Battle of Berlin, 1945.

[Kekkonen]

Doesn't prove anything, other than the census from before the war to after the war, followed by allegations of attrocities. Colorful, but unsubstantiated.

So basically the world war started in 1941 when the "Nazis with a fascist coalition of willing" attacked you, and they commited colorful attrocities which are all substantiated. The glorious Red Army defended the motherland successfully and went on the offensive, there were sadly some cases of collateral damage when Europe was liberated from the Nazis, but that was mostly caused by the Nazis using civilians as human shields.

[He219]

Your argument isn't limited to Soviets alone, Kekkonen. It can be applied to attrocities commited by Churchill and FDR while inflicting massive civilian casualties and selling out eastern Europe to communism.

"It's very striking the way that, obviously, Russian historians do find great trouble in facing up to the facts, or assessing them, even. For example, I think the striking point is that the victory in Berlin is seen as almost a sacred event. It was the crowning point of the sacrifice and the undoubted bravery and heroism and appalling sacrifice of Red Army soldiers during the fight back against the Nazi invasion. The trouble is that anything which undermines or casts dark shadows across this is a very difficult subject for Russian historians to tackle."

Radio Free Europe

[StukaJr]

So basically the world war started in 1941 when the "Nazis with a fascist coalition of willing" attacked you, and they commited colorful attrocities which are all substantiated. The glorious Red Army defended the motherland successfully and went on the offensive, there were sadly some cases of collateral damage when Europe was liberated from the Nazis, but that was mostly caused by the Nazis using civilians as human shields.

Why are you writing this nonsense in regards to what I've said?

I've simply stated that there is no substantial evidence to back up these supposed hundreds of thousands of raped civilians in Berlin. I've said nothing about the use of civilians as "human shields" - that term was not coined until the 70's. Yes, key cities were supposed to be turned into fortresses - so what? WWII was the first war where the purposeful targeting of Civilian population as means of weakening the Armed Forces - as a correction, it was during the Spanish War where the first "success" was achieved, by a wing of Stuka bombers. Every side did it, but accusation of raping thousands of civilian in occupied territories is a stretch without any solid evidence.

With that said, the Berliners were at a lot higher risk from their own roving SS bands then from the Soviet Army - hanging young and old whom did not answer their Furher's call to arms. Hitler ordered the Subways flooded in the final days of the City's defense - killing thousands of Berliners whom used it for shelter. Hitler ordered systematic destruction of Civil Systems and key City structures - have Albert Speer actually followed his orders, Millions more German civilians would have perished in the final months of the war.

Yes, Soldiers get out of line - especially after years in some of the fiercest combat. No, there are no orders to Pillage Berlin or any other German cities by the Soviet Politburo, Stalin, Molotov, Beria etc... There are explicit orders prohibiting attacks against the Civilian population mandated and enforced by NKVD - something that you can't quite say for the Axis troops.

[He219]

Hitler ordered the Subways flooded in the final days of the City's defense - killing thousands of Berliners whom used it for shelter.

Actually, the reports were largely exaggerated and were proven untrue when the water was pumped out. I have a German DVD about it and the battle of Berlin (Chronos Classics 'Schlacht um Berlin'). When the SS blew the explosives, probably under orders of Wilhelm Mohnke, it sent canal water into roughly 25 km of U and S-Bahn tunnels. The water rose slowly and certainly no more than one and one half meters high, but nobody really knows how many drowned from this action.

Wahrscheinlich am frühen Morgen des 2. Mai explodierte im S-Bahn-Tunnel unter dem Landwehrkanal eine Sprengladung, die von SS-Männern dort angebracht worden war, möglicherweise auf Befehl des Kampfkommandanten des Regierungsviertels, Wilhelm Mohnke. Das Wasser des Kanals setzte S- und U-Bahn-Tunnel auf einer Länge von 25 Kilometern unter Wasser. In den Tunnels hatten zahlreiche Verwundete und Zivilisten Schutz gesucht. Niemand weiß, wie viele Menschen ertranken, doch sind Schätzungen von bis zu 15.000 Toten sicher übertrieben, da das Wasser nur langsam stieg und selten höher als anderthalb Meter stand. Source

Yes, Soldiers get out of line - especially after years in some of the fiercest combat. No, there are no orders to Pillage Berlin or any other German cities by the Soviet Politburo, Stalin, Molotov, Beria etc... There are explicit orders prohibiting attacks against the Civilian population mandated and enforced by NKVD - something that you can't quite say for the Axis troops.

Organized by Stanford University's Norman Naimark and Leonid Gibianskii of the Slavonic and Balkan Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, the conference in Moscow will bring together about four dozen historians who have been probing newly opened archives in the former Soviet bloc. They will compare notes and perspectives on the Soviet occupation from 1945 to 1950, immediately after World War II. The conference is funded by the U.S.-based International Research and Exchange Corp. and the Joint Committee on Eastern Europe of the American Council of Learned Societies and the Social Science Research Council.

In his own work on the occupation of Eastern Germany, for example, Naimark was astonished to find in the Russian Communist Party archives confirmation of widespread and brutal rapes of German women by occupying Russian soldiers.

The rapes of what appears to be at least hundreds of thousands of German women by Russian soldiers - estimates range up to 2 million - is now getting public attention in Germany, where it is the subject of a new movie and book. The archives indicate the rapes were not ordered or condoned from the top, Naimark said, but were instead fueled by "deep and complex desires for revenge" among the ranks.

American occupation forces also committed some rapes in their initial occupation of Western Germany, Naimark said, but it was not nearly so widespread in part because "prostitution was legal in the West, and there was lots of prostitution, semi-prostitution and informal liaisons."

Stanford University News Service

[hughdotoh]

Seen that before, i think its 1/4 models what i can remember

DML 1/35. The guy in the foreground hols a VG-1.

[v-twin]

Cool pictures, gentlemen!

I'm with the Germans on this one. None of the Armies were pure and brave, but by god, Hitler was no worse than Stalin! Your discussions, though interesting, do nothing but create flame wars and we really don't need any more of 'em, the Russians will start crying thinking the whole world is against them, pretty soon.

[Kekkonen]

Cool pictures, gentlemen!

I'm with the Germans on this one. None of the Armies were pure and brave, but by god, Hitler was no worse than Stalin! Your discussions, though interesting, do nothing but create flame wars and we really don't need any more of 'em, the Russians will start crying thinking the whole world is against them, pretty soon.

Call it flaming if you like, but what people like StukaJr is saying is as I if claimed that there was no Holocaust. He is pretending like humiliation and murder of hundreds of thousands of people didn´t happen, and when it happened it was not the Russians fault. Giving a correct account of what happened is important for future generations, when all eyewitnesses and people that experienced what happened first-hand will be dead and gone. Most people luckily have a balancied view like you, and can also admit that the (western) Allies did terrible things towards civilians. But if there is one person believing StukaJr´s version then that´s is one too many. And I do think it´s appropriate to compare his denial with the one of Holocaust deniers. Having a degree in history myself I know it´s easy to be too critical of all sources and not believe in anything, but not believing that the Red Army raped hundreds of thousands of women is just too much.

[StukaJr]

I didn't know this was a Tyrant's ***** measuring contest - neither is contribution and heroism made any less by acts of the few. The aforementioned blanket statements of whom is better or no worse perhaps start a good half of the flame wars. Stay objective and on subject.

When subjective evidence is presented, then I'll look towards reviewing it.

[StukaJr]

Call it flaming if you like, but what people like StukaJr is saying is as I if claimed that there was no Holocaust. He is pretending like humiliation and murder of hundreds of thousands of people didn´t happen, and when it happened it was not the Russians fault. Giving a correct account of what happened is important for future generations, when all eyewitnesses and people that experienced what happened first-hand will be dead and gone. Most people luckily have a balancied view like you, and can also admit that the (western) Allies did terrible things towards civilians. But if there is one person believing StukaJr´s version then that´s is one too many. And I do think it´s appropriate to compare his denial with the one of Holocaust deniers. Having a degree in history myself I know it´s easy to be too critical of all sources and not believe in anything, but not believing that the Red Army raped hundreds of thousands of women is just too much.

1) Soviets
2) You are not my judge
3) My denial? Call it skepticism until presented with proper evidence
4) You have History Degree? Maybe you should use it for something more than blanket statements and personal attacks against a person you don't know
5) Feel appropriate what you must - you can get twelve monkeys with the same opinion that's just what it is, an opinion.

Have a good night and stay safe

[Lokos]

(mostly politicized units like the Einsatzgruppen, but that is irrelevant to the point).

Wrong. The old adage that it was just the 'bad' SS and the Einsatzgruppen that committed atrocities is one of the most prevailing myths of WW2. Speak to the guy writing the seventh volume of the official German historical account of the war - I think you'll be quite surprised by how many Landsers participated in war crimes of the most terrible sort.

soviet soldiers were told they could do whatever they wanted (Hitler told his troops the Slavs were sub-human, Stalin expressly authorized rape).

Wrong. The Soviets expressly forbade rape and trespass against persons. More than eight thousand Soviet soldiers were executed for such crimes in the immediate post-war period. Do not equate Nazi and Soviet policy in this regard, because they just do not correlate.

Or you can draw nuances, you can seek to find out that most atrocities committed by nazis were the work of einsatzgruppen,

Once again, you are severely mistaken.

WTF?????

Not in my effing unit!

The Americans, in the Pacific War, had a habit of gouging gold teeth out of the skulls of fallen Japanese soldiers. The taking of war trophies is a common experience in the aftermath of combat.

The rapes of what appears to be at least hundreds of thousands of German women by Russian soldiers - estimates range up to 2 million

The only 'report' that estimates two million rapes is the one cited by Beevor in 'Berlin'. There, he uses the educated guess of a single German GP as a source. Hardly irrefutable evidence.

Hitler was no worse than Stalin!

Is this a serious statement? If so, you just lost a lot of respect in my eyes, v-twin.

and when it happened it was not the Russians fault

Do I have to say this a fifth time on these forums? The Soviets executed more than eight thousand soldiers for trespass to German persons in the immediate aftermath of the war.

Lokos

[v-twin]

Lokos, I'm sorry I lost that respect, but think of it this way:
-they both were cruel tyrants who killed millions of people(can't say for sure, but from what I heard, more people died in Stalin's work camps than in Hitler's)
-they both represent evil ideologies(yes, in my eyes, communism is just as bad as nazism)
-and there's my natural bias I would say against the Soviets(don't wanna get into that, I'm just stating it)

I'm very fond of history and WW II especially and these discussions are very good and interesting(I learned, and continue to learn a lot) as long as we don't start pointing fingers at each others. I really think the only "good guys" of this war were the Canadians, British and Americans who God-knows have their sins. Neither Germans nor Soviets were pure and holy. You(I'm guessing you're Russian too, or from a country that was glad to see the hammer and sickle) see the Red Army as liberators, I, on the contrary. It's a matter of nuances and bias as some of the other people said.

But as Stuka said, this is a pictures topic, not a "who's tyrant **** is bigger".


LE:what's with Kekkonen avatar?

Radu

[Lokos]

You(I'm guessing you're Russian too, or from a country that was glad to see the hammer and sickle) see the Red Army as liberators

I'm Serbian actually. And every Slavic person in Europe was glad to see the hammer and sickle, after the experience of the swastika.

Lokos

[DE_Six]

Wrong. The old adage that it was just the 'bad' SS and the Einsatzgruppen that committed atrocities is one of the most prevailing myths of WW2.

Well, as I said, in the post you quoted, the question of who committed the atrocities on the german side is irrelevant to this debate. Irrelevant, as in not the main point of the question. If I had known you would build your response on it, I would have omitted it altogether.

As for the order, I recant, sources were updated since the publication I was basing my argument on. However, Stalin did reflect the general soviet attitude towards rape in his answer to yugoslav communist leader Milovan Djilas' concerns about the rapes in Yugoslavia. If such was his concern regarding the rapes in Yugoslavia, a partially slavic liberated country (same goes for Poland), he was probably close to condoning those committed in Germany. And since he was C-in-C of the soviet forces, it's doubtful his subordinates would have acted otherwise on the question (since some of you seem to discard Beevor's book from the get-go, I'll mention this comes from Stalin: The Court of the Red Tsar, by Simon Sebag Montefiore).

That said, as far as I'm concerned, He219 (as usual) said it all. I'm not interested in debating with apologists of soviet war crimes.

[Lokos]

That said, as far as I'm concerned, He219 (as usual) said it all. I'm not interested in debating with apologists of soviet war crimes.

Good, because I'm not interested in debating history with apologists for the Nazis.

Lokos

[v-twin]

Great, so it's settled!

Now let's get back to the pictures.