will attest.

The RAF at Dieppe were torn apart by the Luftwaffe which delivered the salutary lesson that no invasion could succeed without superiority in the air ; something the Allies didn't have in 1942.

Forgive me for saying this, but I do get the impression that the Russian view of WWII in some quarters is driven by an element of paranoia - or to put it another way, a chip-on-the-shoulder.....
  • Slipdigit likes this
"Stand by to pull me out of the seat if I get hit" - Guy Gibson

#5 Sloniksp

Sloniksp

    Ставка

  • TrusteeOKF Trustee
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,497 posts

Posted 21 July 2008 - 06:39 PM

can I ask? - Topic Powered by eve community


The popular Soviet definition: Western leaders were looking for further weakening both Soviet Union and Nazi Germany.


No surprise here really. It is also believed that D-Day was launched in order to prevent Stalin from taking the rest of Europe. A theory which can make sense. ;)
The war against Russia will be such that it cannot be conducted in a knightly fashion. This struggle is one of ideologies and racial differences and will have to be conducted with unprecedented, unmerciful and unrelenting harshness. -Adolf Hitler


#6 mikebatzel

mikebatzel

    Dreadnaught

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,182 posts

Posted 21 July 2008 - 07:05 PM

But Mr.Churchill and Rusvelt preferred to have some new colonies in Africa.

Wasn't following WWII that decolonization of Africa began, and by 1980 almost the whole of the continent had gained their independence?
Wasn't it the Russians who then took most of eastern Europe to bolster it's own empire (a sort of Buffer zone), And by 1980 was still invading other sovereign nations like Afghanistan.
Please give the Combined Fleet the chance to bloom as flowers of death. This is the navy’s earnest request. RADM Tasuku Nakazawa prior to the Battle of Leyte Gulf
It is the function of the Navy to carry the war to the enemy so that it will not be fought on U.S. soil. Admiral Chester W. Nimitz

#7 Sloniksp

Sloniksp

    Ставка

  • TrusteeOKF Trustee
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,497 posts

Posted 22 July 2008 - 04:56 AM

Wasn't it the Russians who then took most of eastern Europe to bolster it's own empire (a sort of Buffer zone), And by 1980 was still invading other sovereign nations like Afghanistan.


Ha! I just love the way this is phrased.... "Invading sovereign nations..." you mean just one right? The very same one and with the same enemies which the U.S. is in right now and fighting with? :rolleyes:

Oh and last time I checked, Korea, Vietnam and Iraq ( just to name a few and all post WW2) were sovereign nations too, I wonder what happend there.....

Psh!
The war against Russia will be such that it cannot be conducted in a knightly fashion. This struggle is one of ideologies and racial differences and will have to be conducted with unprecedented, unmerciful and unrelenting harshness. -Adolf Hitler


#8 JCFalkenbergIII

JCFalkenbergIII

    Expert

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,479 posts

Posted 22 July 2008 - 05:03 AM

Just want to point out there though. Off topic but the US did NOT invade either Korea or Vietnam.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

For the first time I have seen "History" at close quarters,and I know that its actual process is very different from what is presented to Posterity. - WWI General Max Hoffman.

#9 Martin Bull

Martin Bull

    Acting Wg. Cdr

  • TrusteeOKF Trustee
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,793 posts
  • LocationLondon, England.

Posted 22 July 2008 - 06:48 AM

I was educated in Russia’s military high-school.

And, for example, we were said there that USA and Great Britain could open the Second front line in Europe against Germany already in 1942....both the USA and Great Britain were ready anough to catch Germany in twistle while Soviet Army was finishing with them near the Stalingrad.


Not wishing to split hairs, but the Russian Military High School may wish to note that the German 6th Army at Stalingrad wasn't 'finished' until 1943.....
"Stand by to pull me out of the seat if I get hit" - Guy Gibson

#10 Za Rodinu

Za Rodinu

    Aquila non capit muscas

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,809 posts
  • LocationPortugal

Posted 22 July 2008 - 09:03 AM

Posted Image

can I ask? - Topic Powered by eve community

Here is the discussion iniciated by Russians on American forum.
As you see, some difference in informational boards.
As for me, i can say that
I was educated in Russia’s military high-school.

And, for example, we were said there that USA and Great Britain could open the Second front line in Europe against Germany already in 1942. Because the Athlantic Border of Nazis was a mythe. And both the USA and Great Britain were ready anough to catch Germany in twistle while Soviet Army was finishing with them near the Stalingrad. But Mr.Churchill and Rusvelt preferred to have some new colonies in Africa. And the British Prime-Minister even sacrificed two thousand soldgiers while attacking Djepp – the most fortificated point on the European sea-bank – in order to show that there is no perspective.
The popular Soviet definition: Western leaders were looking for further weakening both Soviet Union and Nazi Germany.


First of all, welcome to this forum.

Back to topic, no, the Western Allies simply were not prepared to open an European Continent 2nd front in 1942. Dieppe was a test, and it failed. Quite simply military expertise in landing operations did not exist.

May I remind of the trouble that was being taken in defeating the German and Italian troops in North Africa, which shows that even against such a limited enemy the W.A. were not up to a greater task yet.

The first successful landing operation in large scale was in Sicily in 1943 Allied invasion of Sicily - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia at the time of the Kursk Battle, soon followed by invasion of italy.

It still took almost another year to finish a large enough troop and supplies build up to perform the Normandy landing (Op. Overlord), including time for the weather to allow it, which only occurred in June 1944.

The African colonial argument is not valid, the entire Africa was already colonised.

Edited by Za Rodinu, 22 July 2008 - 09:08 AM.

Quousque tandem abutere, Catilina, patientia nostra...


#11 mikebatzel

mikebatzel

    Dreadnaught

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,182 posts

Posted 22 July 2008 - 11:39 AM

Oh and last time I checked, Korea, Vietnam and Iraq ( just to name a few and all post WW2) were sovereign nations too, I wonder what happend there.....


Well with the utmost respect towards you, I will begin with Korea. On 25 June 1950 400.000 troops of Kim Il-Sung’s N. Korean Army crossed the 38th parallel in an invasion with the goal of unifying both Koreas. On the same day, UNSC Resolution 82 condemned the attack, and called for the immediate withdrawal of N. Korean troops back to the 38th Parallel. This did not happen so with UN backing the US and many other countries came to the aid of S. Korea.

Vietnam: While I admit controversy over the second attack, it still remain that N. Vietnamese torpedo boats fired on US destroyers causing the passing of the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution authorizing the president to use military force in Vietnam.

Iraq: I consider this an illegal invasion and will not comment on it(but I do still hold the utmost respect for it's veterans).

Afghanistan: Soviet forces moved into this country after repeated requests from the communist government to assist in quelling an anti-communist insurgency. The US moved into the country after 9/11 in a manor as provided by Chapter VII Article 51 of the UN Charter

Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defense shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.

I consider the mass murder of 3000 civilians an armed attack against my country, and home.

Now, I have no quarrels with Russia or its citizens. The few I do know who now live in the States, I am very close with and consider them some of my closest of friends. So, Slon, I apologize if my previous post offended you.

Edited by mikebatzel, 22 July 2008 - 11:46 AM.

Please give the Combined Fleet the chance to bloom as flowers of death. This is the navy’s earnest request. RADM Tasuku Nakazawa prior to the Battle of Leyte Gulf
It is the function of the Navy to carry the war to the enemy so that it will not be fought on U.S. soil. Admiral Chester W. Nimitz

#12 Slipdigit

Slipdigit

    Good Ol' Boy

  • Administrators
  • 14,907 posts
  • LocationAlabama

Posted 22 July 2008 - 12:25 PM

Have any of you noticed that person who threw this turd of a thread on the forum has not returned to defend his position?

Let's see what he has to say.

Best Regards,  
JW :slipdigit:

SlidigitAxe.png


#13 Za Rodinu

Za Rodinu

    Aquila non capit muscas

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,809 posts
  • LocationPortugal

Posted 22 July 2008 - 12:53 PM

This four-letter-word of a thread is the reflex of how some nationalist ideology looks at their former allies' performance. I for myself have no problem in discussing this with this gentleman in order to widen his views if possible.

Quousque tandem abutere, Catilina, patientia nostra...


#14 Martin Bull

Martin Bull

    Acting Wg. Cdr

  • TrusteeOKF Trustee
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,793 posts
  • LocationLondon, England.

Posted 23 July 2008 - 05:53 AM

Have any of you noticed that person who threw this turd of a thread on the forum has not returned to defend his position?

Let's see what he has to say.


I have indeed. It's early to say, but it will be disappointing if the thread originator turns out to be yet another 'troll'. The original point had a certain amount of validity and I think some fair arguments have been raised in counterpoint......
"Stand by to pull me out of the seat if I get hit" - Guy Gibson

#15 Za Rodinu

Za Rodinu

    Aquila non capit muscas

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,809 posts
  • LocationPortugal

Posted 23 July 2008 - 11:42 AM

Yes, we have seen a spate of people who open a thread with a more or less well put question, and then they vanish. That's rather common, I'd say.

Quousque tandem abutere, Catilina, patientia nostra...


#16 Troglodyte

Troglodyte

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 81 posts

Posted 24 July 2008 - 08:36 AM

Afghanistan: Soviet forces moved into this country after repeated requests from the communist government to assist in quelling an anti-communist insurgency. The US moved into the country after 9/11


I have a question. Who can explain to me: why so-called "freedome fighters" flew their plains in the middle of New-York and not Mosow?
How come they are more angry with their allies then with an enemy they fought for 10 years?
Handle every stressful situation like a dog.
If you can't eat it or hump it.
Piss on it and walk away

#17 mikebatzel

mikebatzel

    Dreadnaught

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,182 posts

Posted 24 July 2008 - 11:00 AM

I think his anger towards the US began when Iraq invaded Kuwait. He offered his "Army" to help Saudi Arabia, but was rejected. The Saudi's then asked for American assistance. Athough America helped supply his army while fighting the Soviet's he was angered that the Suadi's prefered American assistance over his own. At least, this is how I understand his hatred for America.
Please give the Combined Fleet the chance to bloom as flowers of death. This is the navy’s earnest request. RADM Tasuku Nakazawa prior to the Battle of Leyte Gulf
It is the function of the Navy to carry the war to the enemy so that it will not be fought on U.S. soil. Admiral Chester W. Nimitz

#18 Troglodyte

Troglodyte

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 81 posts

Posted 24 July 2008 - 07:27 PM

" You helping my friends makes you my enemy" theory sounds a bit far fetched to me... I think there must be simplier explanation.
Handle every stressful situation like a dog.
If you can't eat it or hump it.
Piss on it and walk away

#19 Sloniksp

Sloniksp

    Ставка

  • TrusteeOKF Trustee
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,497 posts

Posted 24 July 2008 - 09:51 PM

Now, I have no quarrels with Russia or its citizens. The few I do know who now live in the States, I am very close with and consider them some of my closest of friends. So, Slon, I apologize if my previous post offended you.[/FONT]


No apologies needed... No country is perfect and the discussion was civilized.

Oh and I too disagreed with the Soviet Union going into Afghanistan. ;)



All the best mate.
The war against Russia will be such that it cannot be conducted in a knightly fashion. This struggle is one of ideologies and racial differences and will have to be conducted with unprecedented, unmerciful and unrelenting harshness. -Adolf Hitler


#20 andurf

andurf

    Dishonorably Discharged

  • Dishonorably Discharged
  • Pip
  • 1 posts

Posted 25 July 2008 - 11:32 AM

Hello, it's me, who started the theme. I have not the time now but i'll be back:)
Now I can say that there were meant french colonies in North Africa (?) and that that person who told us the board had written the book - the battle for North Africa, looking from Russia. He wrote smth about divisions etc if i find i,ll bring them here.
As for me i'd prefer all the nations be honest in cooperation but the life as i know it don't seem to me so optimistic. And I was a boy when heard firstly that USA and UK prolongued to open the Second Front without really objective obstacles - from the film ofe one American Commy, named "The Unknown War"? 20 series.
Hoping to be back, grateful for your answers:)

#21 Slipdigit

Slipdigit

    Good Ol' Boy

  • Administrators
  • 14,907 posts
  • LocationAlabama

Posted 25 July 2008 - 12:58 PM

Why are you using two user names? That is a violation of the Terms of Agreement.

Which one do you want to keep, because I am killing the other. It is only because of the possibility of a language problem that I don't remove both user accounts.

Edited by SlipdigitBK, 25 July 2008 - 05:52 PM.

Best Regards,  
JW :slipdigit:

SlidigitAxe.png


#22 Martin Bull

Martin Bull

    Acting Wg. Cdr

  • TrusteeOKF Trustee
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,793 posts
  • LocationLondon, England.

Posted 25 July 2008 - 05:33 PM

Roosevelt had very little interest in North Africa and US intervention was secured after much hard work by Churchill, who persuaded them to do so against strong public opposition. Did the US retain control of these 'colonies' after the war ?

But I don't really know why I'm replying .....
"Stand by to pull me out of the seat if I get hit" - Guy Gibson

#23 Za Rodinu

Za Rodinu

    Aquila non capit muscas

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,809 posts
  • LocationPortugal

Posted 25 July 2008 - 10:27 PM

Hello, it's me, who started the theme. I have not the time now but i'll be back:)
Now I can say that there were meant french colonies in North Africa (?) and that that person who told us the board had written the book - the battle for North Africa, looking from Russia. He wrote smth about divisions etc if i find i,ll bring them here.
As for me i'd prefer all the nations be honest in cooperation but the life as i know it don't seem to me so optimistic. And I was a boy when heard firstly that USA and UK prolongued to open the Second Front without really objective obstacles - from the film ofe one American Commy, named "The Unknown War"? 20 series.
Hoping to be back, grateful for your answers:)


It would really be a boon if you read some decent history books, or failing that, seriously browsing what we have been writing in this forum for the last few years... You have to learn how to distinguish History from Propaganda.

May I ask where you are from?

Roosevelt had very little interest in North Africa and US intervention was secured after much hard work by Churchill, who persuaded them to do so against strong public opposition. Did the US retain control of these 'colonies' after the war ?


Well, Martin, it could be argued that the US did retain a lot of colonies under the Neo-Colonialism form but that would be a long discussion that would end with me floating on the river belly down :D

Quousque tandem abutere, Catilina, patientia nostra...


#24 kunaevmarat

kunaevmarat

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 5 posts

Posted 28 July 2008 - 06:30 AM

Why are you using two user names? That is a violation of the Terms of Agreement.

Which one do you want to keep, because I am killing the other. It is only because of the possibility of a language problem that I don't remove both user accounts.


Probably, he wouldn't be back. He recommended me to come, and i heard about this site from my other friend. Very interesting.)))
I,d say smth but first i'll do cite the book of person mentioned by Andurf:

Mr. Golovushkin V.I. “The Second World War. The Battle for the North Africa. The View from Russia”. That is that person.

He cited Werner M., “Attack can win in 1943”: “Up to the end of 1942 there were 70 divisions on the British islands”.

According to Soviet estimates, he cited: “In the autumn of 1942 against 138 USA and UK divisions in the Western Europe there was only 35 German (crossing to British historian J.Grigg - ?). Only the USA had 6900 desant vehicles and were planning to have 12000 up to the end of that year. The US and UK transport meanings in Mediterrian and Atlantic areas could provide more than 63000 soldiers and 2300 tanks be carried in first invasion division”. Than he says that G.Raybern (“The Canadians in Dieppe”) pointed out the fact that 20 English and US reporters were on convoy ships while Dieppe landing attempt. And also is citing Raybern saying that the desant troops had no stationary machine guns and artillery while Dieppe was on of the most strong defense points.

Than Mr.Golovushkin found out that the operations of the US-UK troops in North Feance in June of 1944 showed that the strong Atlantic defense line of Nazis was a myth (what does he mean I wonder). And cites German field Marshall fon Rudshtetdt who said that the Atlantic defense line was an illusion and propaganda myth (according to L.Heart “On the Other Side of the Hill”).

However, I don’t know does Mr.Golovushkin take to mind the Pacific and others operational theaters while concerning the amount of US-UK divisions.

But the truth is that one Eastern front which was the only one for the USSR, destructed the main power of Nazy Ally. The amount of troops and victims, the scape of military operations – are the proof. While that war Churchill, Roosevelt, Eisenhower confirmed that fact – the East Front was the main in that War.

Probably there is much more interesting questions. More global I would say.

For ex, the history of Atomic Weapon, the reasons of the Cold War, the difference between talin's USSR and Hitler's Germany...

I think people all over understand simple things – the Nazy ideology was evil. As one American guy said – “I was brought up with saying that we came to Europe to help people and that is the way I should bring up my children”.

But it is looking like true that politics isn’t so simple.

A lot of Propaganda in our rich for manipulating technologies days.

And even from this thread which started to concern Korea, Iraq, Vietnam etc that is evident that some politic questions of the Past are very actual. Being native Caucasian, seeing how the blood hood has been inspirited at my own place, I understand that in globalizing world the questions of history using by today politicians are the questions of everybody’s concern because politicians could bring not only prosperity but an evil to our homes.

And we, people, nowday have the opportunities of communication we didn’t have before – for example, Internet.

And such communication between us like here can be some chance for better future.

I just write some my understandings.



#25 Martin Bull

Martin Bull

    Acting Wg. Cdr

  • TrusteeOKF Trustee
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,793 posts
  • LocationLondon, England.

Posted 28 July 2008 - 06:51 AM

And cites German field Marshall fon Rudshtetdt who said that the Atlantic defense line was an illusion and propaganda myth (according to L.Heart “On the Other Side of the Hill”).



Ahhh....selective use of sources.....great fun when you have the original book to hand, which I do ( Liddell Hart, The Other Side Of The Hill, revised and enlarged, Cassell, London 1951 ).

Perhaps it may also be helpful to this discussion to use the direct quote from von Rundstedt on p.383 : -

' I was surprised that you did not attempt an invasion in 1941....but at that time I was on the Eastern Front and out of touch with the situation in the West. When I came there, and knew the situation better, I did not expect an early invasion, for I realized that your resources were insufficient....I expected an invasion in 1943...'

As I said, selective use of sources to support a hobby-horse ( David Irvingski ? ;) )
  • JCFalkenbergIII and Slipdigit like this
"Stand by to pull me out of the seat if I get hit" - Guy Gibson




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users