Are your posts just excuses for publishing links to Nazi websites?After the commencement of hostilities on June 22 1941 Adolf Hitler gave a speech outlining his reasons for Operation Barbarossa - http://codoh.com/library/document/2948
Are your posts just excuses for publishing links to Nazi websites?After the commencement of hostilities on June 22 1941 Adolf Hitler gave a speech outlining his reasons for Operation Barbarossa - http://codoh.com/library/document/2948
After the commencement of hostilities on June 22 1941 Adolf Hitler gave a speech outlining his reasons for Operation Barbarossa - http://codoh.com/library/document/2948
After the commencement of Operation Barbarossa Hitler offered to treat captured soviet troops according to the Geneva convention (even though the USSR was not a signatory) if the Soviet Union did the same for German troops in their captivity. Stalin refused. The claim that Hitler deliberately mistreated soviet pows is a lie put out by communists the same as the Katyn massacre being committed by the nazis is a lie put out by communists. Stalin considered anyone in the red army who surrendered to be a traitor to communism and therefore didn't care about the Geneva convention applying to them. Stalin was a tyrant and a despot to his own people. Reprint of an article by Yuri Teplyakov from a Russian magazine - http://codoh.com/library/document/2526
So the Kommisarbehfel, issued on June 6, 1941, was a mistake and Mr. Hitler issued a correction to this egregious breach of the 1929 Geneva Conventions on the 21st?
No?
Unless you can find a link or record outside of Codoh of this order - German, Hungarian, or Romanian archives will be fine - I'm calling it bovine fecal matter.
Victor Suvorov and the other historians who claim that Operation Barbarossa was a pre-emptive strike have their supporters worldwide even in Israel -
www.haaretz.com/weekend/magazine/was-stalin-to-blame-1.228553
Let's be clear. You're saying Hitler had no desire to invade or exploit Poland or Russia, and in invading these countries he was merely defending himself against Stalin's aggression? That's what you're telling us?Stalin had a non aggression pact with Poland - this was broken when the Red Army invaded on September 17 1939.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_invasion_of_Poland
Stalin had a non aggression pact with Finland - this was broken when the Red Army invaded on November 30 1939 -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War
If Stalin had been able to strike first with his Operation Thunderstorm (Operatsia Groza) and break the non aggression pact with Germany then it would have simply been business as usual.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Igor_Bunich
World War 2 has been over for more than 70 years now and the usual pathetic response to call anyone who doesn't believe the official Allied propaganda a "nazi" has worn thin -
https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=7999
The Generalplan Ost (German pronunciation: [ɡenəˈʁaːlˌplaːn ˈɔst]; English: Master Plan for the East), abbreviated GPO, was the Nazi German government's plan for the genocide and ethnic cleansing on a vast scale,[1] and colonization of Central and Eastern Europe by Germans.[2] It was to be undertaken in territories occupied by Germany during World War II.[1] The plan was partially realized during the war, resulting indirectly and directly in a very large number of deaths, but its full implementation was not considered practicable during the major military operations, and was prevented by Germany's defeat.
The plan entailed the enslavement, expulsion, and mass murder of most Slavic peoples in Europe along with planned destruction of their nations, whom the 'Aryan' Nazis viewed as racially inferior.[1][3] The programme operational guidelines were based on the policy of Lebensraum designed by Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party in fulfilment of the Drang nach Osten (drive to the East) ideology of German expansionism. As such, it was intended to be a part of the New Order in Europe.[1]
That's why he had the Wehrmacht charge.Hitler also broke non-aggression pacts with Poland and the Soviets. And his promise that he "wanted no Czechs".
Can you explain that? I don't really know what "charge" you are referring to, and why.That's why he had the Wehrmacht charge.
Can you explain that? I don't really know what "charge" you are referring to, and why.
That joke deserves to be destroyed!I regret having to destroy the joke, but he's referring to the practice of using a credit card, rather then paying by bank cheque (playing on the word Czech)
This may be news to you, but Hitler always blamed other people for his problems.
Wait, what? Was I asleep for 4 years? What happened in the thread since then?
Oh, just brought back from the dead for no reason? Ok. <goes back to sleep>
Stalin had a non aggression pact with Poland - this was broken when the Red Army invaded on September 17 1939.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_invasion_of_Poland
Stalin had a non aggression pact with Finland - this was broken when the Red Army invaded on November 30 1939 -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War
If Stalin had been able to strike first with his Operation Thunderstorm (Operatsia Groza) and break the non aggression pact with Germany then it would have simply been business as usual.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Igor_Bunich
World War 2 has been over for more than 70 years now and the usual pathetic response to call anyone who doesn't believe the official Allied propaganda a "nazi" has worn thin -
https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=7999
World War 2 has been over for more than 70 years now and the usual pathetic response to call anyone who doesn't believe the official Allied propaganda a "nazi" has worn thin -
https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=7999
Definitely not "for no reason". But you are wrong as well. It is to counter the official Soviet propaganda version of events which goes unchallenged in the West because the US and UK were allies of Stalin. There are 2 sides to every story. For 50 years the Soviets said the Nazis committed the Katyn massacre until finally admitting they were responsible in 1990 -I wouldn't say "for no reason". I'd say "for the same reason as the initial thread - to spread the lies that Hitler's bunkmates like to promulgate."
Dead wrong. WW2 has been over for more than 70 years now. If someone doesn't believe the official Allied propaganda version of events it doesn't mean you are automatically a "nazi".The truth never wears thin.
Using accurate terms to describe NAZIs who are seeking to rehabilitate Hitler's image piecemeal is not "pathetic," it's accurate.
Not everyone trying to rehabilitate Hitler's image is a NAZI however, so if you have some examples of non-NAZIs who are trying to rehabilitate the racist, impotent, scat freak's image, feel free to mention them so we can discuss the injustices of calling a non-NAZI a NAZI in detail, as opposed to in vague generalities.
Dead wrong. WW2 has been over for more than 70 years now. If someone doesn't believe the official Allied propaganda version of events it doesn't mean you are automatically a "nazi".
www.ihr.org/news/weber_ww2_may08.html I still see WW2 being referred to as a "war for democracy" yet this slogan completely ignores the fact that the entire democratic world which condemned Hitler for being a dictator allied itself willingly with Stalin the dictator. Do you still think the Nazis committed the Katyn massacre ? www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/?p=56206
There are also never ending movies and documentaries which glorify Churchill and ignore his racism, imperialism and war mongering -
www.veteranstoday.com/2017/07/05/mass-murdering-clown-winston-churchill-and-independence-day/
of course they should. But the evidence for soviet guit at Katyn was robust from the beginning, just as the evidence for Nazi aggression in Barbarossa is unchallengeable. There may be 2 sides to every story, but in each of the cases you cite, there has only been one truth. The Barbarossa aggression was not the invention of soviet propaganda. Churchill warned Stalin about it before it happened, but unfortunately was not believed. So if it is propaganda, it is British as well as Soviet in origin.Definitely not "for no reason". But you are wrong as well. It is to counter the official Soviet propaganda version of events which goes unchallenged in the West because the US and UK were allies of Stalin. There are 2 sides to every story. For 50 years the Soviets said the Nazis committed the Katyn massacre until finally admitting they were responsible in 1990 -
www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/?p=56206
So all Soviet propaganda and their version of wartime events should be taken with a grain of salt. There are 2 sides to every story.
Mondial said:Dead wrong. WW2 has been over for more than 70 years now. If someone doesn't believe the official Allied propaganda version of events it doesn't mean you are automatically a "nazi".
www.ihr.org/news/weber_ww2_may08.html I still see WW2 being referred to as a "war for democracy" yet this slogan completely ignores the fact that the entire democratic world which condemned Hitler for being a dictator allied itself willingly with Stalin the dictator. Do you still think the Nazis committed the Katyn massacre ? www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/?p=56206
Here is what "Revisionists" claim, in Mondial's own words.Mondial said:False claims about revisionists. What they claim and what they don't claim
As has been demonstrated, none of this is true. Absolutely none of it. It has been shown that the USA and the other victors were very lenient on Germany. Rather than forcing them to "toe the line"; the US loosened the requirements for Denazification, with the result that Ex Nazis played a prominent role in West German politics. Because they US needed West Germany's support in the cold war, they looked the other way with regards to Mondial's heroes' crimes. They commutted the sentences of German SS men who massacred American POWs in Malmedy. They hired former SS men as spies, and they even allowed the German government to blackmail Israel with the threat of witholding foreign currency in the form of Arms sales, when it seemed as if Adolf Eichmann would expose prominent Nazis in Adenauer's government. Rather than Mondial's baseless assertion that the "postwar german constitution followed the official propaganda narrative", the US allowed the Germans to disregard the IMT's statutes and instead make use of a built in loophole in the form of section 211 of the criminal code; a holdover from the Nazi era. This loophole and its narrow definition of murder allowed Ex Nazis to get nothing but slaps on the wrist for even the most heinous acts of mass murder, and they were helped along by a German legal system filled to the brim with ex Nazis. All because as mentioned above, "complete denazification was never an option", and in fact eventually removed from the "victors'" agenda.Mondial said:The post 1945 German government and constitution had to toe the line of the Allied occupation forces. Therefore they have to follow the official propaganda version when it comes to World War 2 and the holocaust. And then there is the law against holocaust revisionism in Germany
EtienneSC has avoided tackling these well known facts because they show "Revisionism" for the baseless, dishonest nonsense that it is. Mondial will probably do the same.
Wasting your time, IMV. Nazi apologists simply don't care. About anything.As for Mondial and "Official Allied Propaganda", neither he nor his friends have yet to respond to this.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11525686&postcount=2056
I have asked about this Several times now, and Mondial has yet to answer. Mondial, like most deniers, mis-characterizes the actual, observed post war policies of the victors of WW2 because they are inconsistent and incompatible with their fantasies. Either Mondial knows this and is deliberately spreading crap, or he doesn't, in which case he is lazy and doesn't bother to research a subject before talking crap about it.
It wasn't the Western Allies, that's for sure. Their main priority at the time was opposing the USSR, and to this end, they needed a strong and stable Germany to serve as a bulwark against communism. For this purpose, they loosened the requirements for Denazification and allowed several prominent ex Nazis to serve in the West German government, the CIA and NASA (Instead of torturing them to fabricate false evidence to shame Germany). The malmedy trial defendants, Nuremberg Law architect Hans Globke, several German rocket scientists involved in slave labor, and Hitler's former chief of staff (who later served as the secretary General of NATO) were examples of this. The Western Allies spent a lot off effort to protect them (instead of torturing or coercing them), i.e. Churchill personally intervened on behalf of Von Manstein, the US and West Germany blackmailed Israel to prevent them from exposing Hans Globke and other Ex Nazis in the Eichmann Trial. No American, British, or French Hoax there, that's for sure.mycroft said:Who do you think perpetuated this "hoax" and for what purpose?
And it wasn't the USSR either. They were no "friend" of the Jews, and their post-war policy was "Do not Divide the dead", which was to downplay the fact that Jews were singled out by the Nazis for killing in Soviet territory. In all official reports of massacres on Russian soil, references to "Jewish Victims" were all edited to "Peaceful Soviet Citizens", changing the narrative from being a genocide specifically against Jews to Capitalist Fascists killing Communists. This was why the Soviet Indictment refers to the victims of Auschwitz as "Citizens of Various countries" instead of as Jews. Later on, the Soviets would crack down on Jewish attempts to commemorate the Babi Yar massacre as a massacre against Jews, and even forced local Jews to sign a document formally blaming "Zionism" for the Massacre. No Soviet Hoax either.
I have told Mondial and EtienneSC about these well known policies several times but never got an answer. The truth must be too painful, since the truth is that there was never a hoax to begin with and the Actual, documented policies of the WWII victors rule out any hoax.
Wasting your time, IMV. Nazi apologists simply don't care. About anything.
One hardly needs to imagine a Russian Offensive Plan to account for the existence of Russian to Spanish phrasebooks in 1940, even in the libraries of the Red Army.ETA: And more pertinent to the original OP. I heard about this when teaching a Russian banker back in London - circa 2008. He went on about the "Russian Offensive Plan" - so far as to add that the Nazis had found Russian to X phrase books including Russian to Spanish. And at the time, I thought and to misquote Churchill "Some plan, some bollocks".
One hardly needs to imagine a Russian Offensive Plan to account for the existence of Russian to Spanish phrasebooks in 1940, even in the libraries of the Red Army.
Had your banker forgotten that many Soviet military personnel served in Spain against Franco in the years 1936-39?
Therefore if these phrasebooks existed at all they could not have been for the purpose of facilitating a pre-emptive attack on Germany. So maybe old stock from the Spanish Civil War, I hypothesised.True, but good planning would first start with Russian - Polish then Russian - German etc.. before even thinking of packing Russian - Spanish.
Not the first thing to put in your backpack for your front-line troops unless it was a perhaps an over ambitious attack.![]()
Or really **** troop motivation - even Pavlov's dogs have limits.
Therefore if these phrasebooks existed at all they could not have been for the purpose of facilitating a pre-emptive attack on Germany. So maybe old stock from the Spanish Civil War, I hypothesised.
(Pavlov's troops had limits too, by the way.)
Hitler didn't break the non aggression pact with Poland. He publicly stated on April 28 1939 that due to the deterioration in relations between the 2 countries the non aggression pact was thereby abrogated making it null and void. The Polish government was duly notified of this fact which occurred over 4 months before the German invasion. It's all on the diplomatic record -Hitler also broke non-aggression pacts with Poland and the Soviets.
That simply isn't true. A secret protocol signed in September transferred Lithuania from the German to the Soviet share of the spoils. These two bandit regimes agreed to the change in the terms of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact.WPStalin was the first to break the non aggression pact with Germany. Lithuania was supposed to be in the German sphere of influence yet the Soviets went in and took over this country -
http://codoh.com/library/document/2112/
The reason you revived this thread is to give further vent to your admiration for Hitler and the Nazis, and to reproduce more revisionist propaganda from the Nazi-apologist and Holocaust-denying Journal of Historical ReviewWP.The reason I revived this thread is that it is now 75 years since the soviet-nazi war started yet the MSM and Hollywood continue to peddle the official soviet propaganda version of events as if it is some kind of holy writ.
http://codoh.com/library/document/1826/
https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=7999