That is true, I have simplified the matter a bit for the sake of brevity. After the Munich Agreement the Czechs were betrayed again by the Brits who had a military pact with Czechoslovakia but refused to act because of a legal loophole: Slovakia has declared independency and there was no pact with Czechs.
Still, though reduced after the Munich Agreement and the loss of Slovakia, the Czech's industry was formidable at that time and the army well-equipped and was more than capable to put up with Germans: German generals later spoke very highly of Czech's defence structures and were delighted that they didn't had to take them. With the right amount of the political will, the Czechs could make at least what the Finns did to Soviets in the Winter War.
Russians have founded the two biggest cities on Crimea in 18th century and have been living there ever since. Some families lived on the peninsula as far as they can remember. And now you'd like to force them out of their home or their identity because Crimea was given to Ukrainian SSR 50 years ago with the sole purpose of reducing bureaucratic overhead. That's exactly the attitude of the now-in-powers that led to this mess.
Maybe a new service industry will arise: adjust your public-accessible timeline for a fee. Keeping all the stuff that portrays you as a hard-working person who values work more than anything in his life with quotes like: "there's no greater satisfaction than meeting the deadline" etc.
US Assistant Secretary of State for Europe, Nuland said: “Since the declaration of Ukrainian independence in 1991, the United States supported the Ukrainians in the development of democratic institutions and skills in promoting civil society and a good form of government - all that is necessary to achieve the objectives of Ukraine’s European. We have invested more than 5 billion dollars to help Ukraine to achieve these and other goals. ” Nuland said the United States will continue to “promote Ukraine to the future it deserves.”
None of the things you mention is unique to the Soviet Union. Concentration camps are British invention, the US used to put the Japanese population in camps as well.
History showed though, that the Soviets did stop the Nazi's genocide. As someone who's ancestors were on the receiving end of it, I am indeed grateful for it and would side with Stalin any time, thank you very much.
> I recall a guy called Chamberlain had similar, as well as extremely successful, approach to aggressors about 70 years ago.
Why? It has been indeed a success -- pushing the Germany to the East via Munich Agreement and Sitzkrieg aka doing nothing when Germany invaded Poland. Eventually Hitler did attack the USSR and everyone was happy for a while. Except the France who got occupied in the process.
The famine did not actually care about the ethnics. The Russians were the backbone of the Soviet Union and they suffered greatly as well. The matter is highly politicised in the Ukraine, to the point where no actual discussion is possible. Sadly, the Yushchenko's government did many blatant falsifications about that matter: apart from using the US' Great Depression photos to illustrate the Holodomor they also made a book of the Holodomor's victims where they put everyone who died in the affected regions, including very elderly.
Interesting fact I recall reading is that the US ambassador to the USSR praised the government's effort in fighting the famine.
Because the Tatars openly supported Hitler hoping to get their own country from the Nazis. As usual, the collaborators themselves escaped with the retreating Wehrmacht and the common people had to pay the price for them.
They got marionette governments to act as a buffer for Soviet Union. Because, you know, Czechs made a third of Third Reich's tanks, Slovaks, Hungarians, Romanians were actually fighting along with Nazis. Poland, too, has happily participated in the division of Czechoslovakia (after capturing parts of Ukraine and Belarus in 1919-1921). And Germany, well, started the whole mess. Besides, the Germans should be really thankful for the GDR: without it US and UK would carry on with the plan of destroying Germany's industry and reducing the country to an agrarian one. Instead, the Western Germany got Marshall's plan, become the showcase of Western way of life and is now the locomotive behind the whole EU.
The war would be bloodier and take more time, but keep in mind that the vast majority of Lend Lease shipments happened after 1943. Prior to 1943 the Allies delivered much less than promised, e.g. only about one fifth of arranged trucks. The western front also happened in 1944, way after Stalingrad and Kursk.
The Soviets could successfully move their war production east to the Urals and defend the country till the production was running at full speed. The Germans simply didn't have enough resources to push further.
There are more Tatars outside of Sevastopol than in the city, but they are still a minority. Their history with Russia is pretty complicated and has many conflicts the latest being WWII where the Tatar community openly supported Hitler even after they were denied their own country. While most collaborationists themselves could escape with the retreating Wehrmacht, the common people were not so lucky: the Tatars were deported to Uzbekistan, many of them died. 1989 the Soviets acknowledged the deportation as a humanitarian crime and allowed the Tatars to return to the peninsula.
The area is a powder keg now. The Tatars share anti-Russian views with the Ukrainian nationalists and the Russians, who compose the majority of the people there feel threatened by the new government fearing Latvian-style discrimination.
He is not. Although Russian was not forbidden per se, the use of the language was severely restricted including the law that forbade teaching children in Russian.
Not to mention the fact that the Russians were not granted citizenship based on their ethnicity alone.
It's still no reason to strip said Russians of their rights like Baltic countries did. The fear is that the new Ukrainian government would do similar steps and the fact that one of the first laws passed by the new government was to remove Russian's language "regional language" status is a strong indication for it.
As said, I don't care how noble their goals were. Siding with Nazis is an excuse to nothing. Vlasov and Bandera were used by the Nazi regime and whether they genuinely believed that they are fighting for noble cause is irrelevant -- both were sentenced to death for a reason.
I talk about SS parades and monuments in Latvia. Supported and mandated by the government. I talk about the discrimination of ethnic Russians who were refused the citizenship and were stripped of some rights there. Lithuanian government pursuits the use of Soviet symbolic but does not do the same to the Nazi insignia. All of the above routinely ignored by the European Union.
The famine took part in Belarus and Russia as well, the Ukrainians claiming it a genocide against them is not justified. At least they stopped using Great Depression photos from the US to illustrate their point (not joking, they've been trying to after the orange revolution).
Keep in mind, the protester's leaders made a Nazi Deputy Secretary of the National Security. That's representative enough for me. The protesters themselves were fucked, of course. Many thought they were fighting against corruption, but they still didn't do anything to banish the Right Wing from their midsts. That's what led to Hitler's takeover in Germany: people either doing nothing or considering the Nazis to be useful idiots against the Communists.
Czechoslovakia's strong production was providing a great deal of war supplies to the Germany (one in three panzers were produced there), both Hungarians and Romanians were part of the Axis as well not to mention Ustase in Croatia. You may consider marionette governments as a form of penance.
I know the history, all the countries that aligned with Hitler or supplied him with war production. I know that more Frenchmen fought on the Eastern Front than in the Resistance. But the point is, all these countries have denounced Nazis or were forced to. Some of them have got marionette governments an additional penance and had to serve as a military buffer to the Soviet Union. Finns managed to turn around and fight the Nazis just in time, so they were left alone.
The point is, there are no Nazis in power in those countries nowadays (some Baltic countries may be considered an exception though). In the Ukraine, there are some now.
Slashdot Mirror
The Crimeans have just voted with their feet. A pity that they took the whole peninsula with them :-)
That is true, I have simplified the matter a bit for the sake of brevity. After the Munich Agreement the Czechs were betrayed again by the Brits who had a military pact with Czechoslovakia but refused to act because of a legal loophole: Slovakia has declared independency and there was no pact with Czechs.
Still, though reduced after the Munich Agreement and the loss of Slovakia, the Czech's industry was formidable at that time and the army well-equipped and was more than capable to put up with Germans: German generals later spoke very highly of Czech's defence structures and were delighted that they didn't had to take them. With the right amount of the political will, the Czechs could make at least what the Finns did to Soviets in the Winter War.
Russians have founded the two biggest cities on Crimea in 18th century and have been living there ever since. Some families lived on the peninsula as far as they can remember. And now you'd like to force them out of their home or their identity because Crimea was given to Ukrainian SSR 50 years ago with the sole purpose of reducing bureaucratic overhead. That's exactly the attitude of the now-in-powers that led to this mess.
Maybe a new service industry will arise: adjust your public-accessible timeline for a fee. Keeping all the stuff that portrays you as a hard-working person who values work more than anything in his life with quotes like: "there's no greater satisfaction than meeting the deadline" etc.
It is a must-read, IMO. Some very insightful points from the old congressman.
http://ronpaulinstitute.org/ar...
US Assistant Secretary of State for Europe, Nuland said: “Since the declaration of Ukrainian independence in 1991, the United States supported the Ukrainians in the development of democratic institutions and skills in promoting civil society and a good form of government - all that is necessary to achieve the objectives of Ukraine’s European. We have invested more than 5 billion dollars to help Ukraine to achieve these and other goals. ” Nuland said the United States will continue to “promote Ukraine to the future it deserves.”
Sounds a lot like modern US, actually.
None of the things you mention is unique to the Soviet Union. Concentration camps are British invention, the US used to put the Japanese population in camps as well.
History showed though, that the Soviets did stop the Nazi's genocide. As someone who's ancestors were on the receiving end of it, I am indeed grateful for it and would side with Stalin any time, thank you very much.
> I recall a guy called Chamberlain had similar, as well as extremely successful, approach to aggressors about 70 years ago.
Why? It has been indeed a success -- pushing the Germany to the East via Munich Agreement and Sitzkrieg aka doing nothing when Germany invaded Poland. Eventually Hitler did attack the USSR and everyone was happy for a while. Except the France who got occupied in the process.
The famine did not actually care about the ethnics. The Russians were the backbone of the Soviet Union and they suffered greatly as well. The matter is highly politicised in the Ukraine, to the point where no actual discussion is possible. Sadly, the Yushchenko's government did many blatant falsifications about that matter: apart from using the US' Great Depression photos to illustrate the Holodomor they also made a book of the Holodomor's victims where they put everyone who died in the affected regions, including very elderly.
Interesting fact I recall reading is that the US ambassador to the USSR praised the government's effort in fighting the famine.
Because the Tatars openly supported Hitler hoping to get their own country from the Nazis. As usual, the collaborators themselves escaped with the retreating Wehrmacht and the common people had to pay the price for them.
They got marionette governments to act as a buffer for Soviet Union. Because, you know, Czechs made a third of Third Reich's tanks, Slovaks, Hungarians, Romanians were actually fighting along with Nazis. Poland, too, has happily participated in the division of Czechoslovakia (after capturing parts of Ukraine and Belarus in 1919-1921). And Germany, well, started the whole mess. Besides, the Germans should be really thankful for the GDR: without it US and UK would carry on with the plan of destroying Germany's industry and reducing the country to an agrarian one. Instead, the Western Germany got Marshall's plan, become the showcase of Western way of life and is now the locomotive behind the whole EU.
The war would be bloodier and take more time, but keep in mind that the vast majority of Lend Lease shipments happened after 1943. Prior to 1943 the Allies delivered much less than promised, e.g. only about one fifth of arranged trucks. The western front also happened in 1944, way after Stalingrad and Kursk.
The Soviets could successfully move their war production east to the Urals and defend the country till the production was running at full speed. The Germans simply didn't have enough resources to push further.
Sadly, no.
There are more Tatars outside of Sevastopol than in the city, but they are still a minority. Their history with Russia is pretty complicated and has many conflicts the latest being WWII where the Tatar community openly supported Hitler even after they were denied their own country. While most collaborationists themselves could escape with the retreating Wehrmacht, the common people were not so lucky: the Tatars were deported to Uzbekistan, many of them died. 1989 the Soviets acknowledged the deportation as a humanitarian crime and allowed the Tatars to return to the peninsula.
The area is a powder keg now. The Tatars share anti-Russian views with the Ukrainian nationalists and the Russians, who compose the majority of the people there feel threatened by the new government fearing Latvian-style discrimination.
He is not. Although Russian was not forbidden per se, the use of the language was severely restricted including the law that forbade teaching children in Russian.
Not to mention the fact that the Russians were not granted citizenship based on their ethnicity alone.
It's still no reason to strip said Russians of their rights like Baltic countries did. The fear is that the new Ukrainian government would do similar steps and the fact that one of the first laws passed by the new government was to remove Russian's language "regional language" status is a strong indication for it.
Ukraine 1941: 41 Mio. people, Ukraine 1945: 27,4 Mio. people. Ukraine 1993: 51,8 Mio. people.
Hint: 1941-1945: Nazis, 1945-1993: Communists.
> any more Ukrainians were killed by communist than by Nazis
Interesting... Ukraine 1941: 41 Mio. people, Ukraine 1945: 27,4 Mio. people. Ukraine 1993: 51,8 Mio. people.
Hint: 1941-1945: Nazis, 1945-1993: Communists.
As said, I don't care how noble their goals were. Siding with Nazis is an excuse to nothing. Vlasov and Bandera were used by the Nazi regime and whether they genuinely believed that they are fighting for noble cause is irrelevant -- both were sentenced to death for a reason.
I talk about SS parades and monuments in Latvia. Supported and mandated by the government. I talk about the discrimination of ethnic Russians who were refused the citizenship and were stripped of some rights there. Lithuanian government pursuits the use of Soviet symbolic but does not do the same to the Nazi insignia. All of the above routinely ignored by the European Union.
Hell, if the US makes a known Nazi Deputy Secretary of the National Security I'd be leaving Germany and joining Russia's army.
The famine took part in Belarus and Russia as well, the Ukrainians claiming it a genocide against them is not justified. At least they stopped using Great Depression photos from the US to illustrate their point (not joking, they've been trying to after the orange revolution).
Keep in mind, the protester's leaders made a Nazi Deputy Secretary of the National Security. That's representative enough for me. The protesters themselves were fucked, of course. Many thought they were fighting against corruption, but they still didn't do anything to banish the Right Wing from their midsts. That's what led to Hitler's takeover in Germany: people either doing nothing or considering the Nazis to be useful idiots against the Communists.
As far as buffers go, I couldn't agree more.
Czechoslovakia's strong production was providing a great deal of war supplies to the Germany (one in three panzers were produced there), both Hungarians and Romanians were part of the Axis as well not to mention Ustase in Croatia. You may consider marionette governments as a form of penance.
They also took parts of Belarus and Ukraine in 1919-1920.
I know the history, all the countries that aligned with Hitler or supplied him with war production. I know that more Frenchmen fought on the Eastern Front than in the Resistance. But the point is, all these countries have denounced Nazis or were forced to. Some of them have got marionette governments an additional penance and had to serve as a military buffer to the Soviet Union. Finns managed to turn around and fight the Nazis just in time, so they were left alone.
The point is, there are no Nazis in power in those countries nowadays (some Baltic countries may be considered an exception though). In the Ukraine, there are some now.