WWII vets, kin up in arms over display of Soviet dictator Stalin's bust at National D-Day Memorial

__________________


"If you want peace work for justice" -Pope Paul VI

Jon

Look at it this way, if Stalin wasn't helping do his part with the Eastern Front the Wehrmacht would have more resources to put into other theaters, Stalin and the U.S.S.R. indirectly did their part which in the grand scheme of things was vital for an Allied win or an Allied win with fewer casualties than their could have been if the war went past 1945.

Whether he should be included in the museum, tough call, but I'm not a fan of people who are trying to diminish the U.S.S.R.'s role in the war, infact, any nation that fought!

Actually, Stalin was not "helping" at all. He was forced onto the allied camp after Hitler attacked him. During the war in the West Stalin was content sitting it out and watching the capitalist countries hash it out.

I'm not taking away Russia's contribution in wearing down the Wehrmacht through attrition but let's not make Stalin look like he jumped in voluntarily to help. We should have done the same and stood aside and let them hash it out.

__________________

Well not directly helping of course and by no means am I saying anything like that but had the Eastern Front never happened the Wehrmacht and S.S. would have had far more resources to fight on the other fronts.

Consider Afrika Korps and the Italian Army, the lack of aid, planning, etc on the part of the Italians part created a "drain" of sorts on Afrika Korps (at least, that is the impression given by "first hand" accounts). Had Italy created more weapons, had competent staff, etc the "drain" effect wouldn't have been as big.

Not discounting Russia's contribution but I can see how they would not want Stalin positioned in a role of honor.

__________________

As soon as any memorial to The Great Patriotic War has busts of FDR and Churchill enshrined at the same level as Stalin, I'll gladly acknowledge his "contribution" to the western allies. Eventhough it was minimal (non-existant) as per Operation Overlord.

The western allies contribution to the eastern front is certainly worthy of acknowledgment, is it not?

__________________
Happy Trails,
Clint.

I don't think the vets are saying that the Soviets didn't do their part, but that Stalin was just as bad as Hitler, yet he some how is never treated the same. So it's a classic case of irony mixed with hypocrisy.

On another note. Didn't the D-day Museum change names to the WW2 Museum? I could have sworn this was true after reading this month's issues of World War II Magazine.

I believe this post topic is referring to the National D-Day Memorial which is in Bedford, VA. The WWII Museum, which was formerly known as the D-Day Museum, is located in New Orleans, LA.

Done:
Stalin to be honoured in Russia's war monument - Europe, World - The Independent

Really, there aren't that many shrines to Stalin regarding WWII in Russian. Memorials tend to celebrate either the Soviet Army, or leaders like Zukhov, rather than Stalin himself. For good reason, because Stalin is in fact a highly controversial figure in Russia.

This quote by the author...

Historically inaccurate.

Here is something else some in this forum might find interesting...



This is a WW2 monument built during Stalin's time to honor the four major powers who fought during against ultimate evil. This monument shows the victorious French, Russian, American and British soldiers together as a coalition. How many of such depictions exist in Europe or the U.S.? Can anyone show me any monuments in the "Free World" honoring Soviet soldiers who fought?

Interesting though that the only ones which I have been aware off have been vandalized or moved all together in countries like Poland and Estonia... the very same ones which it seems the author of this article is from.

__________________
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

Or worse, depending on who you believe/listen to. My World War II professor described Stalin as "making Hitler look like Mary Poppins", or something of that sort.

The Soviet soldiers should be remembered and honored. Stalin is more of a controversial figure though. Yes he did many horrible things, but he also united the country AND was able to end the war in Europe, more or less.

__________________


Andy

"Stalin united the country?"

The Soviet regime was united at the point of a gun-barrel. The one thing that "united" Eastern Europe was BARBAROSSA itself, and only after it was discovered that Eastern Europe was out of the Soviet frying pan and into the Nazi fire. One only has to look at the cynical re-opening of churches in Russia and the propagandists linkage with old heroes from the "Hated Days of Czarism". Suvorov and Bagration would have turned over in their graves had they known of their association with this war. Even labelling it "The Great Patriotic War" was cynical propaganda.

Soviet memorials to the "United Allies" are so much whitewash. A united front would have stayed that way, postwar. It didn't. We found the Soviets not to our liking, and their method of "government".

Had Ribbentrop had his way, Barbarossa would never have occurred, and we would then see postwar Soviet memorials eulogizing their partnership with whoever emerged as "winners" in Europe.

The facts are that Germany guaranteed the Bolshevik regime by their very failure to secure a decisive outcome for Barbarossa. The very fact that it survived Barbarossa at all was a shot in the arm for a regime hated and feared by many, including the Western Allies.

Make no mistake of Russian intentions....they simply wanted to be on the winning side no matter who was in control. Having found themselves in 1945 as exactly that, they then proceeded to carry on as if the armed struggle had changed nothing politically in Eastern Europe. I cannot recall even one ethnic group in this region wanting to be part of the Soviet "bloc" voluntarily. The measure of a nation is guaged by the amount of people either ingressing or egressing from your state....

And there were millions of Eastern Europeans, and Russians, that wanted OUT...

That speaks for itself, for the one country they most wanted to reach was.....The United States of America....speaks volumes for the Soviets and their sordid "governance"

Churchill put it best. In the days following the disintegration of the Nazi-soviet Pact, Winston made the following statement to Parliment.

"If Hitler invaded Hell I would make at least a favourable reference to the Devil in the House of Commons."


A pact with the Devil it certainly was......and Eastern Europe paid for it in blood.


Another quote, this time from William Tecumseh Sherman, watching Beauregard's army retreat from Shiloh in 1862....it could easily apply to the Western attitude to the Soviets, postwar....

"We've had quite enough of their society for one day, thanks..."

An interesting monument. Where is it located? I don't think I've ever seen it before.

__________________
"Faint heart never won fair maiden", so I say "Go for it!"

Lou

Russia's CONTRIBUTION to ending WWII??! Sorry, many of you have it backwards.
The war probably would not have STARTED without the Soviets. Hitler's Molotov-Ribbontrop treaty with the Soviets in 1939 allowed them & the Nazis to divide up northern & eastern Europe, permitting the Soviets to conquer Estonia, Finland, Poland, etc. If both countries had not banked on the imperial greed of the other, we might not have needed a D-Day in the first place!
Yes, I know that the Soviets kept the bulk of the German army occupied during most of the war. But that was clearly the fault of Hitler's incompetence in attacking Russia in the first place, just like Napoleon. Does Bedford have a bust of Hitler too, for having been stupid enough to attack the Soviets, thus hastening an end to the war??! It's certainly not as if the Soviets drew Germany into attacking, in order to distract the Nazis. Once Hitler invaded the USSR, that forced Stalin to join our side. But he didn't "join" us enough to bother to send us any naval support in Normandy. He also didn't "join" us enough to come aid the Allies in North Africa either: For the entire war, the Soviets only fought their own battles, most of them, to keep or GAIN their own land. They didn't free a single country. They were the only "allies" to perform as such. Read your history!!

A lot of "poster boys" suffer from political correctness. They seem to kowtow to the Neo-soviet opinions of Russian posters seeking to explain away Russia's SORDID and SELF-CENTERED participation in WW2, all in the name of not offending Russian people who cannot come to terms with the fact that the regime they fought for was WORSE than the "Nazi Beast" they were all fighting (eventually)...

Modern Russians simply don't "get it". Niether does their leader, Medvedev, or his partner in the continueing crime that is modern Russia, Putin.

The way for Russian posters, seemingly, to approach this problem is to ignore it.....

"Great Patriotic War" ???....

(howls of derisive laughter)........."Great Stalinist War"...more to the point.

(other alternatives)...."Great War to Save the Paradise of Workers and Peasants"
.............................."Great War to Convince Us All That Russians Are Good Guys"
.............................."Great War for Justification of Precious Revolution"
.............................."(.................. ..................)"...insert your own

Those self serving Polish, only fighting the Nazis to keep their own land! Those self serving French, only keen on liberating their own country! Those selfish Chinese, did they offer naval support for Normandy? Nope, they only lost a few million civilians. Pah, screw them then!

The US was brought into the war by the attack on Pearl Harbour, lest we forget. So you're saying that if the Japanese were stronger, that too would cast doubt on the US participation in the war?

It's called the Great Patriotic War, because that was what it represented to the Russian people. The Soviet Army didn't fight for Stalin, they fought for Russia. They fought for Russia's very survival, against a regime that was intend on basic extermination of their entire existence. Apparently to some, that's a selfish wish.

And this continued insistence that the Russian regime was worse than Nazi Germany is ludicrous. Without Molotov-Ribbentrop, the Germans would have still invaded Poland. They would have still crushed Poland. Britain and France would have still sat back and done nothing. The only action the USSR could have done to stop WWII, was to attack Germany after their invasion of Poland, despite Poland refusing to have a military alliance with them. Or to have invaded Germany when they attacked France. Would the previous posters be much happier if they did that?

Nobody in Russia has any right to even MENTION "Poland".....

If we had it their way still, "Poland" would have ceased to exist....

I put it to you that without Soviet co-operation, "Case White" was a "no show"....

The rest of Europe more than agreed with this ...presumption?...The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact made it FACT.

POLAND, as an independant state, dissappeared post 1945 anyway.

You modern Russians are like hunchbacks that don't see their own hunch. NOBODY consulted other Eastern Europeans post 1945 to ascertain whether membership of the Soviet Bloc was negotiable....

Mikhail Gorbacheav certainly doesn't make up for Stalin and Khrusheauv (sorry about spelling)

And who in hell mentioned the Chinese?....this is about RUSSIA, mate...and about how it started the war as an ALLY OF GERMANY.....Do all you Russians blinker yourselves to this simple fact. The fact that the allies had a falling out is no business of ours. If the USSR had been so concerned with Nazism as a threat in 1939, WHY didn't they come into the war IN SUPPORT OF POLAND? (support might have constituted simply a safe haven for Polish refugees, food, ammunition etc....it all went to the Germans, while the Soviets obligingly executed as many Polish officers as they could lay their hands on....bastards.

Retribution for Tuchachevski's embarrassing performance in the Russo-Polish War, eh' old boy?)

And if it really was "their land" that the Poles were fighting for, why oh why didn't the Red Army disappear after 1945.?

Read the damn history for a change....Oh these Russians! The "cult of personality" lives on with Stalin, doesn't it? Symptomatic of the "Russian Disease"

Winston was right....Russia = mystery, wraped in riddles, wraped in enigmas

Huh, the Russians were fighting for a regime worse than the Nazi Germans? I suggest who ever believes that look at the history of German counterinsurgency operations in the East... by Abwehr's own admission, their policies were so brutal that the Ukrainians and Belorussians who greeted the Germans as their liberators from June-July despised the Wehrmacht by August-September. The people voted with their rifles.

Because the Polish refused to allow Russian troops to even enter the country if the Germans attacked. Because the Polish refused to make an alliance with the USSR. And, no, the invasion of Poland would have been just as possible without the Russians. This is from German memos:

13th Sept
14th Sept16th Sept
16th Sept was two days before the Russians crossed the border. Two days before a single Russian air strike. The Russians weren't even mobilised on the 10th. This is not a 'no show'.


You are awfully, awfully deluded if you think that Eastern Europe would have been better off under the Germans than the Russians. No one thinks Stalin was puppies and ice cream, but you go waaay too far.

PS: I'm not russian.

Not once have I tendered Adolf as an alternative....WE fought that idiot from the OUTSET, never aiding him....

and 7 million people dead over collectivization alone already overshadows the holocaust, and it was only the begining....the PURGES were yet to come...

Stalin is the man with the higher "kill total", hands down. Power for him meant SUBJUGATION. His war with Hitler was his OWN FIGHT

PS: Not Russian here either....English, and proud of it, even though my country has a less than clean record in international affairs....

I don't think you people have even heard of Tuchachevski or the Russo Polish war....you seem to carry on as if the Molotov Ribentrop Pact was the first time the two dictatorships had co-operated militarily for mutual gain, at the expense of other nations....SORDID and SELFISH

OK, folks. Let's be careful about attacking other posters personally. Keep the thread on topic, and lose the personal invective. You have been warned.

__________________
"Faint heart never won fair maiden", so I say "Go for it!"

Lou

Stalin was supreme leader from 1924-53. Hitler was in charge for 12 years, and did most of his killings in a six year period from 39-45. Does anyone else find it ironic that somehow people can argue the Nazis was the lesser of the two evils because Hitler failed to beat Stalin after a head start of 15 years? And counting the victims of the famine? Had it occurred to anyone that the Russians experienced that after one of the most catastrophic civil wars in history?!

As long as there was a Hitler, the Second World War in Europe would have happened regardless of any form of government existent in Russia. Go read Frederick Meincke; he's a Prussian historian of the old school who lived long enough to see both World Wars. The National-Socialists planned for colonizing Russia and exterminating the Slavs long before the Nazi-Soviet Pact. The Nazi-Soviet Pact was a lie, and so was the anti-Bolshevik Crusade. Heck, Hitler told German newspapers in 1936 that he was going to kill the Jews and conquer the Russians. As for being in league with the Germans, the same charge could be flung at the Western Powers with the same justice. The utter spinelessness of certain politicians in Western Democracies at the face of the Germans was every bit as responsible tothe outbreak of the war as the Nazi-Soviet Pact; in fact, strategically it was perfectly reasonable to see the latter as a reaction against the former, to the perceived impotence of London and Paris and their unwillingness to fight even for their own national honor. Hadn't Churchill said after Munich, that the Western Democracies "had been tried, and were found wanting?"

Stalin was an evil bastard. But Hitler was the antichrist. And if that's too much verbiage for you, a realist no less than A.J.P. Taylor said so. Now you all have a nice Thanks Giving.

Fine....you may hold onto the illusion....I for one am not buying into it. Anyone defending Josef Stalin as a valuable ally is certainly not a man that has had to live under the regime....

And with full bellys and smoking machine packed cigarettes, let us sit awhile, contemplating the piles of corpses....or lets imagine anyway, for we are Westerners, and have not had to live in tyranny for a very long time.

Lets count ourselves lucky indeed that our families don't have to track down relatives and friends caught up in the madness of Eastern Europe.

Through two world wars, this region is STILL a troublespot.

Merry Christmas to all

You lived under Stalin?