Page 1 of 9 123456 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 82

Thread: WWII: Was Stalin to Blame? Did Stalin Plan to Invade Germany?

  1. #1
    Senior Member ogenoct's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Last Online
    Monday, April 23rd, 2012 @ 07:58 AM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Location
    Moscow
    Gender
    Age
    43
    Politics
    National Futurism
    Religion
    Atheism
    Posts
    750
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Did Stalin Plan to Invade Germany?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jäger
    the cold war actually revealed invasion plans of Stalin
    I doubt that. Can you provide evidence for this claim?

    Constantin

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Last Online
    Monday, December 11th, 2006 @ 03:51 AM
    Gender
    Posts
    2,315
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2
    Thanked in
    2 Posts

    Re: Poll: Do you like Adolf Hitler?

    Quote Originally Posted by ogenoct
    I doubt that. Can you provide evidence for this claim?

    Constantin
    Suvorov and Meltyukhov besides many others:

    http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v16/v16n6p22_Bishop.html
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalin's_Missed_Chance
    .

  3. #3
    Senior Member ogenoct's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Last Online
    Monday, April 23rd, 2012 @ 07:58 AM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Location
    Moscow
    Gender
    Age
    43
    Politics
    National Futurism
    Religion
    Atheism
    Posts
    750
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Poll: Do you like Adolf Hitler?

    Quote Originally Posted by Tryggvi
    These are not pieces of evidence but hypotheses and doubtful ones at that. Suvorov has been thoroughly discredited.

    Constantin

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Last Online
    Monday, December 11th, 2006 @ 03:51 AM
    Gender
    Posts
    2,315
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2
    Thanked in
    2 Posts

    Re: Poll: Do you like Adolf Hitler?

    Quote Originally Posted by ogenoct
    These are not pieces of evidence but hypotheses and doubtful ones at that. Suvorov has been thoroughly discredited.

    Constantin
    Yeah. "Discredited" by Gorodetsky from Tel Aviv university, defender of Holocaust and WW2 orthodoxy. And by other careerists of his type.

    Russian researchers like Nevezhin, Danilov or Meltyukhov are significantly more honest, competent and credible, though.

    By the way, Suvorov commented on Gorodetsky's work in The Last Republic.
    .

  5. #5
    Senior Member ogenoct's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Last Online
    Monday, April 23rd, 2012 @ 07:58 AM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Location
    Moscow
    Gender
    Age
    43
    Politics
    National Futurism
    Religion
    Atheism
    Posts
    750
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Did Stalin plan to invade Germany?

    from http://www.battlefield.ru/index.php?...d=108&lang=en:

    The Failed Historian


    "A historian’s chief concern is fact;
    an agitator’s – intonation."
    V. Rezun, “The Last Republic”.


    Translator’s note

    The following article concerns the works of Vladimir Rezun, a former Soviet intelligence officer who had defected to the West in 1978. Beginning in the early 1990s, Rezun, working under a pseudonym of Viktor Suvorov, published a number of controversial books on Stalin and the Soviet Union in World War II. The most well known of these include “Ledokol” (“Icebreaker”), “Den’ M” (“Day M”) and “Poslednjaja Respublika” (“The Last Republic”), and are focused primarily on demonstrating that Stalin’s intention was to launch a massive assault on Germany in the Summer of 1941, and that the German invasion had by chance pre-empted the Soviet one by roughly two weeks. Rezun’s books have fuelled heated debates among both professional and amateur historians, and have been the subject of several comprehensive rebuttal articles and books, nearly all of them in Russian. While no longer considered required reading for anyone interested in the Great Patriotic War, Rezun’s works remain a smouldering source of controversy even to this day, particularly in the on-line community.

    Unfortunately, although Rezun’s books have been translated into dozens of languages, to our knowledge the U.S. editions have been out of print for a number of years. We have thus been forced to translate anew any extracts from Rezun’s books used in the following article, and expect there to be at least some minor variations from the published English translations. In addition, all page number and chapter citations refer to the original Russian-language editions.

    Author’s Foreword

    I would like to begin by stressing that this article was meant as a general survey of Rezun’s failings as a historian, and I by no means seek to claim sole authorship of all the included critiques. Any external sources used are cited in the text itself, and also in the bibliography section at the end of the piece. The article itself was written back in the year 2000, and numerous works demonstrating the true “value” of Rezun’s writings have been published since. So many, in fact, that there is now little need to continue arguing the merits of Rezun’s thesis; in fact, to publicly support Rezun’s theories has become a sign of ignorance. Nevertheless, I have decided to retain the article on The Russian Battlefield website, primarily to express the administrators’ collected view of Rezun’s works. Of course, there are still a few lone dinosaurs out there that, with incredible stubbornness, continue to try and defend Rezun’s thesis. I believe their existence to be quite normal and, unfortunately, unavoidable. The Russian term for this personality type can be loosely translated as “stuck” – in essence, these people generally suffer from a form of mental indolence, but once they seize upon an idea it is utterly impossible to change their minds. Regardless of what evidence you present to them, they will continue to insist that the Earth is flat, that Rezun is, in the main, correct, and so forth. Thus, this article’s main focus will not be to debate Rezun’s few remaining adherents over what is already more or less a settled issue.

    As once or twice I have been accused of falsifying or distorting Rezun’s words, I am providing images of book covers of my source material. While a given passage may somewhat vary across different editions, especially if translated into a foreign language, the overall meaning should remain largely unchanged.

    As I’ve already mentioned, Rezun’s books have prompted a slew of publications, both printed and on-line. Many fault him for utilizing clearly erroneous vehicle and equipment specifications. However, the thrust of the matter is not that Rezun is arriving at flawed conclusions solely due to flawed inputs. Had he truly been mistaken, or were he merely a dilettante, I would not have taken the time to write this article. But, having read and reread “Icebreaker”, “Day M” and “The Last Republic”, I have come to a firm conclusion that Rezun lies, and very deliberately. He is not a dilettante, but rather a “falsifier”.

    Rezun’s books are actually a very easy and interesting read. He is a fine writer and publicist, and knows a good deal about human psychology. It is all too easy to believe a man who can effortlessly explain very complex issues. Of course, serious historical works tend to include numerous questions that have no simple black-and-white answers. Not so Rezun’s books. His writing betrays no hesitation, not a hint of doubt. He writes with tremendous self-assuredness, taking a given fact and effortlessly revealing its “true” meaning to the reader. Or, at least, knowingly hinting at it – as in, “official explanations aside, you and I both understand the real significance of this…” The reader is thus flattered in being made a member of some exclusive club privy to esoteric knowledge – and this when the alternative, mostly the tired and stale Soviet propaganda, which had become incredibly vulgar, shameless and tiresome during the Brezhnev period. Significantly, Rezun’s arguments are aimed directly at Soviet ideologues, no specific persons, of course, but rather some murky archetype such as “the Kremlin historians”, “the Kremlin-KGB propagandists”, “the Kremlin-Lubyanka historians”, etc. The convenience of this approach cannot be overstated, as this saves Rezun from having to refute specific authors or published works; he is, in effect, free to invent whatever nonsense he chooses, and then to spectacularly disprove it before the enthralled reader. At the same time, he can freely take advantage of the old adage that “if you are not with us, you are against us”, or in his case, “if you are against the Soviet propagandists you must be for Rezun”. Given all this, it is hardly surprising that his books had managed to attain such a prominent role in World War 2 historiography as they did for a time.

    Supporters of Rezun’s thesis often fall back on more or less the same arguments. Most frequently, they try to find the tiniest imperfection in the opposition’s case. It’s the schoolyard “oh yeah?” mode of argument. [E.g. two plus two isn’t five - oh yeah, well you’re ugly!] Upon discovering even the most insignificant error, they proceed to make mountains out of molehills and proclaim that this single mistake or omission is of such supreme importance that none of the other ten thousand (correct) arguments made by the same author are worth considering. And thus, Rezun’s thesis is found to be “in the main” correct. Take, for instance, a book published towards the end of 2004 by A. Isaiev called “Anti-Suvorov: the big lie of the little man”. Every now and again on various Internet forums you can find posts along the lines of “oh yeah? Well Isaev makes plenty of mistakes himself!” Of course, these truth-seekers typically prefer not to provide any specific examples of Isaev’s mistakes, in part as they themselves are likely to base their views purely on hearsay. [Of course, applying the same “hearsay” logic to Rezun’s books implies that they can safely be tossed in the trash after reading just the first page.]

    As I have been accused on several occasions of falsifying or distorting Rezun’s words to make my arguments, I am going as far as posting images of the actual book covers of my source material. The publisher information for my editions is as follows:

    Viktor Suvorov, “Icebreaker; Day M,” Moscow, AST, 1996 ISBN 5-88196-303-2
    Viktor Suvorov, “The Last Republic,” Moscow, AST, 1996 ISBN 5-88196-559-0

    At the dawn of Perestroika, when I was still very young, I chanced upon a “samizdat” [unofficially or illegally published issue – Transl.] copy of “Icebreaker”. I was only 16 years old, and had never read anything like it – and Rezun was, as ever, quite persuasive. I believed him. I even believed that I was privy to some secret new Knowledge, that I have had an epiphany. Of course, later on as I read more and more books on the Great Patriotic War, including those cited by Rezun himself, I was incredibly surprised to discover that they – especially the books apparently used to build Rezun’s arguments – state something entirely different!

    Rezun’s entire argument is based on circumstantial evidence. Take any criminal court of any civilized nation, and you will learn that circumstantial evidence is almost never sufficient to obtain a conviction. Rezun further weakens his thesis by wildly distorting the circumstantial evidence itself, as well as by ignoring any and all contrary facts. His errors of fact have been caught and catalogued numerous times, yet still his supporters insist that “well, all right, he might miss a few technical details, but in the main he is still right!” Naturally, this means that any of Rezun’s known errors must not be particularly meaningful or consequential, and that the anti-Rezun “fools” are missing the main thrust of his analytical efforts. I.e. – “in the main”, he is still right. Of course, none of the “Rezunists” seem to clearly grasp what this “in the main” really is, and why Rezun devotes entire volumes to “details” while his main thesis remains carefully veiled, never in full view, and never leaving itself open to a comprehensive rebuttal. I personally believe that this “main thrust” of Rezun’s work is the amalgamation of all his “details”; to disprove a given whole, it is sufficient to disprove some or all of its constituent parts. And these “parts” for Rezun are these very “details”, the BT tanks with underwater movement capabilities, the thousands of TB-7 heavy bombers, Stalin’s secret plans for a European offensive, all the “details” that have already been disproved time and again from all imaginable angles.

    The Rezunists’ primary beliefs can be summarized as follows – before the Great Patriotic War, the USSR was not preparing for a defensive war, but rather for an offensive into Germany. One can begin to see the fallacy of this argument simply in the fact that the USSR’s official histories did not disavow the development of offensive plans prior to the war. In fact, the USSR, the United States and Great Britain all had developed defensive plans that entailed offensive actions. Even Finland, typically viewed as a peaceful and generally harmless nation, developed its defensive plan in an entirely offensive fashion – the vaunted Mannerheim Line was intended to cover the Finnish Army’s flank (rather than “defend the nation from the Bolshevist threat”, as Rezun puts it) while it advanced into Soviet territory towards Murmansk, Petrozavodsk, etc. Even Poland, World War 2’s first victim, had envisioned its defence as one involving offensive operations in East Prussia.

    Purely defensive plans are the province of small states that harbour no illusions regarding their ability to withstand an attack from a powerful enemy; rather, they hope to stall this enemy long enough for an equally powerful benefactor to intervene on their behalf. Rezun’s primary thesis, however, reads as follows: the USSR was the primary initiator of World War 2 because it was preparing to carry out unprovoked aggression against European states in 1941. And this, in turn, serves as the sole reason for the German attack on the USSR. This is the thesis that Rezun dedicated three entire volumes to establishing.

    In this article, I will refrain from addressing every single aspect of Rezun’s arguments, or in fact every single chapter of his books. Literally every page of his works is littered with lies and distortions of some sort, and I am not about to dedicate my life to refuting Rezun’s thesis. My intent is merely to demonstrate his methods of falsification by examining those statements that I view as being crucial to his overall argument, and that Rezun himself habitually refers to as indisputable facts.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Last Online
    Monday, December 11th, 2006 @ 03:51 AM
    Gender
    Posts
    2,315
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2
    Thanked in
    2 Posts

    Re: Did Stalin plan to invade Germany?

    Quote Originally Posted by ogenoct
    The Failed Historian
    Thanks for the link. The author's name, Valeri Potapov, doesn't tell me anything. What are his history and credentials?

    I will surely read this when I have time, but a Russian counter-thesis on
    Danilov's and Meltyukho's archival findings would be more supportive of your thesis that Stalin didn't plan to invade Germany. Suvorov's books only triggered the discussion and further research.

    Another good read:
    Earl Ziemke, The Red Army, 1918-1941
    .

  7. #7
    Account Inactive Lusitano's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Online
    Saturday, March 31st, 2007 @ 04:41 PM
    Subrace
    Mediterranid
    Location
    Lisboa
    Gender
    Age
    46
    Politics
    NS/Identitarian/archeofuturistic
    Religion
    Atheistic
    Posts
    133
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Vedr: Did Stalin plan to invade Germany?

    Ogenoct, truth sometimes can be painfull. You say there are no proves whatsoever just because you dont wish to accept that. I'm sure you know that the Victors are the ones who write history, I'm sure you realised already that most documents are not publucally known, mainly because it would put recently world history (myths) upside down.

    Pardon me for the following comment, but you seem to be much stick in the past for a man who define himself as national-futurist...

  8. #8
    Senior Member ogenoct's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Last Online
    Monday, April 23rd, 2012 @ 07:58 AM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Location
    Moscow
    Gender
    Age
    43
    Politics
    National Futurism
    Religion
    Atheism
    Posts
    750
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Vedr: Did Stalin plan to invade Germany?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lusitano
    Ogenoct, truth sometimes can be painfull. You say there are no proves whatsoever just because you dont wish to accept that. I'm sure you know that the Victors are the ones who write history, I'm sure you realised already that most documents are not publucally known, mainly because it would put recently world history (myths) upside down.

    Pardon me for the following comment, but you seem to be much stick in the past for a man who define himself as national-futurist...
    If the "documents are not publically known," how do we know that they actually exist? With your comment, you are unwittingly supporting me. Thanks. I appreciate it. Besides, even if Stalin had planned to attack Nazi Germany first, it would have been understandable considering the Nazis' open disdain for Soviet Russia and Slavic "subhumans." Also, Hitler already laid out plans to conquer living space in the East in MEIN KAMPF in the 1920s, way before Stalin could have even thought about starting an "offensive" war against Nazi Germany. If I had been Stalin, I would have also planned a (real) pre-emptive strike against Nazi Germany before the latter attacked first and preposterously claimed afterwards that it was a "pre-emptive" strike from their side (even though it would have been an offensive strike in any case, considering that the entire geopolitical framework of Nazi Germany was based on Eastern expansion and hence invasion). I am only "stuck in the past" in the sense that I want to clear misconceptions about Hitlerism (as opposed to National Socialism) since this ideology still seems to blind a great number of otherwise "good Europeans." There is no use in arguing that Hitler wanted to "defend" Europe from Bolshevism when in reality he wanted to conquer, colonize and annihilate fellow Europeans.

    Constantin

  9. #9
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Zyklop's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    German
    Subrace
    Chrom-Mangan
    Country
    Other Other
    Gender
    Religion
    non-religious
    Posts
    2,544
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2
    Thanked in
    2 Posts

    AW: Re: Vedr: Did Stalin plan to invade Germany?

    Quote Originally Posted by ogenoct
    Besides, even if Stalin had planned to attack Nazi Germany first, it would have been understandable considering the Nazis' open disdain for Soviet Russia and Slavic "subhumans." Also, Hitler already laid out plans to conquer living space in the East in MEIN KAMPF in the 1920s, way before Stalin could have even thought about starting an "offensive" war against Nazi Germany.
    Communism declared itself a World Revolution from day one, 70 years before "Mein Kampf"!
    Last edited by Moody; Friday, July 14th, 2006 at 08:38 PM. Reason: Removed abusive language/ad hominem
    Tolerance is a proof of distrust in one's own ideals. Friedrich Nietzsche


  10. #10
    Senior Member ogenoct's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Last Online
    Monday, April 23rd, 2012 @ 07:58 AM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Location
    Moscow
    Gender
    Age
    43
    Politics
    National Futurism
    Religion
    Atheism
    Posts
    750
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: AW: Re: Vedr: Did Stalin plan to invade Germany?

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyklop
    Communism declared itself a World Revolution from day one, 70 years before "Mein Kampf",
    Alright, get a hold of this fact: Stalin departed from the notion of "world revolution" with his doctrine of "socialism in one country."

    Constantin

Page 1 of 9 123456 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Stalin's Grandson in Court to Prove Stalin Never Killed Anybody
    By Nachtengel in forum Articles & Current Affairs
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: Wednesday, October 21st, 2009, 12:30 AM
  2. Stalin's Jews
    By Reno in forum Modern Age & Contemporary History
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: Thursday, September 20th, 2007, 01:54 AM
  3. Victor Suvorov: Stalin Planned to Invade Western Europe
    By ogenoct in forum Modern Age & Contemporary History
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: Wednesday, August 25th, 2004, 03:24 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •