Unz评论•另类媒体选择$
美国主流媒体大都排除了有趣,重要和有争议的观点
 博客浏览Saker档案
读“叛国者”-一个好主意还是一个坏主意?
通过电子邮件将此页面发送给其他人

 记住我的信息



=>

书签 全部切换总目录添加到图书馆从图书馆中删除 • B
显示评论下一个新评论下一个新回复了解更多
回复同意/不同意/等等 更多... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
同意不同意谢谢LOL轮唱
这些按钮可将您的公开协议,异议,感谢,LOL或巨魔与所选注释一起注册。 仅对最近使用“记住我的信息”复选框保存姓名和电子邮件的频繁评论者可用,并且在任何八个小时的时间内也只能使用三次。
忽略评论者 关注评论者
搜寻文字 区分大小写  确切的词  包括评论
列表 书签

有两个名字经常引起许多俄罗斯人的强烈和敌对的反应:亚历山大·索尔仁尼琴(Alexander Solzhenitsyn)和弗拉基米尔·雷尊(Vladimir Rezun),又名“维克多·苏沃洛夫(Viktor Suvorov)”。 针对这两个人的指控清单通常包括:

  • 亚历山大·索尔仁尼琴(Alexander Solzhenitsyn):他组成了被苏维埃政权杀害的大约66万人,他对安德烈·弗拉索夫(Andrei Vlasov)将军表示赞赏,他是中央情报局的oo徒,他是反犹太人,俄国民族主义者和君主制。 最后,现代俄罗斯有句俗话:“给我看反苏维权人士 (“антисовечик”) 我会给你看一个俄方”(这使索尔仁尼琴成为鲁索菲比)。
  • 弗拉基米尔·雷祖恩(Vladimir Rezun):他是叛徒,是希特勒只占斯大林即将发动的苏军进攻的理论的创造者,他是MI-6阵线,以传播反叛主义的理论。

当我听到这些意见时,我想做的是问一个简单的问题: 您实际上读过几本Solzhenitsyn和/或Rezun的书?

答案通常很模糊。 他们最多指的是一本书或两本书(最多)和许多文章(通常这些文章甚至不是由任何一位作者撰写的,而是通常是“创造性的”措辞)。

这让我想起了一个古老的苏联玩笑:党的官员来到某个工厂或办公室进行政治演讲,并绝对惊叹于索尔仁尼琴著名的“古拉格群岛”,称其为丑陋的谎言集。 一位在场的工人问中共中央书记是否读过中共中央书记回答的整本书:“我没有读过这种反苏的污秽物。

这是有很多道理的,因为我很少遇到索尔仁尼琴·怀特(Solzhenitsyn-haters),他实际上至少读过几本书。

好吧,碰巧的是,我16岁时发现了索尔仁尼琴(Solzhenitsyn),并在余生中继续研究他的著作。 在接下来的几十年中,我读了每一本书,而Solzhenitsyn写了好几次书(至少两次,如果不是更多的话)。 至于雷尊,我读了他所有的非小说类书籍(我一点都不喜欢他的小说),所以我想在这里大声疾呼,与读者分享我对这两位作家和男人的严格个人看法。

首先,我将从一些一般性评论开始。

一方面,索尔仁尼琴(Solzhenitsyn)和雷尊(Rezun)都是了不起的作家,不读它们真是令人哭泣! 然而,他们的风格却截然不同:索尔仁尼琴经常与陀思妥耶夫斯基相提并论,这是正确的,即使这比内容更适用于内容和世界观。 我想说索尔仁尼琴的风格是独特的,而且很不平衡。 至少在我看来,他的杰作是“古拉格群岛”(最糟糕的是 他的诗)。 是的,我知道,这是一本非小说类书籍,不是他的纯粹文学杰作之一(例如“癌症病房“或”在第一圈”),但我个人碰巧发现了 古拉格群岛 他最有影响力的书不仅涉及内容,还涉及风格和语言。 我完全主观的认为,他的另一杰作是他的巨大循环“红轮“, 尤其 ”14年八月“和”16年 十月”。 另一方面,我也喜欢他的短篇小说(“Крохотки”)。 从任何中途的客观衡量来看,这个人都是与托尔斯泰或陀思妥耶夫斯基齐名的文学巨匠。

关于瑞尊没有人会这么说。 他的风格可以说是“行人”,即使不是直截了当的“黄色”(意思是“黄色新闻”)。 但这不是问题。 Rezun缺乏优雅和学术上的严谨,他以活泼有趣的写作风格,一些真正引人入胜的想法和许多“创造性的废话”来弥补自己的不足。 我讨厌讨厌Rezun作为一个叛徒和叛徒,或者讨厌他的庸俗风格,但不要告诉我他的写作不佳:成千上万的人对他的书充满着极大的迷恋和欣赏。 这个人有不可否认的才能。

以上只是指出,那些说自己因为讨厌自己的风格而没有读过这些作者的人很可能不是很诚实,而且更有可能因为书的内容而没有读过这些作者。 。 这就是我们接下来要研究的内容。 具体来说,我先来看一下亚历山大·索尔仁尼琴(Alexander Solzhenitsyn),他是两者中较复杂的一个,然后再看雷祖恩(Rezun)。

亚历山大索尔仁尼琴
亚历山大索尔仁尼琴

我们需要记住的第一件事是,索尔仁尼琴(Solzhenitsyn)出生于1918年,这意味着他由一代俄罗斯人抚养长大,他们记得1917年以前的俄罗斯。 我们还需要记住的第二件事是,他是由一代人抚养的,他记得克伦斯基政权的混乱,其后是布尔什维克政变的血腥洗礼,其本身是俄国内战的血腥狂欢。

为什么这很重要?

因为他的反苏联主义烙印与我们在“白色警卫队”或第一代俄罗斯移民(在布尔什维克政变后离开俄罗斯的大约2万俄罗斯人)中看到的相似得多。 例如,这就是索尔仁尼琴为何如此写犹太人在布尔什维克第一届政府中所起的作用的原因:这是白卫队和第一代俄罗斯酋长国的主要观点。

显然,索尔仁尼琴在被捕之前就已经有反苏的感觉,但是很明显,他的入狱首先是在劳教所,后来进入了一个特别的监狱,供科学家将索尔仁尼琴暴露给更多的反苏人。和想法。

当然,这些都不能为索尔仁尼琴可能存在的任何虚假数字(或错误的政治见解)辩解,但确实可以解释它们的来源以及索尔仁尼琴为何认为它们是可信的。 就我个人而言,我是在“白人后卫”和“首次移民”的政治文化中长大的,我可以向您保证,索尔仁尼琴的观点实际上在仍然记得革命前的俄国的那些俄国人中是“主流”。

接下来,索尔仁尼琴本人描述了他如何要求他的所有同胞囚犯(他在古拉格群岛所说的“狂人”)向他发送所有可能的历史文献,回忆录,学术论文等,以便他写下古拉格的历史。 。 不用说,苏联档案没有为此目的而公开,克格勃也没有提议写一份法庭之友简介来帮助索尔仁尼琴。

因此,回顾一下:重要的是Solzhenitsyn的信息来源:

  • 1917年之前的俄国人,他们记得革命和内战的恐怖
  • 白卫兵和第一波移民回忆录和文章
  • 暴露于因有罪或无辜而被反苏活动(著名的第58条)逮捕并被索尔仁尼琴监禁的人
  • 西方学者,政治人物,智囊团的文章(又称“西方宣传”)。

索尔仁尼琴(Solzhenitsyn)确实犯了很多错误,这真是让人大吃一惊吗,尤其是当苏联政府提供的可靠历史信息很少时?

在这里,我必须插入一个相当长的关于苏联国家性质的侧栏。 我认为,苏维埃政权在其历史上变化非常频繁,而且发生了巨大变化。 就个人而言,我将提供以下时间顺序:

  1. 早些年:(1917-1922)。 布尔什维克政变,然后是内战,其后是犹太人的严重恐怖,如艾戈达,弗伦克尔,埃佐夫等。所谓的“战争共产主义”,NEP以及集体化,饥荒和“解构主义”(1932- 1933年)。 这一时期以所谓的“斯大林的清洗”(1936-1938年)结束。
  2. 斯大林为第二次世界大战做准备:(1936-1941)。 在此期间,大多数布尔什维克的“老警卫”要么被处决,要么入狱或降职,并且将新一代的指挥官(“斯大林将军”)安置在所有重要的军事和文职职位上。
  3. 伟大的卫国战争:(1941-1945)。 这个戏剧性的时期见证了俄罗斯民族为自己的生存而战,这也见证了政治文化的真正戏剧性变化:前布尔什维克的恐惧症被对英勇的俄罗斯民族的称赞所取代,军事队伍得到了全面重建(以及传统的俄国肩章),教堂重新开放,镇压急剧减少。
  4. 战后时期和斯大林的最后几年:1945-1961年。 在此期间,苏联从第二次世界大战的废墟中恢复了准奇迹般的复兴,并经历了繁荣与稳定的时期。 斯大林可能在1953年被随行人员杀害,其主要execution子手(拉夫伦特·贝里亚)不久后(也在1953年)被处决,但他们的繁荣与稳定遗产远远超过苏共第二十二届代表大会,赫鲁晓夫创下22并突然谴责斯大林,他的个性崇拜和成千上万的无辜俄罗斯人的康复。
  5. 大背叛 (1961-1964):赫鲁晓夫是有史以来最糟糕,最不道德,无能,虚伪,无能和其他卑鄙的苏联领导人(埃尔辛曾在同一个联盟,imnsho)。 他也是一个血腥的暴君。 然而,可能是为了掩饰自己的无能和对斯大林的狂热仇恨,他的确将苏联的自由化程度提高到了不容忽视的程度,就像戈尔巴乔夫(Gorbachev)的“格拉斯诺斯特”(glastnost)一样-他的“新开放”并没有帮助苏联解体。苏联,远非如此。 最终,克鲁什切夫本人被勃列日涅夫推翻,但为时已晚:虽然直到1961年,大多数(或至少很多)俄国人还是相信马克思列宁主义的理想,并在22日战争后相信了他们的领导人。苏共党代会逐渐陷入了一个幻灭的时期。(它只会在2000年真正停止!)。
  6. 苏维埃国家的慢动作解构,随后不可避免的崩溃:1964-1991年。 我们大多数人都记得勃列日涅夫。 有些人可能还记得安德罗波夫。 有人还记得切尔年科吗? 然后出现了“戈尔比”号,还有几个小时,阿纳耶夫(1991年GKChP政变的成员)被宣告死亡。

了解什么至关重要 这是这六个时期中的每个时期都产生了截然不同的大众和政治文化。 因此,尽管在西方您经常会听到有关“苏维埃”的概括,但事实是,从来没有任何一种整体的苏维埃文化。 形成鲜明对比的完美例子是将经历过早期恐怖时期的那一代人与击败纳粹战争机器然后将第一个人送入太空的那一代人进行比较。

就索尔仁尼琴而言,他在很大程度上是早期的产物,应该在这种历史背景下进行评估,而不是按照能够完全访问许多珍贵秘密档案的现代专业历史学家的标准进行评估。

接下来,我们需要看一下索尔仁尼琴(Solzhenitsyn's)为弗拉索夫(Vlasov)将军的辩护律师的指控。

简短的回答是,是的,索尔仁尼琴通过说苏联早在弗拉索夫背叛苏联之前就背叛了弗拉索夫,来证明弗拉索夫将军背叛了自己的誓言。 此外,毫无疑问,索尔仁尼琴确实完全憎恨斯大林,他认为斯大林是恶性大屠杀者。 他怎么会不赞成有人为斯大林背负武器? 索尔仁尼琴的结论是,如果俄罗斯人民没有抓住这次推翻苏维埃政权的机会,那么他们真的会向世界证明他们是被动的奴隶。

索尔仁尼琴在写古拉格群岛时为自己设定的目标之一就是揭穿一种流行的西方理论:俄罗斯人从来不知道自由,他们也不关心自由。 俄国人有奴隶的心态,他们所想要的只是某种独裁者(沙皇或委员,对他们没有影响)用铁拳统治他们。”。 索尔仁尼琴开始证明的一件事是,俄罗斯人民至少在1946年之前一直抵制布尔什维克政权,而不是被动或奴隶制! 他是什么意思? 他提到了这样一个事实,即1917年至1941年之间,苏联政权不断受到各种敌人(从君主制到托洛茨基主义者)的威胁,而且纳粹入侵苏联后,俄国人民只是抓住了这个机会再次站起来反对布尔什维克。 从这个角度来看,整个弗拉索夫现象不过是内战的延续。 总而言之,当西方的俄罗斯恐惧主义者喜欢对俄罗斯人有奴隶的心态感到高兴时(他们做了很多事情,尤其是所谓的“俄罗斯/苏联地区专家”。)哦,是的,我们抵抗了30年! 相反,你们(意思是西方的人民)不仅对纳粹分子表现出很少的抵抗,而且你们中的大多数人成为了希特勒的忠实和服从的仆人! 现实情况是,我们俄罗斯人比您更热爱自由,这就是为什么我们无法被占领,以及为什么如此难以统治我们的原因。

虽然我个人不能证明弗拉索夫背叛他的誓言,但我确实从根本上同意,苏联政权只有在战争结束后才能实现自己的全部权力和安全。

不管是什么情况,这真的会让索尔仁尼琴有如此观点的人感到惊讶吗? 实际上,这种观点在那些仍然记得1917年以前的俄罗斯的人们中很普遍。 从许多方面来看,索尔仁尼琴是苏维埃政权初期政治文化的纯粹产物,我个人认为他在文化上更接近1917年前的俄国人,而不是苏维埃政权下已经养育的俄国人。

这并不意味着索尔仁尼琴没有得到一些事实,甚至是至关重要的事实,都是非常错误的。

舒适地坐在我们的椅子上并批评那些过去犯过错误的人是一件很有趣的事,但是从根本上讲,这在逻辑上是错误的,在道德上也是虚伪的。 事实是,历史,包括我们最近的历史在内的所有历史,都充斥着神话,概括,简化,谣言,而且最重要的是谎言。 我们都知道9/11,但这并不是一个唯一的例子。 是否有人记得“蒂米什瓦拉大屠杀”,甚至更好的是“斯雷布雷尼察种族灭绝”? 说到斯雷布雷尼察,在马卡莱(Markale)或拉卡克(Racak)上假冒的“大屠杀”同样多呢? 卡扎菲上校把伟哥送给他的男人强奸利比亚妇女怎么样? 还是这位来自科威特的无辜年轻护士,他报道了伊拉克人将婴儿从孵化器中扔出来的情况?

这些都是谎言。

然后,还有更严重的情况,包括有关所谓的“大屠杀”的历史真相。 还是由谁负责启动第二次世界大战? 纽伦堡审判怎么样?有人称赞这是文明人类的巨大胜利,而其他许多人则称它为胜利者的“袋鼠法庭”。 前南斯拉夫问题法庭呢? 您是否觉得这是正义的典范,还是对塞尔维亚民族的猛烈抨击?

如果我们甚至无法就最近的历史达成共识,您是否真的希望来自不同时期的人(因为当今的所有俄罗斯人,取决于他们的年龄)就历史,甚至是关键历史达成共识?

当然不是!

因此,我们现在需要做的不是“吸出”这种或那种个性,并指责他们说谎(那是典型的*苏联*要做的事情:谴责一个假定的敌人并要求对他进行惩罚和沉默)。 我们首先需要考虑这个人在他/她写/说我们现在认为的谎言时知道什么和不知道什么。 犯错是人的,因此是可以原谅的。 故意撒谎是完全不同的事情。

就索尔仁尼琴而言,绝对没有证据表明他有故意欺骗。 实际上, 66万的数字甚至都不是他的。 作为 我已经指出 在过去:

这是 他实际上写了什么 在这个著名的古拉格群岛,有关苏联恐怖分子:

根据流亡统计教授IA库尔加诺夫(IA Kurganov)的估计,从1917年到1959年,不包括战争损失,仅是由于恐怖分子的破坏,镇压,饥饿,难民营的高死亡率以及随后的低出生率,使我们损失了66.7万人” (“古拉格群岛”,第3部分,第1章)。 1976年,索尔仁尼琴在接受采访时说:“库尔加诺夫教授间接地计算出,从1917年到1959年,仅仅是由于苏维埃政权对自己的人民的内部战争,即破坏其饥荒,集体化,农民被驱逐到监狱,难民营和简单的处决,正是这些原因使我们失去了加上我们的内战,有66万人”。 这些数字包括流血的内战,即所谓的“战争共产主义,众多的反布尔什维克暴动(例如 坦波夫的那个),即所谓的“集体化“和”去黑化”下的“纯”政治镇压 臭名昭著的第58条 RSFSR刑法典和 甚至随后的低出生率。 因此,我们正在谈论“最大总和”估计。

我们在这里要注意的第一件事是,尽管库尔加诺夫教授试图得出一个“最大数字”,但苏联档案馆(显示逮捕和/或处决的人数大大减少)仅涉及实际被判刑的人数。苏联法律并未包括库尔加诺夫选择包括的具体事件。

因此,直接将库尔加诺夫的数字与苏联官方文件进行比较就是一例苹果和橙子。

尽管如此,索尔仁尼琴显然仍然讨厌布尔什维克和苏联政权,这很可能使他愿意接受事实和数据,而他本应该仔细检查这些事实和数据。

从意识形态上,也有很多证据表明,索尔仁尼琴在Fedor Dostoevskii,Lev Tikhomirov或Ivan Ilyin教授(普京似乎也经常引用……)的总路线中是君主制,他非常讨厌,这不仅适用于马克思主义或列宁主义,甚至适用于“适度的”社会民主主义(他认为这无法抵挡苏联及其盟国)。 我们也肯定知道,索尔仁尼琴对西方民主国家或资本主义世界观无话可说。 但是,索尔仁尼琴几乎不是典型的“反动派”,因为他对1917年以前的俄罗斯(包括最后一个沙皇)几乎没有什么好说的。 实际上,索尔仁尼琴是一位典型的俄罗斯理想主义者,将相当自由的,甚至是现代主义者对俄罗斯东正教的看法与对彼得一世(西方人通常称其为“大国”)建立的政治制度的强烈反对相结合。 实际上,我认为至少需要单独考虑三个不同的“ Solzhenitsyns”:

Solzhenitsyn作者:这是个人喜好问题。 他的确获得了诺贝尔文学奖,但我们都知道,诺贝尔委员会只是盎格鲁主义者的公关机器的阵线。 亲自? 他是我最喜欢的俄罗斯作家之一,与谢尔盖·卢基安年科(Sergei Lukianenko)的风格截然不同。

立即订购

历史学家索尔仁尼琴:在这里,他所写的每个单词都需要根据我们现在认为的知识重新审视和仔细评估。 对于他的古拉格群岛(Gulag Archipelago)尤其如此,索尔仁尼琴(Solzhenitsyn)称其为“文学研究实验”就清楚地表明,从定义上来说,这是一项正在进行的工作,一项实验和一项调查。 正如我最近所写的,没有值得修正的历史,而且索尔仁尼琴既如此著名又如此错误,他的著作成为批评和重新评估的一致推论的对象是很自然的。

哲学家索尔仁尼琴:再次是个人品味的案例。 我会说 亚历山大·索尔仁尼琴(Alexander Solzhenitsyn)是站在其他巨人肩膀上的巨人 如霍米亚科夫(Khomiakov),陀思妥耶夫斯基(Dostoevskii),伊利林因(IlIlyinyin),索洛涅维奇(Solonevich),列昂捷夫(Leontiev),季霍米罗夫(Tikhomirov),罗扎诺夫(Rozanov)等。 现在,他的哲学遗产已完全被历史讨论所模糊,但这种钟摆最终将以另一种方式摇摆,然后将根据其优点研究他的道德哲学。

至少可以这样说,目前对于“索尔仁尼琴研究”来说不是一个好时机。 在西方,他被憎恨为伟大的俄罗斯民族主义者和反犹太君主国,而在俄罗斯则被憎恨像是对俄罗斯中央情报局的粗暴对待,oo毁了自己的人民并为像弗拉索夫这样的叛徒辩护。 这些信念根深蒂固,以至于我都不愿意尝试在这里进行讨论。 该讨论将进行,但是只有一次强烈反对索尔仁尼琴的仇恨者才会让步,让人们对索尔仁尼琴的实际写作和他的实际含义有更好的个人了解。 现在,他的大多数批评者都在忙着干这个人,他写的所有东西以及所有读过他的人。

索尔仁尼琴流亡在佛蒙特州卡文迪什(Cavendish)时,曾告诉我的一位来访朋友:现在,我们没有自己的国家,这就是为什么现在写这个话题还为时过早的原因 (他指的是当时仍然秘密的一本书,他回到俄罗斯后最终以“一起200年“), 但是一旦俄罗斯恢复自由,我将出版这本书”。 我将这样解释一下:我相信,只要前苏联精英及其后代占据现代俄罗斯的大部分关键职位,就不可能对索尔仁尼琴进行认真的讨论,情感投入的程度太高了。 但这也将过去。 已经有一代年轻的俄罗斯人甚至不记得苏联时代或冷战。 是他们的孩子,甚至是大孙子,有一天将对这个知识巨人进行公正的历史评估。 目前,现代俄罗斯仍然生活在前苏联的“阴影中”。 但是,迟早俄罗斯会从这个阴影中脱颖而出–那时索尔仁尼琴的观点将再次成为前沿和中心。

我想与您分享关于Solzhenitsyn的另一件事:在他的小册子中,“我们的多元主义者”索尔仁尼琴(Solzhenitsyn)总结了针对俄罗斯“自由主义者”和“民主人士”(用俄语的意思)的论文,其含义如下:我们以为你很新鲜,但你还是一样”。 当我阅读索尔仁尼琴仇恨者的著作时,我常常会想到这句话。 在苏联时期,索尔仁尼琴(Solzhenitsyn)仇恨者喜欢称他为“索尔仁尼采(Solzhenitser)”(暗示他可能是犹太人)。 如今,在俄罗斯讨厌索尔仁尼琴的人称他为SoLZHEnitsyn(字母“ lzhe”在俄语中意为“谎言”,表明他是骗子)。 这告诉您所有您需要了解的这些人有能力做到的复杂程度……

现在让我们看看我们的另一个叛徒,

弗拉基米尔·雷尊(Vladimir Rezun)又名“维克多·苏沃洛夫(Viktor Suvorov)”
弗拉基米尔·雷尊(Vladimir Rezun)又名“维克多·苏沃洛夫(Viktor Suvorov)”

弗拉基米尔·雷尊(Vladimir Rezun)以“ Viktor Suvorov”的笔名写作,也写了很多书,但这就是他与Solzhenitsyn相似之处的终结。 一方面,雷尊来自后世,他出生于索尔仁尼琴之后30年,他的成年是在1960年代赫鲁晓夫的“大背叛”时期。 显然,Rezun没有经历过战争,也没有经历过光荣的战后岁月。 这两个人之间的另一个大区别是,亚历山大·索尔仁尼琴(Alexander Solzhenitsyn)被迫流放,而雷尊(Rezun)叛逃,而且叛逃是官方自愿的(有一些间接迹象表明,他是被英国人在日内瓦绑架的,我认为这两个版本同样可信)。 然后他成为一名典型的叛逃者,让我解释一下我的意思。

我一生中遇到了很多叛逃者(还有很多最终决定不叛逃的潜在叛逃者)。 这是叛逃者发生的典型时间顺序(这就是为什么我一直强烈建议所有苏维埃人不要叛逃的原因):

  1. 首先,你是一个“烫手山芋”。 通常,没有哪个地方像叛逃者那样冒充你,假装叛逃者都需要“卖掉”自己的新主人(实际上,西方官员对他们来说是什么样的人),所以他们几乎总是夸大了对苏联的反对。政权,他们在叛逃之前的重要性以及现在的有用性。 只要西方汇报员很快就能确定新叛逃者过去的真实身份,身份以及他/她真正了解的内容,这就不会奏效。 此后,这些叛逃者通常会拥有某种生活手段,并且通常会被遗忘。
  2. 接下来,您尝试打动普通大众。 实现这一目标的最佳方法是为您撰写畅销书。 然后再来一个,再来一个。 出于一个简单的原因,这很少能奏效:叛逃者不得不说的有趣的事情通常会在第一本书中出现,而很少在第二本书中出现。 此后,“宣传震撼值”想象力池就空了,叛逃者通常开始胡说八道。 这种胡言乱语通常会在以后的每本书中变得更糟。 除了一些顽固的通婚者之外,没有人认真对待这些愚蠢的书,而曾经的“烫手山芋”的叛逃者变成了一个完全被所有人遗忘的人(在这里,我想到了那个SOB 卡鲁金 例如)。
  3. 最终,叛逃者会出现精神崩溃,随后是多年的药物滥用,而且常常是自杀。 他们意识到没有人需要或关心他们。 他们意识到自己的前任老板早已忘记了他们,而新任老板也早已忘记了他们。 他们没有朋友,多数情况下是严重的失灵的爱情事务,以灾难告终,他们的家人常常远离他们,最后但并非最不重要的一点是,他们想念了自己被出卖和离开的人民和国家。

就Rezun而言,他在1982年写了他的第一本畅销书,题为“苏联军队内部”这很有趣(在那之前他还有另一本书,“解放者”(1981年,但没有那么成功)。 然后,在1985年,他写道:水族馆”,这是一本关于苏联军事情报部门GRU的相当糟糕且引起轰动的书。 然后是1987年,是Rezun最糟糕的书之一: 特种部队,一堆荒唐的虚构故事,失败了。 到那时,Rezun显然已经遇到了问题。 但是作为一个非常聪明的人,Rezun提出了一个绝妙的主意。

立即订购

这一切始于1985年的一篇简短文章,然后是1988年,他最著名的书的俄语版“破冰船”(“Ледокол”)中,雷尊写为“维克多·苏沃洛夫”(Viktor Suvorov)声称他有证据表明斯大林将要进攻纳粹德国,希特勒别无选择,只能先发动打击。 他的证据? 许多事情,数百项索赔,从有些可信到完全愚蠢。 我不会在这里讨论所有这些内容(很多杰出的历史学家已经做到了–我想到了戴维·格兰茨上校的出色著作)。 我只想提到一个我特别感到胆怯的问题:雷祖恩声称苏联军方曾计划进攻德国,而俄罗斯的各个部队甚至都收到了专门的词汇表,以使他们能够与计划进攻的人进行交谈:德国人。

我非常确定,苏联人有计划进攻德国。 实际上,我也确信,苏联有计划攻击大多数(如果不是全部)邻居。 如果不是的话,整个苏联总参谋部都应该被枪杀(再次!)。 为什么? 因为 和平时期的军队就是这样做的:为战争做准备:包括防御和进攻行动。 自己想想:如果您是苏联将军,突然被召集到斯大林的深夜工作中,斯大林问您“从纳粹政权中解放德国工农的计划是什么?如果我们先发动进攻,这场战争将持续多久?”。 您能想象自己回答:“ C 斯大林(Omrade Stalin),我们没有这样的计划!”? 我认为即使在遇到“您的”射击队之前,您也将蒙受耻辱甚至恐惧。 还记得1919-1920年的苏波战争或1939-1940年的苏芬战争吗? 它们并没有以惊人的成功而闻名(尽管Rezun确实对后者有一些非常有趣的看法,但是它们不在本文的讨论范围之内)。 因此,当然,苏联确实有对德国发动战争的计划,就像今天的俄罗斯有消灭美国的计划(也有自己的计划!)一样。 这样的计划的存在最有力地不能证明俄罗斯或美国的领导人有实际意图互相攻击! 至于“俄德”袖珍词汇表,这就是军事语言学家在不参加战争时经常做的事情。 相信我,我曾经是这样的语言学家– 语言专家 用德语–我什至看到“德汉”词汇表! 但是这些几乎不表明瑞士打算入侵中国,对吗?

Rezun成功证明了他的案情吗? 当然取决于您问的人。 我不是军事历史学家,我认为这个问题应该由专业历史学家研究,而不是像我这样的业余爱好者研究。 我强调指出的是,我认为应该阅读和讨论Rezun的书。 我觉得愚蠢的是,一些俄罗斯电视新闻节目做了什么:首先,他们谴责雷祖恩是他可能是叛徒的叛徒(当然,除非他被绑架了),但这完全是不讲道理的。 然后,他们采访了他的前同事,这些同事描述了他的可怕的性格(无能,酗酒,通常不被喜欢),但他们无法解释这样一个可怕的人和一个无能的人如何在最负盛名的GRU之一中找到位置。 ”Rezidenturas在西方(苏联也与被分配到华盛顿特区的克格勃rezidentura的奥列格·卡卢金(Oleg Kalugin)完全一样!) 然后,他们可能会认为 政变,他们坐上肥皂盒,宣布雷尊的观点极具攻击性,他必须是军情六处的特工,无论是真的还是假,这都与书本或历史理论完全无关。而不是作者的性格。

对于Rezun来说,尤其如此,这是出于另一个特殊原因。 在他写了关于斯大林想要如何进攻德国的书之后,雷尊写了一部绝对令人惊叹的历史书,题为“净化”(“Очищение”)中,他不仅重新审视了斯大林的清洗,而且还出色地捍卫了这些清洗。 如果您懂俄语,请您阅读该书(您可以免费下载俄语版的书) 此处)。 该书的主要论据如下:斯大林了解到,第一批布尔什维克精通大量屠杀无辜平民的技巧,但作为军事指挥官,他们是大胖子零号人物(包括西方人总是以图扎切夫斯基元帅的身份出现)某种军事天才–他肯定不是!)。 此外,到1930年代中期,由于大多数俄国人对其迫害者和酷刑者的仇恨,苏维埃俄国确实处于崩溃和崩溃的边缘,因此,这些精英(以及他们在国外的托洛茨基支持者)看到了秘密警察和政党的血腥清洗。作为“可怕的清除”,对于大多数普通百姓来说,这种清除看起来像是对布尔什维克最坏怪物的最坏解放和公正处决。 此外,雷尊对斯大林的将军和希特勒的将军进行了非常有趣的比较-他得出的结论是,斯大林的情况要好得多(顺便提一下,在战争即将结束时,希特勒同意)。 我发现论文非常引人注目,我希望有一天“净化”将翻译成英文。

以上任何内容均不得解释为对Rezun的辩护,或者就此而言,不应解释为对Stalin的辩护。 对于雷尊来说,我根本没有为他辩护,我只是对他受到侮辱和开除感到遗憾,而不是批评性地阅读他。 至于斯大林本人,我在文章中描述了我对这个人的个人感受:关于斯大林的争议-初步考虑的“篮子””,因此我无需在这里重复一遍。

结论:以弗拉基米尔·普京为例可以模仿吗?

弗拉基米尔·普京(Vladimir Putin)经常被指控怀旧苏联,并希望重建苏联。

没有东西会离事实很远!

普京确实多次宣称苏联解体是“本世纪最大的地缘政治灾难”(“крупнейшаягеополитическаякатастрофавека”)。 普京所指的并不是对苏联的某种怀旧,而是对苏联崩溃给人们造成的难以言喻的痛苦的深刻认识。

实际上,普京对那个糟糕的旧苏联怀有“零”的怀旧之情,他毫不害羞地说出自己的想法,特别是当他面对那些如今理想化苏联时代的人时。 不仅如此,普京还公开表示了他对索尔仁尼琴的崇高敬意。 从这张照片可以看出,这种感觉是非常相互的:

与此形成鲜明对比的是普京经常公开表示对叛逃者的厌恶!

例如,请参阅普京声明的内容 在采访中 与英国《金融时报》 :(重点已添加)

实际上,叛国罪是最严重的犯罪,叛国者必须受到惩处。 我并不是说索尔兹伯里事件就是这样做的方式。 一点也不。 但是叛徒必须受到惩罚。 这位先生,斯克里帕尔(Skripal),已经受到惩罚。 他被捕,判刑,然后入狱服刑。 他受到了惩罚。 出于这个原因,他不在讨论范围之内。 为什么会有人对他感兴趣? 他受到惩罚。 他被拘留,逮捕,判刑,然后入狱五年。 然后他被释放了,就是这样。 至于叛国罪,当然必须受到惩罚。 这是人们可以想象的最卑鄙的罪行。

顺便说一句,这表明普京并不赞同索尔仁尼琴对弗拉索夫将军的同情,但又一次,一个有批判精神的人总能把谷壳和小麦分开。

弗拉基米尔·普京(Vladimir Putin)在伊万·伊林(Ivan Illyin)的坟墓上献花
弗拉基米尔·普京(Vladimir Putin)在伊万·伊林(Ivan Illyin)的坟墓上献花

还有普京喜欢在演讲中提到伊凡·伊林的方式。 对我而言,很明显,就个人对历史和政治的观点而言,普京显然是伊林和索尔仁尼琴的狂热读者(这在支持普京的索尔仁尼琴仇恨者之间造成了认知上的不和谐)。 但是,这绝不意味着普京赞同或同意索尔仁尼琴或伊林所写或所说的一切。 但这确实表明,并非俄罗斯的所有人都“处于苏联的阴影之下”。

但是改变是不可避免的。

首先,历史的钟摆将以另一种方式摇摆,当今看来流行的许多观念必将逐渐淡出,取而代之的是希望对象索尔仁尼琴这样的历史人物进行更加仔细的评估。 其次,许多对“叛徒”一视同仁的人将简单地过世,而他们的后代将不会有相同的下意识的反应。 最后但并非最不重要的一点是,未来的俄罗斯将不得不重新发现她的历史,哲学,精神和文化渊源,在这一点上,索尔仁尼琴或伊林这样的哲学家的思想将再次自动成为中心舞台(尽管不一定得到批评地认可) )。

 
隐藏260条评论发表评论
忽略评论者...跟随Endorsed Only
修剪评论?
    []
  1. Thank you. As always, this was an informative, interesting and well-written article, a useful antidote to the nonsense about Russia, created by the USA’s establishment and intelligentsia.

    • 同意: bluedog, YetAnotherAnon
  2. Sean 说:

    虽然斯大林可能在 1953 年被他的随从杀害

    He was found after one of the nights of heavy drinking that were so routine for him–even though he was 74–that no one thought he was seriously ill. The autopsy showed such serious hardening of the brain arteries that one of the doctors thought his mental faculties must have been affected. Russian men die relatively young because they kill themselves with alcohol and if Stalin was an exception it was only in how long he lasted. His constant heavy smoking could not have helped.

    斯大林是他意识形态的囚徒,他认为资本主义势力会相互摧毁,让他带着他的军队走进欧洲。 他们离边境很近,他甚至在离边境几公里的地方有机场; 对此只有一种解释。 一旦德军进攻,他就告诉他的军队站起来战斗,这是他们能做的最糟糕的事情。 但那时,他们并没有预料到会处于守势。

    中央情报局官方网站评论斯大林所知道的:巴巴罗萨之谜

    https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/csi-studies/studies/vol50no1/9_BK_What_Stalin_Knew.htm

    墨菲重印了希特勒写给斯大林的两封秘密信件,这些信件是他在已出版的俄罗斯资料中发现的,而这在西方是前所未有的。 在这些方面,元首试图让苏联独裁者放心,德国在东欧的军事集结几乎无法掩饰。 希特勒向斯大林透露,军队正在向东迁移,以保护他们免受英国轰炸,并隐瞒入侵不列颠群岛的准备工作。 他以“以我作为国家元首的荣誉”作为结尾,保证德国不会攻击苏联。 [2] 有些人可能会质疑这些信件的真实性,但很难立即驳回。 假设它们是真实的,它们就会增加可能是苏德战争中最令人困惑的悖论:斯大林,一个不信任任何人的人,却信任希特勒。”

    很明显,张伯伦希望鼓励苏联和纳粹之间的冲突。 当然,该战略取决于德国人没有取得完全成功。 但是在 1939 年没有理由认为德国人有能力征服俄罗斯。 直到法国沦陷后,人们才明白希特勒的果断与德军相结合的威力。 斯大林和张伯伦都试图推卸责任,或者如果你愿意,每个人都想把德国人放在对方身上。 轰炸虽然不是直接导致德国失败。 轰炸迫使大量资源转移到防空系统,飞机非常昂贵(德国人缺乏训练有素的飞行员来使投资获得回报)。

    他受到了惩罚。 就此而言,他已经不在雷达上了。 为什么会有人对他感兴趣? 他受到了惩罚。 他被拘留、逮捕、判刑,然后在监狱里度过了五年。 然后他被释放了,就是这样

    确切地说,他是自由的,住在国外的俄罗斯富人拥有相对豪华的螺栓孔的城市。 他们在英国皮肤接触中毒他的想法是将他的女儿和他一起杀死,因此可否认地明确表示将追究叛徒的亲属的责任。 当然,没有人认为他们在他女儿来访的那一刻来找 Skripal 是巧合。 她才是真正的目标. If you are seriously trying to deter treachery, you kill the traitors’ family members.

    索尔仁尼琴(Solzhenitsyn)确实犯了很多错误,这真是让人大吃一惊吗,尤其是当苏联政府提供的可靠历史信息很少时?

    从后来的历史来看,他所写的关于难以驯服的车臣人、无所畏惧的乌克兰人和尽职尽责的古拉格德裔囚犯的文章很有趣。

  3. Alfred 说:
    @Sean

    Surely no one thinks it is a coincidence that they came for Skripal at the exact moment his daughter was visiting. She was the real target.

    Nonsense. I suggest you read John Helmer’s book

    SKRIPAL IN PRISON – THE FIRST BOOK TO REPORT THE TRUTH

    • 回复: @Gerard1234
  4. Sean 说:

    Skirpal was doubtless in the process of drinking himself to death as is par for the course for Russians in late middle age . But if they wanted to kill , Skripal was meeting with Russians from the London Embassy, he could have been poisoned like Litvinenko (a few months after he called Putin a paedophile) with a cup of tea. The use of a skin contact nerve agent on the front door knob of the home where the GRU knew his daughter was visiting with him, does not make sense except as a way to kill his daughter, ostensibly in an attempt on his life, but she would not have been collateral damage at all. And all Russians would have got the message.

    • 回复: @Poiuytrewq
  5. Tsigantes 说:

    An article long needed. Especially the (glaring) point about what militaries do i.e.plan for every conceivable contingency re defence and attack. It is truly remarkable that so few Americans understand this.
    谢谢萨克!

  6. Poiuytrewq 说:
    @Sean

    Sean, you are not intellectually equipped to discuss Russia or intelligence topics. Give it up.

    • 同意: Vojkan
    • 谢谢: Alfred
    • 回复: @Sean
  7. vot tak 说:

    I don’t look at either of these 2 celebrity writers as traitors. I see them as flawed historical writers who intertwined fiction with nonfiction. IE: what they wrote, and claim, is not a reliable source of factual information. It’s quite clear their individual biases took precedence over their judgement of what they present as factual material and it is also very clear their biases skewed the results.

    I grew up reading american historians who did this sort of thing ubiquitously and called it history. The use of propaganda and falsehoods in so much of american sourced historical work lead me to consider all american sourced historical work suspect unless collaborated by outside and unconnected sources.

    My point here is that if a source is inaccurate, why waste time with it. Unless one’s purpose is debunking or rebuttal. I know fox news, guardian, cnn and bellingcat are useless for serious news and don’t bother with such sources. They are unreliable. So I simply don’t use them. The same with historical analysis, once a source shows itself to be factually unreliable, I don’t use them. This is true for sources I once thought were accurate, but found later to be not accurate.

    • 同意: FB
  8. Patricus 说:

    Thanks for the thoughtful article. This makes me want to dive into Russia’s modern history.

    • 回复: @Paw
  9. Sean 说:
    @Poiuytrewq

    Putin was a counterintelligence specialist, so his mindset is Смерть шпионам. He probably ordered the death of Litvinenko, and decided to kill Skripal’s daughter as a stratagem similar to that of Trotsky making the families of Tsarist officers hostage.

    Eventually, defectors experience a mental collapse, followed by years of substance abuse and, very often, suicide.

    What is called suicide in the West is in Russia considered relaxation through a ‘mission’ of the type that means Russian men don’t die of cirrhosis, because they don’t live long enough. Skirpal could have been killed by just inviting him back to the land of 酒精类 poisoning. The trouble with Russians is they don’t brew, sell and drink beer like the commercial successful communities of Germans, but instead swill down litres of vodka, which is why a quarter of all Russian men die before they reach their mid-fifties. Igor Sergun was only 59. Igor Korobov his successor as head of the GRU was a methuselah at 62 when he died discouraged a few months after the Skripal operation. He should have sent the Russian anti terrorist squad to England with orders to protect Skripal then they would have killed him, like they killed hundreds of innocent men women and children in the Moscow theatre siege and Beslan school siege though their ‘sledgehammers not only can be used for cracking nuts but that is what sledgehammers are designed to do’ mentality.

    Anatoly Golitsyn and his wife Svetlana at Coconut Grove in Los Angeles (1961)

    This is why Putin needs to instill worry (in those toying with the idea of selling information to the West) about what would happen to their families; he does not think exile in the West is a deterrent to Russians: more like an added attraction. The Saker has many similarities to Golitsyn, and those who believe the Saker are being duped by him because they are mentally weak like JJ Angleton.

    • 巨魔: bluedog, refl
  10. John Regan 说:

    Alexander Solzhenitsyn is very relevant as a thinker even today. He was, if anything, an even more trenchant and insightful critic of liberal democracy and capitalism than he was of Soviet Communism. Any Western dissident who has not read his Harvard commencement speech, for example, should do so.

    https://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/alexandersolzhenitsynharvard.htm

    In fact, this was what convinced me that he was the real deal, and not just another cheap money-grabber or CIA asset. When he came to the West, he did not preach to the choir. He started criticizing 在水底采捕业协会(UHA)的领导下, degeneracy and tyranny, just as he had with the ones he had experienced at home. Solzhenitsyn wanted to tell the truth, not to please people.

    Incidentally, his novels are part of the great literature of the world. In my opinion, Saker is quite right about 红轮, although it’s sadly underrated at least in the West.

    However, this article makes far too little of one of Solzhenitsyn’s most important works, 一起200年, which is only briefly mentioned. This is without doubt one of his bravest as well as most valuable efforts, the culmination of his relentless quest for accurate history. Furthermore, given how its contents have played a large part in the demonization campaign against him, it is surprising that it should not be examined in more detail here.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_Hundred_Years_Together

    • 同意: Robjil, anarchyst
  11. John Regan 说:

    By contrast, Suvorov/Rezun always struck me as exactly the sort of publicity hound Saker describes. “Icebreaker” and its sequels were largely sensationalist books, more style than substance. It’s quite fair of academic historians to deprecate them on that account.

    However, even if they are ultimately unconvincing, they did perform a great public service in bringing the Soviet preventive war controversy (which is an interesting interpretation that actually has much to be said for it) to wider attention. That made it possible for other, more serious historians to examine the matter in depth, if only through the excuse that they were refuting the “Evil Nazi Apologist” Suvorov. (Much as happened with the British historian A. J. P. Taylor and his book on the origins of World War II, if anyone now remembers the controversies surrounding that.)

    So, Suvorov deserves a good amount of credit on that account. As a publicist, he has made excellent contributions to world history. As historiography, however, his books were never very good, and have also been superseded by the historians he inspired.

    For those who are interested in the issues he introduced, one might recommend (for example) the books by Gabriel Gorodetsky (“Grand Delusion”), Joachim Hoffmann (“Stalin’s War of Extermination”), Ewan Mawdsley (“Thunder in the East”) and Richard Raack (“Stalin’s Drive to the West”). A more popular account (which Saker probably wouldn’t like, due to its anti-Soviet bias, but sometimes insightful) is “Deathride: Hitler vs. Stalin” by John Mosier. These are all available in English. Unfortunately, many of the best books are written either in German or Russian, and almost never translated.

  12. The reality is that we, Russians, are far more freedom loving than you are, this is why we cannot be occupied and why it is so hard to rule over us.

    “你会知道真相,真相会让你自由。”

    保佑并保存。

  13. Poiuytrewq 说:
    @Sean

    Sean, your attempt at showing knowledge really did not help: it just makes you look even MORE ignorant. I told you – give it up! Besides listing factoids does not make you sound any less clueless anyway, the opposite in fact 😉

    • 回复: @Sean
  14. @Sean

    Nah. Like I said at the time, Putin’s the consummate professional. If he wanted the Srkipals dead, they’d be dead.

  15. Mikhail 说: • 您的网站

    Simply calling Vlasov a traitor is simplistically inaccurate. See:

    https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2019/12/14/czech-russian-relations-and-the-roa-conflicting-historical-narratives/

    Was Mihailovic a traitor? BTW, towards the end of WW II, attempts were made to unite Vlaov’s forces with Mihailovic’s.

  16. Bankotsu 说:
    @Sean

    很明显,张伯伦希望鼓励苏联和纳粹之间的冲突。

    你是完全正确的。

    ……英国保守党政府达成了一个绝妙的主意,他们可以通过让德国和俄罗斯在东欧相互对抗,用一块石头杀死两只鸟。

    就这样,他们觉得两个敌人会僵持不下,或者德国会满足于罗马尼亚的石油和乌克兰的小麦……

    ……为了实施这个让德国东征俄军的计划,需要做三件事:

    (1) 清算位于德国和俄罗斯之间的所有国家;
    (2) 阻止法国兑现与这些国家的联盟; 和
    (3) 欺骗英国人民接受这是解决国际问题的必要的,实际上是唯一的解决方案。

    张伯伦集团在这三件事上都如此成功,以至于他们在成功之列,失败只是因为……”

    http://www.yamaguchy.com/library/quigley/anglo_12b.html
    http://www.carrollquigley.net/books.htm

    • 谢谢: S
    • 回复: @Hans Vogel
    , @ploni almoni
  17. trint 说:

    I found “Two Hunderd Years Together” (German Version) to be even more compelling than “The Gulag Archipelago”, since it irrefutably documents the source of all the evil and misery which Russia was subjected to.

  18. Miro23 说:

    One of the best articles I’ve read on Unz. I don’t know much about Rezun (Suvarov) but I have read Solzhenitsyn’s “The Gulag Archipelago”, “The First Circle” and “Cancer Ward” and agree with Saker.

    The sidebar on the nature of the Soviet state is a great summary/timeline.

    What is crucial to understand here is that each of these six periods generated a very different popular and political culture. Thus, while in the West you often would hear generalizations about “the Soviets”, the truth is that there never once was any one single monolithic Soviet culture.

  19. Sean 说:
    @Poiuytrewq

    In many ways Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s views were typically Russian, as with his Nobel address in which he said that the West had become metastable and must collapse. However, I am of the opinion that collapses come, not from internal processes, but rather losing the competition with other entities. The Soviet Union’s elites lost faith in it because they were unable to keep up, not just with washing machines as with the Nixon–Khrushchev debate (actually a shouting match) but military power. China was supposed to suffer terrible civil unrest that would disrupt its development. Yet there is no sign of the supposed inevitability; nothing succeeds like success over against other countries.

    MOSCOW (Reuters) – Former Russian economy minister Alexei Ulyukayev, accused of extorting a bribe, told a court on Monday he thought a bag holding \$2 million (£1.5 million) in cash which he took from Rosneft chief executive Igor Sechin held a gift of expensive alcohol [15Kg!].

    Free booze, the never ending quest for Russians, but at least they are no longer getting intoxicated on the cooling fluid for MIGs as a Cold War defector pilot alleged was common in his squadron.

    The fate of Ulyukayev shows what what advocates of free-market economics can expect if they try to introduce it into the energy sector, which is where much too many capable Russians are working. Russia is falling further and further behind technologically and the key sector of energy is becoming organisationally decadent as Rosneft controls more and more of it. Russia’s elite are being denied the opportunity to flourish in a free enterprise environment, and there are structural ‘Dutch Disease’ tendencies as well. The Russian elite (the natural elite, not Putin’s cronies) understand that being overtaken by China and relegated to a humiliated position is unnecessary but now inevitable. Russia supplying China is the biggest mistake since Stalin sent Hitler the oil for Barbarossa; this is short term thinking even if the official line is that Russia is getting access to a new market (they only sell the products of their extraction industries). China refuses to participate in nuclear arms reduction talks leaving Russia to be pressured by the USA. is now making for itself everything they were getting from the post Soviet rustbelt. Russian Bear as milch cow.

    The style of thinking that led JJ Angleton to be impressed by Anatoly Golitsyn is the same that believes the Saker’s wild speculations. Not all Russian emigres are clever and capable people held back by stultifying over centralisation in their homeland; Golitsyn was reprimanded for his sladash ways in the USSR, found it much easier to fool the CIA supposedly master of counterintel because he told Angleton what he wanted to hear. The Saker tells Americans that their country is rotting from the head down, and those of a conspiratorial caste of mind believe him. Like a Cold War relic leading Russia to disaster, Saker cannot see China except through the prism of Russia’s antagonistic relationship with the West.

    • 回复: @Zarathustra
  20. S 说:

    Suvorov’s thesis in 破冰船, as described by Wiki, is just about identical to the thesis of Guido Preparata in his book Conjuring History . Preparata, though, has it that it is the Capitalist US/UK that was doing this, rather than the Communist Soviet Union.

    Preparata, like Suvorov, got a lot of criticism for writing what he did.

    However, it doesn’t have to be a case of one being right, and the other wrong, as both thesis can be correct.

    If a person looks at Capitalism and Communism as a Hegelian Dialectic, I submit a broadly controlled and guided one since 1776 and 1789, that their actions closely parallel each other shouldn’t be too surprisong. Gaining control of Germany, the center of power upon continental Europe, would be the ulterior motive for both ideology’s adherents.

    In theory, closely paralleling Capitalism and Communism should be wholly equal players as they march toward synthesis in the formation of a global super state/empire, and their creation of the new Multi-cultural Man.

    However, as this dialectic is manmade, and not naturally occurring, or spontaneous, and London has historically been it’s arbiter (and creator) since it’s late 18th century beginnings, it would make sense that the US/UK would have the edge and beat out Stalin in WWII in pushing Germany into doing it’s greatest harm to the Communist Soviet Union, rather than to the Capitalist US/UK. This would also explain the US/UK consolidation of its control over the whole of Germany, while pushing Russia ever eastward and out of Europe.

    Should things continue as they are, it would seem London (and now New York) along with powerful elements of Anglo-Saxon and Jewish elites, and their hangers on, and others involved to lesser extents, will come out on top when the world state/empire is formed.

    It’s not over until the fat lady sings, though, and the best laid plans of mice and men and all that.

    ..Stalin planned to use Nazi Germany as a proxy (the “Icebreaker”) against the West. For this reason, Stalin provided significant material and political support to Adolf Hitler, while at the same time preparing the Red Army to “liberate” the whole of Europe from Nazi occupation.

    https://archive.org/details/ConjuringHitler/mode/2up

    • 回复: @Hans Vogel
    , @Ron Unz
    , @S
  21. You have to be an utterly innumerate retard to believe that the Soviet policies led to the death of 66 million people!! That is more people dead than WW2!! Hello if that was true there would be no Russia today just a giant wasteland, no people, no industry, nothing, do you think that the rest of the world wouldn’t have noticed this catastrophic dieoff. How stupid do you have to be to believe in such retarded crap?

    • 同意: FB
  22. Sam J. 说:

    I’ve read and enjoyed most of the non-fiction books of both authors. Thanks a great deal for writing this essay as it puts ideas in order and gives me insight into ideas that I didn’t even know existed. It’s very impressive as a map to understanding what was going on.

    If you consider total deaths, the Bolshevik war, babies not born, executions, death from overwork it’s not impossible that Solzhenitsyn’s numbers might not be too far off.

    “…Did Rezun successfully prove his case?…”

    There’s a lot of facts and conjecture in his book “The Chief Culprit: Stalin’s Grand Design to Start World War II” but what impresses me most as making the case is the actual equipment packages that Stalin ordered to fight with. It was mostly offensive in nature. Over and over Suvorov gives the numbers of mostly offensive equipment numbers being built and also gives the numbers for and orders stopped for more defensive weapons. That there were plans for attack means nothing as you say but actual production of weapon systems means something. One of these was the immense numbers of paratroopers equipped for. If you read the book and pay attention to the equipment packages produced you can not help but be impressed by this detail.

    • 回复: @nokangaroos
  23. Hans Vogel 说:
    @Bankotsu

    It is all to do with the 19th-century “Great Game,” the Anglo-Russian rivalry over dominance of the Eurasian landmass. Halford MacKinder in 1904 provided an academic justification of England’s subsequent anti-German and anti-Russian policies.

  24. Hans Vogel 说:
    @S

    You’re right! And then there is also Erkki Hautamäki: Finland in the Eye of the Storm, in which he sustains there was an English-Russian agreement (Churchill-Stalin Pact) to attack Germany in the spring of 1940.

    As for Preparata: his academic career was destroyed as a punishment for writing his dissertation Conjuring Hitler. So much for academic freedom in the “West!”

    • 回复: @Armaggedon
    , @S
  25. According to estimates by exiled 统计学教授 IA Kurganov

    As someone said there are lies, damn lies and statistics – this professor should be fired for such mind numbing incompetence and intellectual dishonesty, seriously why is there such a whiff of crackpottery surrounding Russian intellectuals?

  26. Truth3 说:

    Once again the Faker Saker utilizes his not quite talented enough sophistry to obfuscate and misdirect.

    If he wasn’t such an insufferable asshole in doing so his handlers would probably throw six shekels his way.

    Stalin clearly intended attacking Germany in July 1941.

    To ignore the numerous facts that can only point to that truth is truly absurd.

    The Red Army dispositions in the Bialystok Bulge… Zhukov’s attack proposal… the extensive Stavka War Games of 1941 that only can be described as offensive… Stalin’s two speeches on May 5 to apparatchiks and cadets… the mountain of actions that can only be described as preparing to attack Germany… are all ignored in this piece of shit thrown on the table by Faker.

    Mr. Unz… dump this clown.

    • 同意: kikl
    • 回复: @Truth3
  27. Truth3 说:
    @Truth3

    Excerpt of the May 5 Stalin speeches… from David Irving’s Hitler’s War… you can find it right here on https://www.unz.com/book/david_irving__hitlers-war/...

    New tank models, the Mark 1 and 3, are on their way; these are excellent tanks, whose armour can withstand 76-millimetre shells. In the near future there will also be a new tank graced with my own name…Our war plan is ready, we have built the airfields and landing grounds, and the front-line aircraft are already there. Everything has been done by way of clearing out the rear areas: all the foreign elements have been removed. It follows that over the next two months we can begin the fight with Germany…We have to take our revenge for Bulgaria and Finland.

    • 回复: @Truth3
  28. 这些都是谎言。

    Luckily, all the tales about German atrocities are true.

    相信我!

  29. Bukowski 说:

    我读过苏沃洛夫/雷尊的《罪魁祸首》,我同意他的观点,即苏联将在 1941 年进攻德国。斯大林在 1941 年的一次演讲中明确指出苏联即将进行进攻性战争。
    http://www.fpp.co.uk/online/03/04/Stalin_plans.html
    直接从马嘴里出来! 顺便说一下,Suvorov/Rezun 并不是唯一一个说斯大林会这样做的作者。 还有许多其他人,包括大卫·欧文、伊戈尔·布尼奇、约翰·莫西尔、康斯坦丁·普列沙科夫、马克·索罗宁等
    https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=7999

    • 同意: kikl
  30. Armaggedon 说:
    @Hans Vogel

    The “pact” in 1940 was Operation Pike and it was not with Stalin. Churchill hated the communists so much that Operation Unthinkable too was elaborated.

    Please stop reporting lies as truth. It is obvious that in 1941 CCCP was not ready for war.

    Only have a look at the reason of Operation Pike, and you will stop reporting Hautamäki’s lie.

    • 回复: @Hans Vogel
  31. Imparfait 说:

    Article très subtil qui masque une énigme historique, le fameux traité Germano-Soviétique et ses clauses secrètes, cela démontre que l’histoire ne peut en aucun cas être compris sous un seul poins de vue, il faut la pluralité des poins de vue et Antony Sutton avec ses deux livres sur l’Allemagne et la Russie ( Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution (1974, 1999)
    Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler (1976, 1999) ) montre bien que l’on bien affaire à une histoire beaucoup plus complexe qui confirme les hypothèses de Viktor Suvorov dans son livre : Le Brise-Glace, Orban, 1989. Une autre hypothèse toutes les citations des dirigeants soviétiques qui émaille les têtes de chapitre de ce livre sont tels fausses ?
    C’est une question qui mérite d’être poser avant de faire un procès à cet auteur?
    Quand a Alexander Solzhenitsyn après avoir lue presque sa totalité de ses ouvrages, ce n’est pas un vieux Russe qui parle a travers ces écrits, mais bien un Russe par la souffrance qui a endurer qui à transmuté sa souffrance en espérance qu’un jour la Russie sorte de l’Enfer. Le dernier livre qui a écrit la Russie sous l’avalage montre est un appel à l’âme du peuple Russe à renaître et à préparer un nouveau avenir. La question qui se pose es que la Russie le veut?

    • 同意: kikl
  32. @Sam J.

    The “Suvorov hypothesis” dovetails well with contemporaneous German accounts and what is common knowledge in military circles.
    – It is impossible for an air force to lose over 2000 planes in one day unless struck in an attack posture.
    – The comments on the BT-7 and T-34 tanks and especially the W-6 diesel engine being the most advanced in the world are correct.
    – The railcars full of Central European maps were there, and Soviet commanders complaining about lack of Russian ones were common.
    – Much has been made of the glossaries, but they amount to little; I have a
    German(-Russian) and an American(-German) one, and they are hilarious (“Where is your Kommissar/Ortsgruppenleiter/whatever?”).

    So far, so simple. Anybody could have cobbled that together in a few weeks.
    However I´m not too sure about the central part of his argument, the fabled
    “ten airborne divisions”. Known is as much as the Soviets did regiment-size winter landings with heavy equipment in 1928, so they sure had the know-how …

  33. Truth3 说:
    @Truth3

    From the Military publication in Russia militera.lib.ru…

    In the course of the operational-strategic games held after the December 1940 meeting of the Red Army’s senior command in January 1941, it was revealed that the Soviet offensive on the fortified area of ​​East Prussia would most likely fail. Therefore, in the updated strategic deployment plan of March 11, 1941, preference was finally given to the main attack in the south-west direction, supported by the invasion of Romania. It was noted: “The deployment of the main forces of the Red Army in the West with the grouping of the main forces against East Prussia and in the Warsaw direction causes serious fears that the struggle on this front may lead to protracted battles.”

  34. Guilty of not having read everything on the list 😀

    I found Solzhenitsyn a bit too Russian for my refined Volga German tastes –
    more Tolstoi than Dostojewskij.
    However his idea that meaningful social change only accrues from lost wars does merit broader consideration.

    So should one read traitors? Most definitely yes.
    As Wittgenstein said of his own, the value is not in the writing but in what you take away from it.

  35. refl 说:

    The truth is that history, ALL history, very much including our recent history, is chock full with myths, generalizations, simplifications, rumors and, most of all, lies.

    That is the starting point for all revisionist history.
    But one thing has to be added here: As the leading international media are owned by the Anglozionists, as anglophone historical writing is the gold standard of worlwide scholarship and as the language of international discorse is necessarily english, the Anglozionist western empire necessarily has the edge in spreading its myths.
    This even makes me wonder, why the current propaganda they are spreading is just that bad.

    My perspective is, that while for Russia there is today a relevant counterforce that can correct the black propaganda of a whole century, I do not see anything like this for the other victim of Anglozionist black propaganda, which is Germany – I cannot imagine a writer to correct the sick lies about the relations between Germans and Jews, or for the serious – though possibly wrong ideas behind Germany’s warfare in WWII.
    More exactly, the books are even there, but to discuss them openly is next to impossible.
    The German public is the first to indulge in the most intense selfhatred, so much so that once the truth sinks in, it has to be the end of the world as we know it.

  36. Saggy 说: • 您的网站

    Question for Saker or anyone familiar with most of Solzhenitsyn’s work … What are the chances that this quote is accurate? Is it consistent with other statements he made?

    你必须明白,接管俄罗斯的主要布尔什维克不是俄罗斯人。 他们讨厌俄罗斯人。 他们憎恨基督徒。 在种族仇恨的驱使下,他们折磨和屠杀了数百万俄罗斯人,而没有一丝人的悔意。 它不能被夸大。 布尔什维克主义犯下了有史以来最大规模的人类屠杀。 世界上大多数人对这一巨大罪行一无所知和漠不关心,这一事实证明全球媒体掌握在肇事者手中。

    • 回复: @Truth3
    , @Robjil
  37. Stupid Americans, buying into the lie Putin is a nationalist who loves all people, even Christians and is the most moral leader in the world. It’s time for a wake up pill. Quit buying the lies.
    WILL VLADIMIR PUTIN SAVE THE WORLD?


    视频链接

    • 回复: @Wavelength
    , @FB
  38. Truth3 说:
    @Saggy

    Ask David Duke… Solzhenitsyn spoke these words to him.

  39. Robjil 说:
    @Saggy

    这是准确的。

    Look at what is happening today in the Middle East.

    Mad Albright said 500000 Iraqi children dying of ZUS sanctions is OK.

    Anyone is an Amalek who gets in the way of Zion uber alles.

    It is the way it is and still is.

    Freedom of the press is the only way to end this madness since 12.23.1913.

  40. Hart 说:

    Rezun, Icebreaker Hitler pre-empted Stalin.

    请解释原因 H. Liddell Hart in his interviews with German generals:

    The German generals talk

    https://www.amazon.co.uk/German-generals-talk-Berkley-Books/dp/B0007ESISK/

    Which was revised as:

    Other Side of the Hill: Germany’s Generals, Their Rise and Fall, with Their Own Account of Military Events, 1939-45

    https://www.amazon.co.uk/Other-Side-Hill-Germanys-Generals/dp/0330253417/

    These generals never hint at any of this 废话.

    It is pure shameless invention to please Rezun’s new masters.

    Consider the following, does it sound like Germany was in a rush to invade Russia ? Yes, there was a small window of time – after the winter thaw and before the next winter freeze. That was part of what motivated Germany. Stalin’s imminent invasion is complete B.S.

    [更多]

    Hitler’s gamble in Russia failed because he was not bold enough. He wobbled for weeks at the critical phase, losing time he could never regain. After that he ruined himself, and Germany, because he could not bring himself to cut his losses. There, in a nutshell, is the sum of the evidence I gathered from his generals.

    这里是最令人吃惊的。 拯救俄罗斯的最重要的不是她的现代进步,而是她的落后。 如果苏维埃政权给了她一个可以媲美西方国家的道路系统,她可能很快就会被淹没。 德国机械化部队被她的道路状况所阻碍。

    Preliminary to the issues of the Russian campaign itself is the question whether the Greek campaign caused a vital delay in its launching. British Government spokesmen have claimed that the despatch of General Wilson’s force to Greece, though it ended in a hurried evacuation, was justified because it produced six weeks’ postponement of the invasion of Russia.

    It is of historical interest, however, to discover whether the campaign actually had such an indirect and unforeseen effect. The most definite piece of evidence in support of this lies in the fact that Hitler had originally ordered preparations for the attack on Russia to be completed by May 15th, whereas at the end of March the tentative date was deferred about a month, and then fixed for June 22nd. Field-Marshal von Rundstedt told me how the preparations of his Army Group had been hampered by the late arrival of the armoured divisions that had been employed in the Balkan campaign, and that this was the key-factor in the delay, in combination with the weather.

    But it was not the Greek campaign that caused the postponement. Hitler had already reckoned with that commitment when the invasion of Greece was inserted in the 1941 programme, as a preliminary to the invasion of Russia. The decisive factor in the change of timing was the unexpected coup d’état in Yugo-Slavia that took place on March 27th, when General Simovich and his confederates overthrew the Government that had just previously committed Yugo-Slavia to a pact with the Axis. Hitler was so incensed by the upsetting news as to decide, that same day, to stage an overwhelming offensive against Yugo-Slavia.

    • 同意: Miro23
  41. Solzhenitsyn was a giant and he helped to bring down the USSR.

    His claim that 66 million people were slaughtered is no more difficult to believe than the six million jews that were lampshaded by the most evil man in history.

    “The Gulag Archipeligo” is a must read…..the brutality and stupidity of the communists is laid bare for all to see. The book is unforgettable, hard to get through, but worth every minute of effort.

  42. Hart 说:

    Also, in above mentioned book, 一字不漏 is mentioned about vast Russian supplies being seized by the German invaders.

    Seems that Rezun was pranking his patrons: “How dumb are these people ? Will they believe anything ?”

  43. Adûnâi 说:

    > “It is my opinion that over its history the Soviet regime changed rather often and rather dramatically.”

    This recap of historical periods is something people generally do not do. They think in black-and-white terms (not races). It reminds me of how gamers rave about the Activision-Blizzard merger in 2008, but the history of Blizzard in fact has encompassed quite a few epochs in 1991-2020.

    > “Does anybody even remember Chernenko?”

    My mom does, she says her step-dad called him “Chernushkin”.

    > “which goes something like this: “Russians have never known freedom and they don’t care about it. Russians have a slave mentality and all they want is some kind of dictator (Czar or Commissar – makes no difference to them) to rule over them with an iron fist“”

    Does it not require a strong will to oppose liberalism that promises freedom and with it – moral decay and mortal decadence? Do you not need freedom to obey?

    > “We all know about 9/11, but that is hardly a unique example.”

    Please, don’t tell me that you believe in conspiracy theories surrounding 9/11.

    > “And then, there are the much more serious cases, including the historical truth about the so-called “Holocaust”. Or, who carries the responsibility for starting WWII?”

    Germany started it by foolishly attacking Poland.

    > “cost us 66.7 million people”

    Why did Solzhenitsyn say nothing of the evils of the modern genocidal Russian Judaeo-Christian regime under Yeltsin and Putin?

    > “Sergei Lukianenko”

    My favourite modern Russian writer is Viktor Pelevin. Especially his later works (not the earliest!).

    > “During the Soviet period the Solzhenitsyn haters liked to refer to him as “Solzhenitser” (hinting that he might be a Jew). Nowadays, Solzhenitsyn haters in Russia refer to him as SoLZHEnitsyn (the letters “lzhe” means “lie” in Russian, suggesting that he is a liar). That tells you all you need to know about the degree of sophistication these folks are capable of…”

    Russians are notorious for being the Niggers of the White race and unable to conduct a rational discussion. Check out this childish Little Russian video by Toronto TV aimed against one YouTuber supersharij – it is full of “funny” in-group jokes and nothing else! Nothing else!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-__D9Biw7cs

    > “famous book, “Icebreaker” (“Ледокол”) in which Rezun, writing as “Viktor Suvorov” claimed”

    You missed two commas here.

    > “Depends whom you ask; due the hatred”

    介词 on and , respectively, are missing.

    > “Khrushchev was the worst, most immoral, incompetent, hypocritical, inept and otherwise despicable Soviet leader ever”

    Whom did Khrushchev betray? Was it not Stalin? Did he not betray Stalin just like the Russian people would later go on to betray their own Soviet Union, just as America betrayed its mother Germania, just as Clovis betrayed his Germanic gods?

    • 回复: @Wavelength
  44. @Robert Dolan

    It is the Soviet equivalent of Night and The Diary of Anne Frank

  45. Desert Fox 说:

    Have the book The Gulag Archipelago and refer to it in regards to what is happening here in the ZUS.

    • 同意: Robert Dolan
  46. Trinity 说:

    Hmm, I will have to find out if Andrei Vlasov is related in some way to the great 1960’s Soviet olympic weightlifter and writer, Yury Vlasov. Yury entered politics after retiring from olympic weightlifting but wasn’t nearly as successful in the political field as he was at hoisting heavy iron over his head. The bespectacled Vlasov was legendary in the sport of weightlifting, holder of both gold and silver medals in olympic weightlifting in the 1960 and 1964 olympic games. He was certainly not the stereotypical meathead. He cited the Jew in several of his writings and perhaps that is why he never gained much mileage in his political career.

  47. Robjil 说:
    @Robert Dolan

    He never said 66 million. He said millions. That 66 million is not his words. I never read that in his “200 years together, Jews and Russians” book. It is always millions were tortured and slaughtered by the Amalek obsessed Jews who took over Russia in 1917.

    Here is a reprint of a quote from Saggy in #36. It sums up the thesis of Solzhenitsyn’s “200 years together book. I noticed that Solzhenitsyn published this book in 2001/02. Perhaps, he was warning the world about nine eleven, another Zion psych ops.

    你必须明白,接管俄罗斯的主要布尔什维克不是俄罗斯人。 他们讨厌俄罗斯人。 他们憎恨基督徒。 在种族仇恨的驱使下,他们折磨和屠杀了数百万俄罗斯人,而没有一丝人的悔意。 它不能被夸大。 布尔什维克主义犯下了有史以来最大规模的人类屠杀。 世界上大多数人对这一巨大罪行一无所知和漠不关心,这一事实证明全球媒体掌握在肇事者手中。

  48. Hart 说:

    Solzhenitsyn concludes his essay against Russian “liberals” and “democrats” (in the Russian meaning of the word) by the following words: “we thought you were fresh, but you are still the same“.

    参考:

    The Leopard Paperback by Giuseppe di Lampedusa

    The [lad’s} eyes began smiling again. “For the King, yes, of course. But which King?” The lad had one of those sudden serious moods which made him so mysterious and so endearing. “Unless we ourselves take a hand now, they’ll foist a republic on us. If we want things to stay as they are, things will have to change. D’you understand?” Rather moved, he embraced his uncle.

  49. I wonder why SAKER leaves KGB defector Major Anatoliy Golitsyn, author of 新的谎言 and Perestroika欺骗 off his list of “traitors”?

    Could it be that Golitsyn’s claim that Communism faked its own death in 1991 is true? Could it be the Berlin Wall was torn down and the Warsaw Pact dissolved for reasons of deception? Could it be Putin is in all actuality an old ex-KGB party member still loyal to Soviet style Communism and is playing a very good game of perestroika deception? Could it be these truth’s don’t fit the narratives we are being bombarded with now?

    Who is Vladimir Putin, and why does he behave the way he does? Much has been written, but little has been revealed. It has been said that Putin represents a return to Bolshevik rule. But what does this mean? Part of the answer may be found in “The Bolshevik Code,” the operational value system of the Soviet leadership before the fall of communism in 1991. Putin is a 21st Century incarnation of The Bolshevik Code, and his conduct is better understood with reference to this Code.

    https://www.europeaninstitute.org/index.php/251-european-affairs/ea-april-2015/2017-perspectives-understanding-putin-the-bolshevik-code-provides-clue

    Another “traitor” left off of SAKERS list is Yuri Bezmenov, also a Soviet defector who was trying to warn us of the “deception” game.

    People worship at the alter of 今日俄罗斯 (RT) where even the likes of Ron Paul goes to pronounce America bad, Russia good on a 24/7 basis, yet nobody ever questions the fact that it is nothing more than a state owned propaganda mill for pushing the Russian(Soviet) agenda.

    • 回复: @Robjil
    , @Hart
  50. sally 说:

    What bothers me about this conversation is that everyone waits on the power of the leaders of the nation state to decide and to act.. What the hell there are millions of citizens who should be a part of these decisions..

    The nation state system is responsible for the many wars.. Its a failure that should be completely outlawed and eliminated from its current position as nemesis to mankind.

    Clearly the oil and gas owned, petrodollar controlled, nation state system put Germany into a vice, and tried its best to squeeze the life out of it.. German people rose to defend.. their identity <= what they should have done was round up all of the leaders of all of the nation states and put them on a one way rocket to the moon. .

    Humanity is menaced by the power of the nation state in the wrong hands. If does not matter if the victim is Germany, Russia, Iran, China,, Netherlands, Austria, Hungry or Venezuela the result is the same, the humanity captured within the nation state container will be made to suffer the consequences brought on by the unilateral decision of a very few people. Its those few people who are to made to leave the earth, not the people who are trying to live a descent life.

  51. Robjil 说:
    @Johnny Walker Read

    In Yuri’s video at the end, he sums up what makes a nation strong. It is believing in something abstract like a religious concept. The lack of any religious concept destroys nations.

    That is not deception. It is reality. Zionists have a extremely strong religion obsession that they carried for centuries. Sadly for humanity, it has worked wonders for them. Purim themed wars in the middle East since 1991 is one example of it at work.

    WWI and WWII was the work of Zionist Jewish Advisors. The names of them are available in “The controversy of Zion” by Douglas Reed.

    Russia of today does have a strong love for the people of its land. That is the “national abstract religious concept” that makes Russia strong today. ZUS rulers are doing the opposite. They are hating the history and people who made the USA, invading or coup-ing other nations and inviting conquered peoples in.

    • 回复: @Johnny Walker Read
  52. @Sean

    Please! Do not be so pessimistic. Russia has enough money to buy the newest and best machinery from Germany and Switzerland. Russia is probably already building up its consumer oriented industries.

  53. @Robjil

    Russia is not out friend, just as Israel is not our friend. They are both doing all they can to see America destroyed. Quit buying the “Putin is a hero” B.S.

    • 哈哈: bluedog
    • 回复: @Robjil
    , @Desert Fox
    , @John Regan
    , @FB
  54. Hart 说:
    @Johnny Walker Read

    The account of a real defector:

    https://www.amazon.com/Deadly-Illusions-Dossier-Reveals-Stalins/dp/0517588501

    A loyal, effective, unapologetic, Soviet operator even while in exile in the US.

    Soviet master spy Alexander Orlov (1895-1973), who defected to the U.S. in 1952 to denounce Stalin’s crimes, was eulogized in the U.S. Senate for helping America fight the Cold War. But this astonishing report–an unprecedented collaboration between British historian Costello and former KGB officer Tsarev, press consultant to the Russian Intelligence Service–persuasively argues that Orlov played a game of wits with the CIA and FBI, feeding them half-truths and trivialities while concealing the identities of former colleagues and Soviet agents he had recruited. Using a trove of declassified Russian intelligence files and FBI and CIA documents, the authors establish that Orlov masterminded the notorious Cambridge spy ring and the recruitment of British moles Kim Philby, Guy Burgess and Donald Maclean. They also reveal that KGB agents held secret meetings with Orlov in 1969 and 1971, inviting him to return to Moscow as a hero.

    On the evidence of his dossier, moreover, Orlov was considered a hero of the Soviet Union well before his death in 1973.

  55. Robjil 说:
    @Johnny Walker Read

    Russia is not doing anything to the US.

    ZUS is doing many things against Russia.

    There is no USA anymore. It is ZUS.

    USA has not existed since 12.23.1913.

    Russia at least is trying to get back its sovereignty with Putin.

    This is why the widespread hatred of Putin in ZUS led lands.

    • 同意: Robert Dolan
    • 回复: @Adûnâi
  56. Desert Fox 说:
    @Johnny Walker Read

    Russia has returned to being a Christian nation and the ZUS has become a diabolical, demonic, draconian, satanic enemy of Christians, this is the zionist satanic plan to destroy Christianity and America!

    • 同意: Robjil
    • 回复: @Johnny Walker Read
  57. Ron Unz 说:
    @S

    Suvorov’s thesis in Icebreaker, as described by Wiki, is just about identical to the thesis of Guido Preparata in his book Conjuring History . Preparata, though, has it that it is the Capitalist US/UK that was doing this, rather than the Communist Soviet Union.

    Well, I found the Preparata book almost totally worthless, filled with conspiratorial theories that had virtually no evidence behind them. Just because someone comes up with an outlandish historical hypothesis doesn’t mean it’s necessarily correct.

    By contrast, the Suvorov Hypothesis seems quite likely to me, and backed by an enormous quantity of persuasive circumstantial evidence. Moreover, the fact that it’s been almost totally ignored by virtually all Anglosphere MSM organs for three decades hardly supports the silly claim that it was fabricated in service of the CIA or MI6. A few people had repeatedly claimed that Glantz effectively rebuts it, so I read the Glantz book and found that this was entirely untrue, with Glantz almost totally ignoring Suvorov’s claims, and just repeating the conventional story of Barbarossa that I’d seen 100 previous times.

    So, overall, I’d argue that it’s far more likely than not that Suvorov is more or less correct in this analysis of the circumstances leading up to the outbreak of the Russo-German phase of the war:

    https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-when-stalin-almost-conquered-europe/

    • 哈哈: FB
    • 回复: @Truth3
    , @Begemot
    , @L.K
    , @S
  58. AnonFromTN 说:

    Reading is always a good idea. Believing everything you read is a bad idea.

  59. Truth3 说:
    @Ron Unz

    All Nail and no Thumb when Unz swings the Hammer.

  60. Alfred 说:
    @Sean

    Putin … probably ordered the death of Litvinenko, and decided to kill Skripal’s daughter as a stratagem similar to that of Trotsky making the families of Tsarist officers hostage.

    Not only can you read the mind of Putin but you tell us that he also kills his putative hostages. Remarkable!

    Am I to understand that Skripal and his daughter are imprisoned like Julian Assange for their own safety? 🙂

    The book I referred to above points out many of the glaring inconsistencies in the official, every changing, narrative. A sort of MH-17 on steroids.

    You are an embarrassment. Please take your drivel elsewhere!

    • 同意: Desert Fox, Nonny Mouse
  61. Begemot 说:
    @Ron Unz

    Glantz … just repeating the conventional story of Barbarossa that I’d seen 100 previous times.

    If all you have is the truth to state, then you are bound to repeat yourself.

    • 回复: @kikl
    , @Ron Unz
  62. kikl 说:
    @Begemot

    “If all you have is the truth to state, then you are bound to repeat yourself.”

    Well, if he is in possession of the truth, then why didn’t he address the main arguments supporting the theory that Barbarossa was a preemptive attack? Knowledge is not acquired by repeating the purported truth like a religious dogma. It is acquired by adressing arguments.

    I recommend this book because it is written by a former General of the communist East German Army who was trained in Russia.

    In particular, the military analysis of the line-up and concentration of the USSR’s troops is outstanding.

  63. Ron Unz 说:
    @Begemot

    If all you have is the truth to state, then you are bound to repeat yourself.

    Maybe you should actually read my linked article. Here’s what I said about Glantz:

    Although purporting to refute Suvorov, the author seemed to ignore almost all of his central arguments, and merely provided a rather dull and pedantic recapitulation of the standard narrative I had previously seen hundreds of times, laced with a few rhetorical excesses denouncing the unique vileness of the Nazi regime. Most ironically, Glantz emphasizes that although Suvorov’s analysis of the titanic Russo-German military struggle had gained great attention and considerable support among both Russian and German scholars, it had been generally ignored in the Anglo-American world, and he almost seems to imply that it can probably be disregarded for that reason. Perhaps this attitude reflected the cultural arrogance of many American intellectual elites during Russia’s disastrous Yeltsin Era of the late 1990s.

    https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-when-stalin-almost-conquered-europe/

    • 回复: @Begemot
  64. Epigon 说:

    Soviet Union was preparing for an offensive war in Spring of 1942.
    The introduction of new frontline tank models (A-43/T-34M, KV-3, T-50), fighters, bombers, artillery, small arms and the training for the expanded RKKA were all scheduled to end by Winter of 1941/1942.

    The now famous T-34 was meant to be a stopgap prototype run, discontinued in July-November of 1941 to make way for definite version.

    Polikarpov biplanes and obsolete fleet of light tanks and tankettes of 1930s? Riiiight, sounds about right for offensive of Summer 1941

    • 回复: @Truth3
  65. L.K 说:

    造酒者:

    So, OF COURSE, the Soviets did have plans for war against Germany, just as Russia today has a plan to destroy the US (which also has such a plan of its own!).

    Typical sophistry by the Saker. Or is it just plain ignorance of all the facts? Doubtful since the Saker pretends to have at least read “The Chief Culprit”. Of course, what proves Stalin was planning an offensive against Germany in the summer of 1941 is not merely the war plans themselves, but the FACT they were clearly acted upon, including the nature of the gigantic and OFFENSIVE Soviet troop deployments near the Soviet-German demarcation line.

    Already in 1967 in the USSR, the decorated Soviet war veteran Major-General Petr Grigorenko, who had fought in the battles of Khalkhin Gol and later commanded troops in the early battles following 22 June 1941 against the Germans, submitted an article to the Soviet journal Voprosy istorii KPSS, pointing out that Soviet military forces vastly outnumbered German forces in the summer of 1941 and that the Red Army deployments could only be explained by the Soviet regime attempt at a surprise attack on the Germans.

    Former Red Amy Major-General Petr Grigorenko, who commanded troops in initial battles following June 22, 1941, complained in his memoirs that “there could be only one reason for [the heavy deployment of Red Army offensive troops in the West], namely, that these troops were intended for a surprise offensive. In the event of an enemy attack, these troops would already be half encircled. The enemy would only need to deal a few, short blows at the base of our wedge and then encirclement would be complete.”13 Encirclement became the hellish fate for many units of the Red Army in the opening weeks and months of the war.

    资料来源:Albert Weeks,“斯大林的另一场战争”。

    • 同意: Johnny Walker Read
  66. Anyone promoting Solzhenicin and Souvorov aka Rezun should not be considered a serious expert on Soviet union and his opinion on anything USSR russia related should be ignored.
    Here is the man who was not born in the Soviet union and who never lived there dares to express his worthless opinion about the country.
    Considering however who the readers are it is understandable but among public who was born and lived in USSR Sacker would have been considered a clown he is.

    • 回复: @AnonFromTN
  67. E_Perez 说:

    The best arguments for Suvorov comes from military experts:

    Excellence alone cannot explain the stunning advances of the German army. The Soviet forces were superior by an estimated factor of six in every area: troops, aviation, tanks and artillery.
    The Germans could never have entered Soviet territory by more than 50km facing such a tremendous superiority … if the Soviets were in any normal configuration, especially if in defense against the Germans, who Stalin supposedly feared so much.

    But, as Suvorov explains, they were not in defense positions but caught in the middle of an immense offensive build-up, with most military personnel on the move – sitting in trains to the west and their equipment out of reach.

  68. L.K 说:
    @Ron Unz

    Furthermore, focusing only on Suvorov the way the Saker does, a softer target for obvious reasons, while completely ignoring the large body of literature in Russian and German, 2 languages the Saker has command of, available now for nearly 30 years, shows tremendous bad faith. I can find no excuse for such behavior.
    There are many Russian historians, who live in Russia, including academic ones and former soldiers, who have reached the conclusion that the Stalin regime was INDEED in an advanced state of offensive preparations against Germany when Hitler preempted his plans with an offensive of his own.

    For example, Albert Weeks is a US historian & former Professor of International Affairs, fluent in Russian, who has closely followed the Russian historians’ disputes which arose [after the fall of the Soviet Union and the partial opening of archives] over the Stalin regime’s offensive war plans against NS Germany. Despite being very ignorant of the German side, basically repeating the usual anti-Hitler line, professor Weeks nevertheless concedes that several Russian historians and former Red Army and intel veterans have reached the conclusion that Stalin was indeed planning to attack in 1941.
    不仅如此,这些俄罗斯历史学家和军人中的一些人与俄罗斯国防部有/有联系,有些人倾向于亲苏联:

    Nevertheless, what the (Russian)researchers have produced is a pattern of Red Army deployments and concentration of troops along the Soviet western frontier in spring 1941 that strongly suggests that the General Staff and Stalin were planning eventually to get the preemptive jump on the Wehrmacht. The fact that in addition to Russian historians a number of informed ex–Red Army or security officers make this allegation cannot be ignored. As it turned out, of course, the Germans got the jump on the Soviets. ...

    It is significant and worth recognizing that a number of “new” Russian historians are opting for the offensist interpretation as to Stalin’s and the Red Army General Staff’s war planning on the eve of Barbarossa. In the meantime, it is unhelpful to assume, as some Western writers have, that these Russian historians take the positions they do, like the notions proffered so vehemently by émigré Viktor Suvorov, because they blindly hate Stalin or for some other reasons unrelated to the facts and documents that they have collected.

    请注意,一些攻击性说服的历史学家与俄罗斯国防部有关。 其他人(与备受鄙视的苏沃洛夫不同)在他们对事件的解释中表现出亲苏联的倾向。 然而,他们坚持有关斯大林战争计划的冒犯论点。 15
    西方专家和观察者应该注意俄国历史学家的最新发现以及他们对发现的解释。 俄国历史学家说,他们将继续敦促当局开放更多档案,因为他们坚持认为,从1939-41年期间的其他绝密信息将继续被隐藏。 …

    来源:斯大林的另一场战争

    • 同意: Johnny Walker Read
    • 谢谢: John Regan, Vaterland
    • 回复: @Johnny Walker Read
  69. Adûnâi 说:
    @Robjil

    USA has not existed since 12.23.1913.

    What a moronic statement. So you have no problem with the America that gave its Negroes the rights equal to those of the Whites? Only when a big scary bank took power, only then America suddenly became bad?

    And four years later, they entered the war against Germany! Four years! What a great case of swift corruption of an honest innocent nation by a big scary elite!

    And you, of course, take no issue with the fact that American Aryans prayed and still pray to a dead Jewish angel Jesus.

    • 回复: @Robjil
    , @Desert Fox
  70. Robjil 说:
    @Adûnâi

    12.23.1913 was the first Zion century.

    We are in the second Zion century.

    Guess what date that started on?

    12.23.5671 in the Jewish Calendar. In our calendar, it was 9.11. 2001.

    Money talks. Money is the reason WWI happened so soon after the FED was started up.

    Jewish Advisors talked up WWI and WWII. No mercy allowed to Amaleks, anyone who is against Zion.

    Money still is talking. Israel gets a free pass to bomb Gaza and Syria without any “guilt”.

  71. Desert Fox 说:
    @Adûnâi

    In 1913 the zionist banking kabal took over the creation of the US currency which was unconstitutional, and from that point on the currency was created out of thin air and was a debt and interest creation with the zionist bankers benefiting from the debt and interest and this became the template for all the ensuing wars, fought for the bankers, who were the agent provocateurs in every war since the creation of the FED.

    The zionists have ruled America ever since.

    • 同意: Robjil
    • 回复: @Franz
  72. On the Icebreaker thesis — yeah, it’s probably nonsense, and it generally seems to be advanced by advocates of the ‘Saint Hitler’ school.

    Most of the evidence offered simply demonstrates that yes, the Russians did have a war plan, and — go figure — that war plan relied on the principle that the best defense is a good offense.

    However, I’ve never read any convincing evidence that the Russians actually planned to strike in 1941. If anything, that they were so grossly unprepared demonstrates the opposite. After all, an army planning to attack in 1941 would have had to have been ready to go by no later than July or August. If so, how is it that they were so grossly unready by June 22nd? There were masses of artillery — but without trucks to tow it; tanks without fuel, etc. Many of the Soviet Mechanized Corps almost literally collapsed as soon as they started to move. This was not an army that was about to leap into action.

    Now, one interesting theory I’ve read is that Stalin was indeed planning to attack — but in 1942, not 1941. So he was frantically reorganizing and reequipping — but was caught in the middle of it all. Certainly a Red Army left to complete its reorganization and reequipment could have been a far more formidable force by 1942.

    Seen in this light, Stalin’s almost pathological insistence on avoiding any response to German provocations starts to make a great deal of sense. It wasn’t that war wasn’t to happen; it was that it was to happen in accord with Russia’s schedule, not Germany’s.

    • 同意: bluedog
    • 巨魔: L.K
  73. @Desert Fox

    The world has indeed been turned upside down. Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin, a career apparatchik in the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and a loyal agent of the Soviet secret police, the KGB (and head of its successor, the FSB), now not only proclaims himself to be a Christian, but has donned the mantle of global protector of Christianity and morality — to the rejoicing huzzahs of many Christians and conservatives in the West.

    However, before bestowing Defender of the Faith accolades on Vladimir the Pious, we would do well to look carefully behind and beneath the highly contrived Christian image being spun by the Kremlin’s public relations department and gullible Christians with short memories in the West.

    Sadly, the quotations noted are not unique, nor restricted to wild outliers.

    https://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/europe/item/19162-putin-defender-of-christian-faith-and-morality

    I can post this stuff until I’m blue in the face, and I’m sure it will change very few minds on the worship of Putin here at UR. That being said I will leave one more link to evidence it’s all a big, fat LIE. So follow on comrades, like a good little Soviet should.

  74. Saker’s articles always challenge me. I find myself researching names and places he mentions, which leads to even more discoveries.

    To me, that is what a good writer is about. If you read something and it doesn’t challenge you in any way, why read it? The more I read the more I realize just how little I know and how much propaganda is out there.

    If anyone has a good article on the Srebrenica genocide, which would refute the official narrative (which states that almost all the bodies have been identified), please leave me a link. I would like to learn more about that. Saker referenced that as one of many official narratives that is a lie. thx

    • 回复: @Robjil
    , @Anonymous
    , @Mikhail
  75. John Regan 说:
    @Johnny Walker Read

    My perspective: Putin is not our friend, but he is the enemy of at least some of our enemies. Sometimes we have common interests, sometimes not. We should look at any interactions between us pragmatically and dispassionately, according to the situation at hand. That is certainly what he does on his end.

  76. @Bankotsu

    巨魔通常彼此同意。 更复杂的人似乎同意这个标志。

  77. AnonFromTN 说:
    @Sergey Krieger

    Truth be told, the Saker does not pretend to have any first-hand knowledge of Russia or the USSR. His opinions often sound weird to those who have that first-hand knowledge. Not in so many words, but he honestly admits that Solzh’s views are obsolete, the product of the reaction to the first period of Soviet history. I don’t know why he believes that they will ever become relevant. Then again, he is not unique in this, people believed all sorts of ridiculous things for millennia. He demonstrates an unhealthy Putin-worship. Whatever Putin believes does not make it true. His literary perspective is also strange. From artistic standpoint, “One day in life of Ivan Denisovich” is Solzh’s best, even though it is not faithful to the truth. It betrays the fact that Solzh never was in a normal camp where most prisoners were, only in VIP ones. This is consistent with him being an NKVD informer, although does not constitute proof. “August 1914” that the Saker praises is simply a pathetic attempt to ape Tolstoy. Reminds one of the proverbial frog that wanted to be as big as a bull.

    As far as Soviet realities are concerned, the Saker is clearly ignorant and clueless. But there are shades of grey: compared to the ignorance of an average commenter here, he is an expert.

    • 回复: @Dmitry
  78. @Johnny Walker Read

    In all their spare time (when not playing golf or watching old movies) Reagan and George W were clearing brush on the ranch.

  79. Franz 说:
    @Desert Fox

    In 1913 the zionist banking kabal took over the creation of the US currency…

    The zionists have ruled America ever since.

    That’s it. Few want to see it.

    Who has the power of the purse decides everything. It decides the wars, the graft, the fate of the founding race, the fate of relations between women and men, all of it.

    From 1913 on, we gradually ceased to be a Republican Democracy and instead became a Capitalist Plutocracy. The proof is all around everyone. And the butt of jokes among travellers to the States who go back home to real nations.

    • 同意: Desert Fox
    • 回复: @Adûnâi
  80. Desert Fox 说:
    @Johnny Walker Read

    I stand by what I said, and Putin and Russia are saving Syria from the terrorists created and funded by the ZUS and Israel and ZBritain.

    • 回复: @Johnny Walker Read
  81. To ‘The Saker:’

    Have you ever thought of doing a translation of 一起两百年 into English? There still isn’t a decent translation out there, and you would seem to be qualified.

    Within limits, if anyone ever dreamed up a crowd-funding scheme to entice you into this, I’d consider taking part. The work needs to be done.

  82. niceland 说:
    @Colin Wright

    你写了:

    On the Icebreaker thesis — yeah, it’s probably nonsense,

    What follows is argument to the contrary. For Hitler the question wasn’t when Stalin would attack, this year or the next. I bet he was contemplating; when would the enormous Red army in his backyard be ready to fight? It’s clear he struck before that happened. Isn’t that the basis for the Icebreaker thesis?

    • 回复: @Colin Wright
  83. Robjil 说:
    @freedom-cat

    Here is a good article about Bob Baer, the CIA officer that was part of the program to destroy Yugoslavia in the 1990s. He explains how the Srebrenica incident was a created incident to get NATO to dismantle Yugoslavia for ZUS.

    https://katehon.com/940-croats-bosnians-serbs-you-have-been-manipulated-war-was-staged-former-cia-officer.html

    当被问及斯雷布雷尼察时,贝尔说从 1992 年起他再次来到波斯尼亚。 他说,这一次,他们训练了代表刚刚宣布独立的新国家波斯尼亚的军事单位。 斯雷布雷尼察是一个夸张的故事,他说,很多人都被它操纵了。 他说,死亡人数是政治营销的一部分。 他说,他的老板此前曾在美国参议院任职,并多次告诉他,波斯尼亚总有一天会出现大骗局。 贝尔说,就在斯雷布雷尼察事件发生前一个月,他的老板告诉他,这个小镇将在全世界闻名,并指示包括贝尔在内的特工通知媒体。 当贝尔问为什么,他被告知他会看到的。 贝尔说,之后他们接到命令,用新组建的波斯尼亚军队袭击斯雷布雷尼察的房屋和人民。 Baer 说,塞尔维亚人紧随其后,因为他们也得到了报酬并被告知同样的事情。

    Baer said that the deaths in Srebrenica had been due to Bosnians, Serbs and Americans, but the blame was laid at the feet of Serbs. He said that many of the victims had been buried as Muslims and yet they were Serbs or other nationalities. He said that few years back, a friend of his, former CIA employee, currently working in the IMF, had told him that Srebrenica was a product of an agreement between the U.S. government and Bosnian politicians. Srebrenica was sacrificed because after the alleged crimes of Serbs, America had been given a reason to attack.

    • 回复: @freedom-cat
  84. @Sean

    Anything related to the truth about Putin, the now perceived “和平王子” and supporter of all things moral will not be tolerated in this Soviet style chat. Keep it up and you will find yourself imprisoned in the digital “古拉格群岛” here in UR comments section. Be very, very careful comrade, and chose your words wisely.

  85. @Desert Fox

    It’s all part of the globalist plan to destabilize and then carve up Syria.

    During a six-hour meeting at the Black Sea resort of Sochi on Tuesday, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Russian President Vladimir Putin effectively carved up northeastern Syria between themselves, after the abrupt withdrawal of U.S. troops paved the way for a bloody Turkish incursion across the border. The United States was not present at the meeting.
    In his comments, Trump seemed to wash his hands of not just Syria but all of America’s wars in the Middle East. “Let someone else fight over this long-bloodstained sand,” he said.

    https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/10/23/turkey-russia-northern-syria-erdogan-putin/

    • 回复: @Desert Fox
  86. melpol 说:

    Writers have great imaginations and facts bore them. Books concerning historical events are written by the most imaginative of writers. They write interesting narratives without the least bit of supporting evidence. Some use footnotes to support their imagination. But those footnotes are from writers who also write from their imagination. Russian defectors who wrote best selling novels during the cold war were thought by readers as written truth. But they were written to stimulate the imaginations of Russia Phobes. The written word is no more reliable than the spoken word. The reliable witness is hard to find. Only God knows truth but remains silent.

    • 回复: @Vaterland
  87. Desert Fox 说:
    @Johnny Walker Read

    Trump has not washed his hands of Syria, ZUS troops are still there , take a look at some sites like 今日退伍军人网 and Southfront.org, and Russia is wining the war in Syria, do some research, and Putin did not carve up Syria, and Erdogan is a warmongering fool.

    • 回复: @anon
  88. Adûnâi 说:
    @Franz

    Who has the power of the purse decides everything. It decides the wars, the graft, the fate of the founding race, the fate of relations between women and men, all of it.

    Gold did not save Jews from Auschwitz. Political will trumps economics.

    Otherwise, you are speaking like a Marxist.

  89. utu 说:

    Who does really like the Icebreaker Hypothesis by Suvorov? Actually everybody on the margins:

    (1) Hitler fanboys can explain Hitler’s stupidity in attacking the USSR. That Hitler was really trying to save the Western Civilization from the Judeo-Asiatic hordes who under the Bolshevik banners were about to overrun Europe. That poor Hitler had no choice. Not only Poland attacked him in 1939 and them England and France started the War but also the Bolsheviks were about to break the nonaggression pact that for Hitler like all other treaties was sacred. But then he had no choice; he had to preempt the treacherous Stalin.

    (2) Stalin fanboys are reassured that Stalin was not Hitler’s bitch who was giving to Hitler everything Hitler wanted since the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact only to be then betrayed by Hitler’s sneaky attack and be caught w/o pants. Instead Stalin was more cunning than Hitler but just was not lucky with timing because the cowardly balkanoid Greeks and Yugoslavs did not fight hard enough to keep Wehrmacht busy for longer. Just one more month and the history could have been different and Stalin would have saved the world from Hitler already in 1941. That the shameless Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact was just a tactical stratagem on part of brilliant Stalin who was playing for time and thus had to make a deal with a devil which by attacking Poland in 1939 also allowed Stalin to move Red Army further West in preparation for the conquest/liberation of Europe. The alleged offensive positions of the Red Army troops suppose to explain the easiness with which Wehrmacht cut into Russia like a knife into butter and stop us from thinking about poor leadership , low morale and general ineptitude of military in the USSR after Stalin purges and terror of late 1930s.

    • 回复: @Vaterland
  90. @niceland

    I had a whole long erudite answer laid out — and my splinted finger hit some key.

    Fucking reality…

  91. @Adûnâi

    ‘Gold did not save Jews from Auschwitz. Political will trumps economics…’

    Gold did save 一些 Jews from Auschwitz. Economics can also trump political will.

    • 回复: @Seraphim
  92. anon[837]• 免责声明 说:
    @Desert Fox

    Erdogan is a fool for betraying Russia. Turkey will regret not continuing to cooperate with Russia in good faith.

    • 回复: @Desert Fox
  93. 苏联从一开始就与英国/美国有联系,因为革命是西方精英资助的一项特殊行动的结果。

    这对于领导人来说是不可能在不损害工业实力的情况下撤消的。
    因此存在复杂的依赖关系。
    租借是这些依赖关系中的另一个。

    斯大林预计会在事件发生前十年遭到来自西方的攻击。

    不仅仅是希特勒,当巴巴罗萨开始时,英国和法国距离尝试空袭只有几周的时间。

    斯大林有充分的理由确保苏联不会启动它。

    由于罗斯福显然反对希特勒,这将对提供租借的意愿产生影响。
    作为侵略者,斯大林可能冒着破坏罗斯福关于希特勒的决心的风险。

    罗斯福的副总统杜鲁门在 1941 年公开表示他们平衡了德国和苏联,这样他们就会在每一方杀死尽可能多的人。

    这听起来不像是与苏联结成牢固的联盟。

    如果让谁开始行动的话,那么苏联的欺骗可能是有动机的,以激怒希特勒采取第一步。

    然而,如果是这样的话,他们似乎比原来准备得更好。

    还是可以想象,苏联会在初期故意让事情变坏,以证明谁是邪恶的一方毋庸置疑?

    在我看来,虽然不太可能,但至少是一种合乎逻辑的可能性。

    • 回复: @ploni almoni
  94. Desert Fox 说:
    @anon

    Agree, Putin saved Erdogans life in the coup, and then this stupid bastard goes and supports AL CIADA aka ISIS and so Russia is blowing the hell out of the tanks and howitzers etc. that Erdogan is sending into Syria, this is a shooting gallery for the Russian airforce.

    Russia came into Syria in September 2015 at Syria request and is kicking AL CIADA’s ass!

    • 回复: @anon
  95. Paw 说:
    @Patricus

    In Russia , desire for the world with no wars won in 1917 , by whole population of the peacefull Slavs and was hijacked by group of fanatical bandits.
    Emptiness of imperialism found its fulfilment in hatred and in fanaticism of anticomunism..

  96. @Robjil

    Robert Baer is a self-professed propagandist, though. It’s hard to trust someone like him. Sure, many of these CIA types put out some truth, but it’s usually with mixed signals.

  97. Hard to take a guy seriously that thought America should continue our genocide in Vietnam, where kids today are still being born disfigured, horrific birth defects from all the poison our overlords dumped on them. Claiming to be “Christian” yet supports the murder of millions of people that he doesn’t like, sounds like our wonderful “Christian Zionists” here.

    Solzhenitsyn also a fanboy of Pinochet and his murderous goons. The same ideology that is driving the refugees to our southern border today.

    Asked Reagan to drop a nuke on Moscow. Why oh why would they want to throw him in the gulag? He was the Juan Guaido of his time. The Joshua Wong or Bana Alabed of Russia. Lol

    Solzhenitsyn was a neocon. I’m sure he was probably on the CIA payroll, everything points to that. How anyone can take anything he says as truth is beyond me. No need to read his books, might as well read a book by Paul Wolfowitz, Paul Bremer or some other scumbag.

    Not surprising that many Nazi fanboys here love him. Guess thats what happens when Nazis, Nazi collaborators write your history and run the media. Nazis were a product of the same folks behind the CIA as well.

    The Germans lost but the fascists won. Fact.

  98. @Colin Wright

    So, you basically acknowledge the main point of the “Saint Hitler” crowd (whatever the hell that is), except nitpicking over the precise date?

    • 回复: @Colin Wright
  99. anon[837]• 免责声明 说:
    @redmudhooch

    Agreed. A lot of right-wing fools don’t realize it was the Soviets who stood at the forefront against cultural degeneracy and unlimited plutocracy that many associate with Zionism. Why they talk so much about scary communism is beyond me, Jews may have infiltrated communism in order to sabotage it, but Jews are fundamentally capitalist parasites. Trotsky and his followers were simply saboteurs working for international finance to derail Soviet socialism.

    • 回复: @ploni almoni
  100. anon[837]• 免责声明 说:
    @Desert Fox

    Strategically, Turkey under Erdogan reminds me of Hitler’s Third Reich. The same way Hitler betrayed the USSR by breaking the non-aggresion pact and attacking Russia.

  101. Seraphim 说:
    @Colin Wright

    Gold did save very many Jews from Auschwitz. Schwartz György (aka George Soros) is a case in point. Would someone ask why Rezső Kasztner (aka Rudolf Israel Kastner) was assassinated (in Israel) in 1957? Heard about the “Kasztner train”?

  102. @Beefcake the Mighty

    ‘So, you basically acknowledge the main point of the “Saint Hitler” crowd (whatever the hell that is), except nitpicking over the precise date?’

    我不会那样说。

    Hitler’s attack on Russia was ‘over-determined,’ if I understand that term correctly.

    Yes, Russia had made it obvious that she had further aggressive designs; in November 1940, Molotov had gone so far as to demand bases in Denmark (!). Germany had already felt it necessary to send troops to Romania to forestall further Soviet demands on that country. So certainly it was clear that the Soviet Union posed a threat.

    On the other hand Hitler’s grand design had always involved carving out a German empire in the East. He was quite prepared to reach an accommodation in the South, West, and North; in the East, there would eventually have to be war.

    Finally, absent some change, Hitler was going to have to demobilize some of that huge army he’d assembled. The conflict with Britain simply wasn’t sufficient reason to keep half of Germany’s available manpower under arms. Either there would need to be a major continental campaign soon or some large portion of all those mobilized reservists would have to be allowed to return to civilian life.

    Hitler almost certainly was going to want to strike East at some point; Stalin’s aggressive moves combined with the fact that victory in the West meant he had a huge but suddenly unemployed land army under arms simply made it easier for him to reach the decision to do it now.

    The central point is that at least some in Hitler’s fan club would have it that an otherwise peacefully-inclined Fuhrer was simply responding to Russia’s threats.

    This misstates the situation. There was no peacefully-inclined Hitler; he’d always wanted to wage a war of conquest in the East, and Stalin and the general situation combined to make the decision to do it now easier.

  103. @redmudhooch

    ‘…No need to read his books…’

    Well, a lot of them are pretty good books. I’d particularly recommend 1914年八月 (I’ve read it twice) and The First Circle. Among his short stories, ‘Incident at Kretchetovka (sp?) Station’ stands out in my memory.

    I don’t think there’s much question Solzhenitsyn is one of the outstanding Russian writers of the twentieth century. I’m not familiar enough with either Nabokov or Bulgakov to go further than that.

    • 同意: Desert Fox
  104. Dmitry 说:
    @AnonFromTN

    Saker is clearly ignorant and clueless… compared to the ignorance of an average commenter here, he is an expert.

    Lol your argument is apparently in the style of “compared to an average cockroach, a locust is beautiful” Or “compared to cancer, HIV is enjoyable”. Besides it is wrong, as even the lower-average commentator on this site are writing more intelligent and coherent comments, than Saker. And moreover, Saker knows less about Russia, Russian politics, Russian history, or Russian language – than I know about municipal politics of Mumbai or Manilla.

    • 回复: @AnonFromTN
  105. I read “The Gulag Archipelago” and ended with zero belief in the veracity of its contents. I read “August 1914”, compared it with actual historical accounts of the Battle Of Tannenberg, and concluded that Solzhenitsyn was talking through his hat. I read “One Day In The Life Of Ivan Denisovich” and had the exact same reaction to Elie Wiesel’s “Night”, to wit, it’s nonsense written to please a western market. Overall I have absolutely no reason to consider Solzhenitsyn to be anything more than a bad joke. I have not read Rezun directly so I can’t say anything about him except that the idea that the 1941 Soviet armed forces, based around obsolete I 15 biplane and I 15 fighters, SB 2 bombers with so many design defects that Stalin was appalled, and with tanks distributed among infantry divisions and so unable to conduct blitzkrieg offensives, could even think of invading Germany is something only the militarily illiterate can believe.

    Whenever I encounter people attempting to defend the likes of Solzhenitsyn, I am reminded of the Iraqi traitors in exile like the “poet” Kanan Makana, which claimed to be thrilled by every bomb that dropped on Baghdad. “Good writing” as an apologia for imperalist water carrying? Come off it.

    • 不同意: Desert Fox
    • 回复: @Seraphim
    , @Robjil
    , @vot tak
  106. Seraphim 说:
    @Fiendly Neighbourhood Terrorist

    You read more obsolete Soviet (and Sovok) propaganda than Solzhenitsyn, to be sure. Nobody can believe that these are your own thoughts.

    • 同意: utu
  107. Vojkan 说:

    Putin: treason is “the most despicable crime one can imagine”. Yep. Traitors are despised by both those they betray and those for the benefit of whom they betray. The Skripal hoax is a case in point and all the arguments used to accuse Russia in that affair are more a matter of psychological projection than a matter of facts.

  108. Robjil 说:
    @Fiendly Neighbourhood Terrorist

    His book “Two hundred years together – Jews and Russians” is based on documents not his story.
    This is the reason that it has not been translated into English.

    It was published in 2001-02, soon after nine eleven. This is when he realized that the west is the real trouble maker of our time. His anti-Soviet and pro-western stuff before this was similar to of all of us in the west, most of us fall for the razzle dazzle “democracy” Zion MSM of the western world.

    Nine Eleven opened his eyes to the Zion uber alles mentality ruling the west. So he published “Two hundred years together – Jews and Russians”, he hoped to open the eyes of the west about what is happening to it. The west just ignored it. It did not translate the book.

    He changed his ways. St. Paul was Saul who persecuted Christians. Should we ignore St. Paul’s writings because he was Saul before he was St. Paul? The same applies to Solzhenitsyn.

    • 同意: Desert Fox
  109. RouterAl 说:

    孤立地看,我想你可以不理会破冰船和罪魁祸首。 作为一个实际阅读过这两本书并更深入地跟进本网站上许多伟大文章的人。这两本书的内容让我觉得非常合理。 我很想知道有多少海报真正读过这些书。 还有约阿希姆·霍夫曼 (Joachim Hoffmann) 的斯大林的灭绝战争,它以类似的方式涵盖了苏联的建设。
    大多数人应该知道的第一个来源是斯蒂芬·古德森 (Stephen Goodson) 的《中央银行的历史》(The History of Centralbanking),它详细介绍了美国和英国为结束德国和日本的国家无债务银行体系而采取的举措。 大卫·霍根 (David Hoggan) 所著的《强迫战争》(The Forced War) 详细介绍了罗斯福 (FDR) 胁迫英国人向波兰提供保证的举动,波兰或多或少地开始了二战。 在战争期间,英国人逮捕和监禁泰勒·肯特,因为他试图提醒美国国会注意罗斯福和丘吉尔在欧洲发动战争并使美国卷入其中的所有秘密渠道,以谋取利益犹太银行家。 美国对日本发动的经济战争是为了让他们攻击美国,而故意削弱美国的防御,以便对中途岛或夏威夷进行先发制人的攻击,以促成一场人们都不想要的战争。
    今天西方的所有错误都源于二战和大骗局,直到我们能够公开讨论原因,谁促进了这些原因以及谁从中受益,西方将继续在精神和道德上衰落。 在英国,我们失去了很多时间,我们失去了所有的黄金和可兑换货币储备,我们以甩卖价格失去了在美国的所有经济利益,我们失去了 2 万人,帝国正在出路,最终拥有 400 亿欠美国的债务和欠加拿大的 4 亿美元,我们直到 1.2 年才偿还。在英国,犹太媒体仍然崇敬丘吉尔,而对我来说,他应该与查理二世手中的另一位英国叛徒克伦威尔遭受同样的命运。尸体应该被挖出来,他的头骨卡在伦敦桥的钉子上,作为对其他叛徒的警告。

    • 回复: @Nonny Mouse
  110. Truth3 说:
    @Epigon

    Polikarpov biplanes and obsolete fleet of light tanks and tankettes of 1930s? Riiiight, sounds about right for offensive of Summer 1941

    Yes, they did have small tanks. The Germans had Pz II and Pz 38 models as the bulk of their forces too. But the Red Army had 25,000 tanks, the Heer 3,000.

    Polikarpov planes in abundance? Yes, and they would have caused plenty of trouble if the Luftwaffe had not massacred them on the ground on June 22. The Red Air Force also had growing numbers of advanced fighters… The Yak-1 and MiG-1 were being delivered in squadron quantities weekly.

    Deep Offensive action requires Bombers and Ground Attack aircraft… lots of them. They act as advanced breakthru forces artillery and suppression of flank threats… bombing targets the Tanks or Panzers encounter or slip by. Did the Red Air Force have large Bomber Fleets ready for attack? Darn right… the Luftwaffe was outnumbered before their lightning strike on the first day.

    By the way… the Israelis learned that lesson well… they destroyed nearly the entire Egyptian Air Force on the outset of their blitz called the Six Day War.

    Try not to be so stupid in your offhand smart ass analysis.

    The Red Army was a real threat until Hitler broke their back in June & July 1941.

    The German mistake? Allowing their Army to be wasted by the Winter attempt to capture Moscow. This was the greatest military mistake in history. The campaign around Yelnya should have made the German General Staff aware that digging in for a long multi-year fight was required.

    You cannot fight a war of movement in mud and ice, without roads, hundreds of miles deep in enemy territory and supplies being hauled by panje wagons.

    Their only hope… dig in, and allow the Red Army to thoroughly exhaust themselves in frontal attacks endlessly.

    Hitler said in 1942… If I do not get the Caucusus Oil I must end this war.

    He might have gotten and kept Baku with a wholly different strategy. But in real time, these decisions are not so easy to see.

    • 回复: @Epigon
    , @Quartermaster
  111. Why do we believe “declassified documents” and such from the CIA or the Former Soviet Union?

    It strikes me as similar to believing a liberal American academic (sociologist or social historian let’s say) on the trans Atlantic slave trade…

  112. 我喜欢这句话:

    “Over a half century ago, while I was still a child, I recall hearing a number of old people offer the following explanation for the great disasters that had befallen Russia: “Men have forgotten God; that’s why all this has happened.” Since then I have spent well-nigh 50 years working on the history of our revolution; in the process I have read hundreds of books, collected hundreds of personal testimonies, and have already contributed eight volumes of my own toward the effort of clearing away the rubble left by that upheaval. But if I were asked today to formulate as concisely as possible the main cause of the ruinous revolution that swallowed up some 60 million of our people, I could not put it more accurately than to repeat: “Men have forgotten God; that’s why all this has happened”

    “Solzhenitsyn – Voice from the Gulag,” Eternity, pp. 23–24

    • 谢谢: SeekerofthePresence
  113. AnonFromTN 说:
    @Dmitry

    Yes, Saker has a lot of delusions and weird views. Not surprising from a person who never lived in the USSR and post-Soviet Russia. Besides, his Putin worship appalls me. But in one thing you are wrong: he does speak Russian fluently. This just shows that speaking the language is woefully insufficient for understanding the realities you never experienced first-hand.

    • 回复: @ploni almoni
  114. @Johnny Walker Read

    I don’t dislike Putin, but….this is so, should we say- gay?

    • 哈哈: Beefcake the Mighty
    • 回复: @Johnny Walker Read
    , @vot tak
  115. With regard to the original question: sure, you should (if you have spare time) read people you disagree with. Solzhenitsyn is a significant writer; as regards Suvorov, I haven’t read him, but Igor Bunich is, perhaps, not too different, and I liked it.

    What normal people should avoid is memoirs of US presidents & literary diarrhea of American “pundits” (left, center, right) which are, give or take, torrents of excrement.

  116. S 说:
    @S

    Suvorov’s thesis in Icebreaker, as described by Wiki, is just about identical to the thesis of Guido Preparata in his book Conjuring History .

    LOL! Naturally, that should read 召唤希特勒。

    While I was a little tired when I wrote that I don’t know if I was 累。

    Auto spell corrector gone haywire, or, a moderator having a bit of fun with the spelling, perhaps? 😉

  117. @Adûnâi

    Having gold and having the power to issue money are not the same.
    Having the power to issue money allows one to finance propaganda, to sell war bonds, etcetera ad nauseum.

    Dec. 23, 1913 is a seminal date in U.S. history. It is the date where the money power ascended to run the Congress as opposed to the Congress issuing money. Money being issued by a private central bank taking a cut versus a national bank legislated by the Congress are two very distinct things. Anyone who fails to understand this fails to understand the History of the 20th century.
    The United States helped to build Germany as a bastion against communism then later colluded with Stalin to destroy it. They then set up Western Europe as Vassal powers. This has been a status quo to this very day.
    The German High Command had incredible balls. They attacked the Soviets, knowing full well they were at a 5:1 disadvantage in numbers and equipment. I believe they had no choice. The Saker would have us believe every army has plans for all sorts of stuff. Sure Saker, whatever you say.

    • 谢谢: Johnny Walker Read
    • 回复: @Adûnâi
  118. Franz 说:
    @Adûnâi

    Otherwise, you are speaking like a Marxist.

    Absolutely! Groucho is my muse and guiding star.

    Although a soft spot for Harpo is inevitable, since I actually studied harp for awhile.

    Political will trumps economics.

    This is the stumbling block of the modern mind. Politics IS economics. Politics IS religion. We have created boxes around aspects of the same bundle.

    Nature is not amused. Whatever humans do is about 功率. Your armies, wealth, and gods can be knocked over by anybody building a stronger version of any of the three. It is nature, human nature.

    • 回复: @bike-anarkist
  119. S 说:
    @Hans Vogel

    Yes, Preparata and Suvorov displeased a lot of powerful (and not so powerful) people, in particular those who still adhere and strongly believe in their respective corresponding ‘progressive’ Capitalist or Communist cause.

    However, as this centuries old, contrived, controlled, and increasingly decrepit Hegelian dialectic moves forward towards final synthesis in global Multiculturalism, likely heralded by WWIII, it makes sense we would find out more and more of it’s past hidden secrets along the way, in books by people such as Preparata and Suvorov.

    以上皆是 Capitalism, with it’s artificial hyper-individualism, and, a closely paralleling Communism, with it’s artificial hyper-collectivism, are bad, spiritually lifeless, and anti-human systems of thought, as is their convergance and synthesis in global Multi-culturalism.

    If they lied to us in the past about the supposed wonders and doings of Capitalism and Communism, such as in WWII as described by Preparata and Suvorov, why shouldn’t they also be lying to us now about the Rosemary’s baby like child of these two nefarious anti-life ideologies, Multi-culturalism?

    Humanity has been being played since 1776 and 1789 by the City of London.

    The answer, of course, is to stop believing and being influenced by this hatred driven dialectical madness, and to choose life.

  120. Epigon 说:
    @Truth3

    You’re an imbecile lecturing me to not be stupid, while unironically claming that Soviets fielded 25 000 tanks on June 22nd, 1941.

    • 回复: @Truth3
  121. AnonFromTN 说:
    @S

    让我想起一个笑话:
    – What is the difference between a spy and an intelligence officer?
    – Their intelligence officer is a spy, whereas out spy is an intelligence officer.

    • 回复: @S
  122. @Bardon Kaldian

    Not me “Hero”. Posted that pic for all the Putin worshipers here. A quart of vodka and and this image should make all my fellow comrades here feel all warm and fuzzy.

    • 不同意: Desert Fox
    • 回复: @Bardon Kaldian
  123. @Franz

    This is the stumbling block of the modern mind. Politics IS economics. Politics IS religion. We have created boxes around aspects of the same bundle.

    Simple and emphatic statement without self-projection, angst and hubris.
    感谢。

  124. @S

    Reminds me of my favorite movie scene of all times.

    • 回复: @S
  125. @RouterAl

    感谢这些参考。 我会努力弄到那些书的。

  126. Truth3 说:
    @Epigon

    The Red Army tank park on June 22, 1941, was…

    On the one hand, the Red Army was huge – having added four million men to its ranks in the previous three years and with a tank park of 23,106 vehicles in June of 1941.

    According to the lowest source I could find.

    Just one source.

    Others have it as high as 30,000+.

    I was in the Soviet Union for years, were you?

    I studied the GPW my entire life, did you?

    I read thousands of pages of Red Army documents after they were declassified, did you?

    SJSTFUAF.

    Decode that, AHDH.

    • 谢谢: Johnny Walker Read
    • 回复: @Epigon
  127. S 说:
    @Ron Unz

    Well, I found the Preparata book almost totally worthless,

    I found it rather valuable and useful.

    filled with conspiratorial theories that had virtually no evidence behind them.

    Hmmm. I wonder if we read the same book? I didn’t see it that way at all. Seemed well thought out to me.

    Just because someone comes up with an outlandish historical hypothesis doesn’t mean it’s necessarily correct.

    If someone really believes in Capitalism, that the Capitalist US/UK was doing exactly the same thing (as posited by Preparata) that it’s purported ‘arch enemy’, the Communist Soviet Union was doing (per Suvorov), it would potentially be quite disturbing. [Vice versa if one believes in Communism.]

    A person might not want to even accept the possibility.

    I take it, then, that Preparata may have offended certain sensibilities you may have about the Capitalist US/UK bloc and it’s actions prior to WWII?

    By contrast, the Suvorov Hypothesis seems quite likely to me, and backed by an enormous quantity of persuasive circumstantial evidence…So, overall, I’d argue that it’s far more likely than not that Suvorov is more or less correct in this analysis..

    Some might argue that ‘circumstantial evidence’ is about the same difference as ‘virtually no evidence’, per your statement regarding Preparata, however, I won’t pursue that here.

    My point regarding Preparata was not that he was right, and Suvorov wrong, but, rather that authors were correct…ie the Capitalist US/UK was doing virtually exactly the same thing as Suvorov alleges the Soviets were doing, ie each was attempting to bludgeon the other using Germany as a pawn to do so. The US/UK was much more succesful in this endeavor.

    The cynical ulterior motive for both Capitalist and Communist powers in this was to gain control of Germany, Europe’s center of power, and thus to gain control of Europe, and then the world…dwarfing any empire the Germans may have been attempting to construct at the time.

    In the decades prior to 1914 Britain turned more and more against Germany as a real potential threat to it’s empire’s hegemony over much of the world, and British journalism during that time reflected that in their writing.

    Similarly, I’ve posted on the 1853 US/UK geo-political 新罗马 book multiple times, and excerpts from it can be found in my archives.

    Those excerpts include the quote from the book describing how a future US/UK united front would unleash a ‘world’s war’ upon the Earth when it made it’s move to conquer Germany. This in turn would bring about a global struggle between the US and Russia for the obtainment of total world power.

    So, I find Preparata’s (and Suvorov’s) thesis quite believable.

    Some of the disbelief in the idea of both Preparata and Suvorov being right stems from the power of the Big Lie I think.

    How can it be possible that Capitalism and Communism are two closely paralleling and ultimately complimentary ideologies, when we’ve been led to think otherwise by our respective leaders?

    That Anglo-Saxon ‘Founding Fathers’ of the Capitalist United States, ie Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, and apparently Ben Franklin as well, were quite involved with the French 1789 Communist Revolution as well,

    和,

    that London was where the Capitalist defacto ‘manifesto’ (Adam Smith’s famous 1776 work) and Marx’s 1848 共产党宣言, were both first published, each of these events having ties to the City of London, should cause ‘true believers’ in Capitalism and Communism to pause everywhere.

  128. S 说:
    @AnonFromTN

    好笑话。

    I’ve always found the Spy vs Spy meme to be rather amusing.

  129. Adûnâi 说:
    @steinbergfeldwitzcohen

    The German High Command had incredible balls. They attacked the Soviets, knowing full well they were at a 5:1 disadvantage in numbers and equipment.

    An absolute and shameless lie. The German and allied forces had a advantage of 1.3:1 in June 1941. And by the population total, Germany and her allies did not lag that far behind.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Barbarossa

    Money being issued by a private central bank taking a cut versus a national bank legislated by the Congress are two very distinct things. Anyone who fails to understand this fails to understand the History of the 20th century.

    Can you not think for yourself? All you are saying is regurgitated garbage spewed as if by a robot.

    The Congress was and is full of Jesus-worshippers who sold their race in 1861, in 1941 and in 1964. Why should I care whether their herd of animals issues their cursed Jewmerican paper, or a bunch of Jews from the Federal Reserve does? It’s all the same.

    • 回复: @vot tak
    , @L.K
  130. S 说:
    @Johnny Walker Read

    That is a great movie I’ve seen many times.

    With it’s sympathetic portrayal of Confederates one wonders if it could be even made today.

    • 同意: Johnny Walker Read
  131. Mikhail 说: • 您的网站
    @freedom-cat

    This is a good, brief counter-point to the anti-Serb BS pertaining to Srebrenica:

    http://silentcrownews.com/wordpress/?p=4712

    • 谢谢: freedom-cat
    • 回复: @freedom-cat
  132. Adûnâi 说:
    @S

    以上皆是 Capitalism, with it’s artificial hyper-individualism, and, a closely paralleling Communism, with it’s artificial hyper-collectivism, are bad, spiritually lifeless, and anti-human systems of thought, as is their convergance and synthesis in global Multi-culturalism.

    Are you not suffering from a case of Eurocentrism? Last time I checked, multiculturalism was only spreading in the West. Turkey, Iran, India, China – all of them are quite entrenched in their own values are are having none of the Western rot.

    Humanity has been being played since 1776 and 1789 by the City of London.

    Let me guess… The City of London inherited its money from Venice?

    Either way, it’s all childish. The real world is not about money. The real picture is being painted with ideas – namely, the Christian axiology of the love towards the poor and the retarded. No wealth in the world will make a White man vote to give Negroes rights, and yet here we are.

    Moreover, the power of the West and of multiculturalism is waning already – the Aryan stock is being depleted and drained, and the other three regions of the world have increasingly been turning towards radicalism – Turkey and Iran to its empires, India to radical Hinduism, China to its historical trade routs. Those “nefarious London elites” must be pretty suicidal in political matters, and pretty subservient to the dead Jew on the cross in questions spiritual.

    If those elites had existed, they would have murdered all non-Whites by 1930 to begin with…

  133. anonymous[307]• 免责声明 说:
    @Johnny Walker Read

    [I can post this stuff until I’m blue in the face, and I’m sure it will change very few minds on the worship of Putin here at UR. ]

    Good. The ignorant ‘whites’ have surrounded around a FAKE leader, Putin, since they have NONE of their own. His ‘white’ skin and his fake Christianity attracts many fools.

    In fact, what Putin has done is nothing but being a good boy for his zionist masters, Rothschild family, like other zionist stooges, Trump, Modi, Erdogan, Emmanuel Macron, where all are in bed with the baby killer Netanyahu, and repeating the Jewish mafia slogan came out of his dirty mouth of an ASSASSIN and a anti Muslims racist, Modi, the other day in India where the zionist media calls it “the greater democracy’, which is laughable.

    All these racist zionists stooges that ignorant people call ‘leaders’ are working for the zionist mafia thieves where should be destroyed.

  134. @Seraphim

    That’s a very cogent response. How many brain cells did you expend coming up with that?

  135. vot tak 说:
    @redmudhooch

    “Hard to take a guy seriously that thought America should continue our genocide in Vietnam, where kids today are still being born disfigured, horrific birth defects from all the poison our overlords dumped on them.”

    Definitely. Fanaticism never results in honest or accurate analysis.

  136. vot tak 说:
    @Fiendly Neighbourhood Terrorist

    “Whenever I encounter people attempting to defend the likes of Solzhenitsyn, I am reminded of the Iraqi traitors in exile like the “poet” Kanan Makana, which claimed to be thrilled by every bomb that dropped on Baghdad. “Good writing” as an apologia for imperalist water carrying? Come off it.”

    There is a description of those who favor the propaganda of their country’s enemies. I can’t quite recall the word for it… ;-D

  137. vot tak 说:
    @Adûnâi

    “who sold their race in 1861, in 1941 and in 1964”

    Have you tried alprazolam?

  138. vot tak 说:
    @Bardon Kaldian

    “this is so, should we say- gay?”

    The zionazi-nazi wing of the right is obsessed with the male figure. Go figure. 😀

    • 回复: @Bardon Kaldian
  139. @Anonymous

    Thx. I didn’t realize he had an article on it. I’ve just recently started reading his stuff.
    我很感激你的回应。

  140. @Mikhail

    I really appreciate your response and the article. I shall be reading this. Thank you!

  141. Epigon 说:
    @Truth3

    I was in the Soviet Union for years, were you?

    I studied the GPW my entire life, did you?

    I read thousands of pages of Red Army documents after they were declassified, did you?

    All that time and effort, and apparently you were unable to find:

    – the number of tanks/AFVs in the Western Military districts which were the only ones engaged by Axis in Barbarossa.

    – the breakdown of said inventory by type, age

    – the breakdown of that inventory by fighting condition

    Apparently, the expert you failed to read Shein’s book on this particular subject

    Here is a nice guideline for tards like you – June 1941 saw 25392 tanks in Soviet inventory.
    13981 were in western districts

    12223 regular tanks (discounting chemical, engineer, special purpose)

    Of these, only 337 KV-1, 132 KV-2, 635 T-34 without radio and 197 with radio.

    275 KV-1 ready for action, 124 KV-2 ready for action, 599 T-34 ready for action and 195 radio-equipped ones ready for action.
    Those are modern, 1940 and later designs. The rest are tankettes, light tanks, cavalry tanks, amphibious and scout tanks.

    What this doesn’t include is the lack of trained crews fit to operate the modern tanks – these were in short supply as well.

    Overall, the on-paper strength quickly drops down when a deep dive is performed into individual models – T-26, BT-7 – so the overall combat-ready AFV strength of Soviets facing the Axis was around 7000. They were opposed by a concentrated, well supplied and led force of 3658 tanks and 377 SPGs.

    The main reason of Soviet actual strength being lower is both wear and tear (T-26 were old) and lack of spares, fuel due to chronic shortage of tractors, tracks and oil tanker trucks.

    There were 3 T-26 in need of light repairs and maintenance for each T-26 ready for action ( 696 vs 2391) and just 6 of BT-7 were combat ready while 1020 BT-7 needed maintenance and repairs.

    The beauty of archive records and statistics. So next time you want to start claiming you’re an expert and have read documents, do yourself a favour and keep your mouth shut.

    • 同意: Adûnâi
    • 回复: @Truth3
    , @Truth3
  142. lobro 说: • 您的网站

    ABOUT TIME for some truthful revisionism.
    Too long have the hordes indolent, intimidated or incapable of any critical thought or absorbing new and potentially heretical information run roughshod over any divergent argument, ratcheting up profanities and ad-hominem to a deafening pitch.
    And it always comes down to this:

    Who are you to dispute the magical St. Solzhenitsyn?
    How many Nobel prizes did you win?
    He is seconded by FIVE-STAR (count them) historians like Robert Service and Robert Conquest, who cares if they can’t speak Russian and are paid by neocon think tanks and mass media to spew hateful innuendo and drivel against Putin and Trump?
    We represent widely disseminated and approved viewpoint, our sources are acknowledged as respectable by the huge majority of the population—AND THUS, TRUE!

    Because quantity implies quality, the more people subscribe to a claim, the more true it is according to their math, the tyranny of mediocrity.
    And these are the more refined and civil statements I encountered, don’t ask me what the rest have been.

    NB: I agree with most of the Saker’s past views but also disagree with some, and when I did, I was attacked by the same bleating crowd as described above, swap Saker for Solzhenitsyn.
    Wonder what would they say now—if impossible to ignore this article, they will instantly switch allegiance (because that’s all they go by, personal allegiances and animosities) and attack the Saker like some satanic deviant for having dared to run counter to the received dogma.

    It is best summarized by the Protocol 15(6), of immortal, almost supernatural wisdom, I never tire of quoting it, to the general apathy:

    by so much as ours disregard success if only they can carry through their plans, by so much the “goyim” are willing to sacrifice any plans only to have success.

    A goy pursuing independent thought is a precarious existence, caught between a rock and a hard place.

  143. Truth3 说:
    @Epigon

    Here is a nice guideline for tards like you – June 1941 saw 25392 tanks in Soviet inventory.

    So… you now confirm the 25k Tanks in the Red Army inventory… as if it was your fact.

    Sophist prick.

    Apology accepted asshole.

  144. Truth3 说:
    @Epigon

    You’re an imbecile lecturing me to not be stupid, while unironically claming that Soviets fielded 25 000 tanks on June 22nd, 1941.

    Your own words asshole.

    Choke on them.

    When you were shown to be an ass, you decided to be the sophist to cover it up.

    Simple words. Simple Truth.

    Asshole lying sophists like you can’t handle the Truth.

    I again state the same as before…

    The Red Army had 25k Tanks on June 22, 1941.

    Your sophistry only confirmed it.

    I didn’t say 25k T-34’s… KV-I’s, or KV-II’s.

    I said 25k Tanks.

    By the way, have you ever sat in a BT-5?

    A T-28?

    Think they are not Tanks?

    • 回复: @Epigon
    , @Korenchkin
  145. Epigon 说:
    @Truth3

    In the context of Barbarossa, RKKA having 10 000 tanks in Caucasus, Siberia and Far East is irrelevant and you deliberately tried obfuscating the fact.

    Furthermore, out of 13 000 tanks positioned to contest the Axis, almost half were not combat-ready and not deployed to combat. Let me guess – you think Soviets sent all those 1920s and 1930s dinosaurs into combat at some point?

    Pilling on top of it, you now present 3000, when in reality there were 4000 Axis AFVs which were concentrated, prepared and ready to descend upon dispersed Soviet AFVs arranged in peacetime echelons behind the border.

    Voila – your initial claim of 25 000 Soviet tanks facing 3000 German is gone – it was a case of 4000 German tanks deployed in focused spearheads surprising 7000 (1000 modern) Soviet tanks.

    Symptomatic of Western mongoloids, you readily bundle scout and amphibious tanks, tankettes and 1930s Vickers 6-ton derivates (T-26) in order to make your case stronger.
    Since German armoured halftracks and armoured cars perform much of the same duties as Soviet scout and amphibious light tanks – why not add them to German armour strength? That’s right – because your narrative breaks down.
    The same is true if prime mover, heavy tractor and light vehicle comparison is made between Wehrmacht and RKKA.

    In reality, most of Soviet AFV losses were due to abandonment, destruction by own crew, capture coming from lack of fuel and ammunition and strategic encirclement, not due to destruction in combat. Especially in case of (the only) modern Soviet designs at the time – KV and T-34

    You think you’re the first fanboi trying to parrot the nonsensical account of 20 000 destroyed Soviet tanks in 1941? Since you have been found out and called out, you will now assume a smug stance and insist on semantics and sophistry.
    I really like the “I sat in BT-5 therefore I am an expert and not a mong caught pushing a false narrative”

    Germans had local and absolute army numerical superiority in Barbarossa. Fact.

    • 同意: Adûnâi
    • 巨魔: L.K, John Regan
    • 回复: @Truth3
  146. Korenchkin 说:
    @Truth3

    The Red Army had 25k Tanks

    Half of them were never even going to be used
    And the strategy of “digging in” would never have worked as time would then be overwhelmingly on the Soviets side because they had the capability of outproducing the Germans in everything
    The Germans knew this, which is why they came up with the insane plan to take Kiev, Moscow and Leningrad within a few months

    And the idea that Soviets would attack in 1941 just after they’ve finished purging their staff and haven’t even found replacements is so idiotic in it’s face that only Werhaboo retards would believe it

    PS you only need to press “enter” once, dear Redditor

    • 回复: @Truth3
  147. @L.K

    This article speaks to Stalin’s supposed “defensive only” posture. It proves he was poised to invade Poland and ally with Hitler: What Moscow has to hide: Rudolf Hess and the Secret Protocol

    When World War II ended, no one among the Western Allies knew of the existence of a Secret Protocol, attached to the Hitler-Stalin “Non-Aggression” Pact of Aug. 23, 1939 and signed by Nazi Foreign Minister Joachim von Ribbentrop and Soviet Foreign Minister Vyascheslav Molotov. Even after Germany and Russia were engaged in a vast and bitter war, both sides had reason to bury proof of their former brutal friendship. But at war’s end, the Russian secret stood in danger of being exposed, as Nazi archives and prisoners fell into the hands of the Western Allies. Russia faced the threat that the Protocol would be revealed, and itself reveal Russian imperial ambition.

    What did the Secret Protocol to the Hitler-Stalin Pact say? That, “in event of any war,” Russia would be assigned “spheres of influence” in eastern Poland (40% of the country); . the Baltic states of Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia; a free hand in Finland; and that portion of Romania abutting Soviet territory. Soviet actions after Hitler’s invasion of Poland on Sept. 1, 1939, showed how precisely the Soviets adhered to the Protocol’s terms. On Sept. 17, Russia invaded Poland from the east; on Sept. 18 Russian and German troops shook hands in Poland. Then, Moscow invaded Finland. Next, it took the Baltic states.

    Stalin was able, in conference witlll Britain and the United States (when they became his allies against Hitler), to present these actions as “defensive” against the Nazi threat. But the Secret Protocol would prove that, to the contrary, Russia had used the deal with Hitler to advance her ancient imperial designs on Europe.

    https://larouchepub.com/eiw/public/1987/eirv14n36-19870911/eirv14n36-19870911_053-what_moscow_has_to_hide_rudolf_h.pdf

    • 回复: @vot tak
  148. Gerard1234 [又名“杰拉德2”] 说:
    @Alfred

    Surely no one thinks it is a coincidence that they came for Skripal at the exact moment his daughter was visiting. She was the real target. If you are seriously trying to deter treachery, you kill the traitors’ family members.

    Just a reminder that Lugovoi – the main suspect in the killing of Litvinenko -was visiting the UK at the time with his wife, son, daughter and her boyfriend/husband. A hastily arranged family holiday seems a strange time to be ordered to do an assassination on behalf on the state. A family holiday with (unwitting?) family menders seems a pointless ruse.

    It is claimed by the Comedy Club British Intelligence services that in the presence of his 8 year old son right next to hi, he slipped some Polonium into Litvinenko’s teapot in some cafe or Pub in central London.

    I might be wrong here – but his ex wife ( mother to that 8 year old) may have been living in London also, with joint custody of the kid. Could very possibly be wrong here – but if true there was no mention at all of the boy or the ex-wife and their property being tested for traces of Polonium …which in itself was BS scientifically in regards to claims traces were found on the plane and some hotel bathroom

    To me it seems you are just reversing logic here – these circumstances with the family of both Skripal and Lugovoi..together with the “suicide” of that pig Berezovsky suggest the british intelligence framing Russia ( several theories about why they wanted to do so)

    BTW I dont know how reciprocal it is – but immensely nice ( or up to something?) of VVP and the Russian authorities to allow Skripal’s dead wife and son’s coffins to be sent to Salisbury for burial. If I was President I would never have allowed it.

  149. Wavelength 说:

    The “preemptive strike” idea has been debunked by historians who have studied Soviet and German military operations right before and during the war. This video, made by youtuber TIK, delves into this “Icebreaker” book and analyzes the claims with official historical records, troop numbers etc.

    Also, one must take into consideration that for a long time, during the cold war, the Soviet records were not accessible to the public, while the German records were. A lot of captured German officers, soldiers etc, wanted to sell themselves to the western allies, in the coming cold war with the USSR. So they often stated myths about the USSR. Only after the collapse of the USSR, did the Soviet records became public, and are now offering a counter narrative to the “official” German-influenced narrative.

    • 巨魔: L.K, Vaterland
    • 回复: @Beefcake the Mighty
    , @L.K
  150. Wavelength 说:
    @Johnny Walker Read

    “Vigilante_Intelligence” aka Johnny Gat (Ziony Rat) is an anti-Russia propaganda channel, pretending to be “based anti-zionist”, while spreading his J MSM approved anti-Russia drivel. A lot of people distrust the MSM today, so they’re trying a new tactic: pretend to be alternative media, and try to sway people into being anti-Russian.

    • 回复: @Johnny Walker Read
  151. @Wavelength

    There is nothing even remotely “open” about access to Soviet archives. Not even Glantz claims to have had open access.

    • 回复: @Epigon
  152. Wavelength 说:
    @Adûnâi

    The video you referenced is not Russian, but Ukrainian. They speak Ukrainian there, and it is written in Ukrainian. But I guess, you not being able to speak Russian, don’t know the difference huh.

  153. Wielgus 说:
    @Johnny Walker Read

    That picture of Putin reminds me of a key difference between him and Yeltsin.
    Yeltsin was a pudgy alcoholic who sometimes appeared drunk on TV, and was a physical wreck. Putin seems to have decided to do physicality stunts like this to emphasize that he is different.

  154. Truth3 说:
    @Epigon

    惊人。

    Obtuse.

    Obstinate.

    I stated a simple fact.

    The Red Army had 25k Tanks in June 1941.

    It is Truth.

    Your own words even confirmed it.

    Now… after insulting me with your comment that the Red Army did NOT have 25k Tanks, and being firmly spanked for it… you turn Sophist Extraordinaire.

    Are you pure 100% asshole?

    Now you try to pivot to an argument that I never made… as if I did.

    What a total dickhead you are.

    Jew characteristics, all the way, by the way.

    Check your bloodline. 23 & Me will out you that way too.

    • 巨魔: vot tak, Korenchkin
  155. Truth3 说:
    @Korenchkin

    And the strategy of “digging in” would never have worked…

    我们永远不会知道。

    But we do know this… going for Moscow (Operation Typhoon) didn’t work.

    So… you obviously never studied logic or critical thinking.

    • 回复: @Korenchkin
  156. Epigon 说:
    @Beefcake the Mighty

    Decades passed since then.
    Btw both Glantz and Krivosheev are brainlets.
    Protip: Try adding their Soviet AFV loss claims together and subtractring it from Soviet starting inventory and production figures, then compare it to inventory at the end of war.

    What do you mean you get a negative number while in reality Soviets were drowning in tanks at the war’s end?

    Yep, they are THAT foolish.

    • 回复: @L.K
  157. @Wavelength

    So far it is the only place you will hear the Russian propaganda print and video rag known as 今日俄罗斯 exposed for what it is.
    Think there is only 假新闻 in America? Think again comrade.



    视频链接

  158. 萨克

    Should the veracity of “200 years together” be questioned?

    A believer

  159. L.K 说:
    @Wavelength

    I know I’m dealing with a know-nothing bullshitter when the best you can do is name some youtuber nonsense to make your case, which tells me you NEVER studied the issue in any depth and never read the literature.

    So they often stated myths about the USSR. Only after the collapse of the USSR, did the Soviet records became public, and are now offering a counter narrative to the “official” German-influenced narrative

    The above is another dead giveaway that you have ZERO idea what you are talking about.

    The official “history” about the German-Soviet conflict has always been and largely continues to be the propaganda version that the peace-loving Soviet Union was suddenly and treacherously attacked by a Hitler in search for an Empire in the East.

    The partial opening of Soviet archival materials, closed again by the Russian government, allowed many Russian ( as well as some Germans)historians to reach far different conclusions about the true nature of the conflict.
    This is precisely the reason why the Russian government closed the archives and passed legislation punishing dissenting historians. So perhaps the Saker should spare us all the BS about how free Russians are to explore inconvenient truths.
    This extensive body of work in Russian and German has been largely ignored in the West and most of it has never been translated into English, greatly limiting its reach.

    俄罗斯历史学家尼古拉·科波索夫在 2018 年出版的《法律与记忆:走向历史的法律治理》第 14 章(通过刑法捍卫斯大林主义)中写道:

    5 年 2014 月 XNUMX 日,俄罗斯总统弗拉基米尔·普京 (Vladimir Putin) 签署了一项法律,对“侵犯与第二次世界大战事件相关的历史记忆”的行为规定了刑事责任。 该法律在俄罗斯联邦刑法典中增加了以下条款:
    第 354.1 条 纳粹主义的复兴
    The denial of facts established by the Judgment of the International Military Tribunal for the trial and punishment of major war criminals of European countries of the Axis, the approval of crimes established by the above-mentioned Judgment, as well as dissemination of knowingly false information on the activities of the USSR during the Second World War, committed publicly, are punishable by a fine of up to three hundred thousand roubles… or by deprivation of liberty for up to 3 years.”
    The law also increases the punishment to up to 5 years of imprisonment if ‘the same deeds[have been] committed with the use of one’s official position or through the mass media, as well as with an artificial fabrication of prosecution evidence
    “。
    This law is commonly known as the Yarovaya Act, since Irina Yarovaya, a State Duma deputy from ‘United Russia’, the party in power, …

    俄罗斯历史学家现在独立不是很令人鼓舞,是吗?

    • 谢谢: Johnny Walker Read
    • 回复: @Wavelength
  160. L.K 说:
    @Epigon

    Epigon, you are so typical of the Team Russia shills and propagandists, pushing propaganda and disinfo on the Internet, and it shows…

    Here is what armor specialist and military historian, Steven Zaloga, writes about the situation and the “obsolete” Soviet tanks at the beginning of Barbarossa:

    ……巴巴罗萨行动的许多历史都认为苏联坦克过时了,除了新的 T-34 中型和 KV 重型坦克。 事实并非如此,BT-7 明显优于大多数德国坦克,例如 PzKpfw I、PzKpfw II 和 PzKpfw 35(t)。 另一方面,BT-7 不如德国中型坦克,如 PzKpfw III 和 PzKpfw IV。 …

    这项工作的重点的两种坦克类型是德国 PzKpfw 38(t) 和苏联 BT-7。 这两种类型在技术上具有可比性,具有相似的装甲和火力水平,使它们成为相当接近的技术匹配。 …

    However, out of the 3,400 German tanks & assault guns available for Barbarossa, only around 1,400 were PzKpfw III and PzKpfw IV.
    想想看,在战役开始时,仅红军的第一战略梯队就有近 1,000 辆 T-34 和 500 多辆 KV。
    再次扎洛加:

    历史上最大规模的坦克战是 1941 年 13,000 月至 3,400 月在苏联西部边境地区作为巴巴罗萨行动的一部分,超过 XNUMX 辆苏联坦克与 XNUMX 辆德国坦克对战。 尽管红军拥有巨大的数量优势,但其坦克部队却在一系列暴力对抗中被粉碎。
    在不到三周的战斗中,将近 12,000 辆苏联坦克损失了; 德国坦克损失约 400 辆。...

    • 同意: John Regan
    • 回复: @Epigon
    , @Korenchkin
  161. L.K 说:
    @Adûnâi

    You are another know-nothing relying on this youtuber tik & spreading nonsense.

    The German and allied forces had a advantage of 1.3:1 in June 1941. And by the population total, Germany and her allies did not lag that far behind

    The Germans did not have any numerical superiority in June 1941 and it didn’t take that long for them to find themselves in numerical inferiority, despite the gigantic losses they inflicted on the Soviet forces, which is telling about who really was preparing for total war and which side had a larger population base, even more so since Germany was not facing only the Soviets.

    在波罗的海和黑海之间,国防军拥有 148 个各种类型的师,包括后方安全部队和总部预备队。
    然而,最初的打击力量只有 120 格。 3.580 辆坦克和突击炮,少于 2.100 架作战飞机。

    面对他们,在苏联西部军区,1°战略梯队有170个师和旅,越来越多地得到部署2个师的80°战略梯队的支持。
    他们有 15.000 辆坦克、34.700 门大炮和大约 9.000 架作战飞机。
    考虑到德军的部队规模更大,而且在巴巴罗萨开始时并非所有的苏联部队都已满员,德军最初在所有其他主要项目的人力和数量上都处于劣势。

    资料来源:各种,参见 Die Militärstrategie Deutschlands 1940-45: Führungsentschlüsse, Hintergründe, Alternativen by Heinz Magenheimer, 2002。

    The economics of World War II – Six great powers in international comparison
    马克·哈里森编辑

    How important were these economic factors in deciding who won the war, and who lost? In answering this question it has always made sense to distinguish two periods of the conflict.
    在第一时期,经济考虑不如纯军事因素重要。 这是轴心国势力最成功的阶段,大致持续到 1941 年底或 1942 年(确切的转折点在不同的地区剧院之间相差几个月)。 第一个时期,凭借战略和战斗力的优势,德日两国在经济上占优势的强强联合上,以压倒性的失败告终。 战略诡计和突袭、移动速度、集兵力和目标选择的技巧、军事传统和团队精神等因素都站在他们一边。
    ...
    In the second period of the war, which began in 1942, economic fundamentals reasserted themselves. The early advantages of the Axis were dissipated in a transition period of stalemate. A war of attrition developed in which the opposing forces ground each other down, with rising force levels and rising losses. Superior military qualities came to count for less than superior GDP and population numbers. The greater Allied capacity for taking risks, absorbing the cost of mistakes, replacing losses, and accumulating overwhelming quantitative superiority now turned the balance against the Axis. Ultimately, economics determined the outcome.3

    • 回复: @Epigon
  162. Epigon 说:
    @L.K

    You’re an idiot for assuming I’ve never read Zaloga.

    You’re an imbecile for presenting Zaloga, who has never accessed Soviet archives and primary sources, as God-given.

    Quick exercise for you and Zaloga: these 12 000 “lost Soviet tanks” were crewed by how many tankers and were part of which formations? How many casualties did Soviet tankers suffer?

    Another quick exercise: how many Soviet tanks, of those “lost”, were destroyed in combat by Germans?

    The fact that Zaloga presents Barbarossa as a series of tank vs tank battles which saw destruction of 12 000 Soviet tanks is telling.
    Newsflash – German tanks accounted for a small proportion of Soviet tank losses in Barbarossa. Mechanical breakdown due to lack of spares, abandonment due to lack of fuel and ammunition (all due to encirclements, chaos, confusion and inadequate logistics) followed by ATGs were the main cause of losses. Mechanized corps suffered the most when trying counterattacks and breakthroughs – attrition during movement followed by running into German PaKs and Panzerjägers.
    “Losing” broken, untracked, obsolescent, waiting-for-maintenance and otherwise non-combat deployed tanks sitting in depots and bases that were overun by Axis – I guess it makes you Wehraboos feel warm.

    Just like doing actual analysis and focusing on important aspects of war (logistics, artillery concentration and ammo expenditure) makes your head hurt.

    BT-7 and TNHP did not have similar performance and characteristics. Ridiculous.

    I really despise this whole pop history and war nerd culture – all consequence of gaming industry and retarded Wehraboos.

    Now comes the part where I ask you to name TOP 10 incorrect and nonsensical claims and statements from Zaloga’s books.
    我期待着讨论。

    PS: 400 German AFV losses in Barbarossa claim you quoted is actually not near the top. There are much worse idiocies published.

  163. Epigon 说:

    “Germans lost 400 tanks” This statement immediately caught my eye – no doubt expert Zaloga must have serious sources backing this claim,
    对?

    As it turns out – no, he doesn’t.

    Army Group Centre alone had 641 Total Write Offs until September – that is – the only loss category Germans counted.
    Adding 131 and 174 losses by North and South Panzergruppen – well, what do you know? Expert Zaloga is dead wrong.
    Those are burned up, ammoracked, disintegrated (find pictures of Pz III or Pz IV hit by 122 mm and 152 mm HE shells) tanks that no amount of depot and factory repair work could make combat ready.

    Germans being on the strategic offensive could claim the battlefield afterward – so every Soviet tank was a total loss, while only total write offs were German losses.

    Guess how this went once Soviets were on the offensive and German Big Cats were all but unsalvageable due to a combination of weight, lack of recovery vehicles, hostile skies and rapid pace of Soviet advances. Combined together, all these facts contributed to the fact that German K:D tank ratio dropped once Big Cats were introduced.
    Correlation, but not causality.

    And here we have our expert Zaloga claiming that all 4 German Panzergruppen had 400 losses between them.

    • 同意: Adûnâi
    • 回复: @L.K
  164. Epigon 说:
    @L.K

    Wow, you’re an even worse idiot than I imagined.
    You unironically claim that concentrated, fully manned and equipped invading German divisions didn’t have local numerical superiority across the frontline?

    They were facing Soviet divisions in peace time configuration, not fully manned, personnel on leave, deployed in a dispersed, echeloned pattern in depth. Not at all concentrated.

    Again, you quote incorrect and bogus numbers at the same time.
    A tank or a plane without a crew or not fit for combat service is not an asset. A mortar or gun storaged and not issued with ammo, deployed in a firing position is not an asset.

    Insisting on these empty numbers and comparing Soviet division and German division count (amateur hour, those are vastly different sized formations within differing OOBs) just shows how disingenuous and ignorant you are.

    But please, do explain how Germans advanced boldly not due to force concentration (Schwerpunkt) and opposition unpreparedness, 3+:1 superiority on the offensive, but instead due to Teutonic spirit and Kruppstahl superiority over Asiatic and Mongoloid Soviets.

    This would be the point where I introduce comparison of electric energy generation, coal, iron ore, steel, bauxite, aluminum, sulphuric and nitric acid production for USSR and Reich, and Reich+Ostfront allies.

    Then do the same for population of USSR minus occupied areas vs Reich.

    If you weren’t a degenerate Wehraboo Internet “expert” and c/p aficionado, you would have never brought this subject up.

    • 巨魔: L.K
    • 回复: @vot tak
  165. @Peter Grafström

    Certainly, Stalin had to arrange to be attacked first, for the same reasons that FDR had to induce Japan to attack Pearl Harbor (even though the US was already fighting Japan covertly in Burma with the “flying tigers” who had German Luftwaffe shark’s teeth painted on their planes.) Even once attacked, the Red Army was not too enthusiastic to defend Stalin, and had to be encouraged with machine gunners at their backs to shoot anyone who retreated. That is why Stalin ignored all warnings of the impending attack. He had to let the Germans go first or risk losing control of his own people. As it was, when the Germans did attack, thousands threw down their tools and cheered. And joined the Germans.

  166. @AnonFromTN

    Plenty of people are completely wrong about realities they experienced first hand.

    • 回复: @AnonFromTN
  167. @Sean

    If you secretly assassinated Stalin and did not want to be discovered, you would try to make people think that he died from heavy drinking, wouldn’t you? Well, at a meeting with Germans before the war, heavy drinking was being encouraged. Stalin himself was drinking heavily from his carafe of vodka. A suspicious German officer deliberately poured himself some vodka from Stalin’s carafe and instead of vodka tasted water. Stalin smiled. Those heavy drinking parties were to get the others drunk and then observe them. But you know that.

  168. AnonFromTN 说:
    @ploni almoni

    True enough. One of the German writers (don’t remember which, I think it was Max Frisch, so actually a Swiss writer writing in German) expressed it best: “a person has experienced something and is now looking for his story”.

  169. vot tak 说:
    @Epigon

    Been enjoying reading your demolitions of the boy scouts here. 😀

    工作很好

  170. vot tak 说:
    @Johnny Walker Read

    La roach, LOL.

    At thesaker.is there is a trumpette psywar sales critter calling itself bro93 who posts a lot of la roach rubbish. Apparently la roach is a likudite approved reference. 😀

    • 回复: @Johnny Walker Read
  171. Korenchkin 说:
    @Truth3

    我们永远不会知道

    We do know, since the Soviet Union destroyed them (at heavy losses, true) even when the Germans lucked out massively with total element of surprise in 1941
    The USSR lost it’s industrial core, Kiev, Minsk, Stalingrad, Donetsk, Sevastopol and so many other cities, yet the Germans still failed to cause they breakdown of the Soviet Government like they hoped (basing it on their experience in WW1 when the Tsarist Government faltered)
    Digging in would just give Soviets time to produce, produce and produce until the Germans eventually drowned

    • 回复: @Truth3
    , @Seraphim
  172. Korenchkin 说:
    @L.K

    typical of the Team Russia shills and propagandists, pushing propaganda and disinfo on the Internet

    Did I step into 4Chan instead of Unz by mistake?
    Read the posts of the people you’re replying to before organizing them in your fantasy strawmen categories

  173. Korenchkin 说:
    @ploni almoni

    thousands threw down their tools and cheered

    Thousands (!)
    This was a war of millions
    Had the Germans not acted like violent subhumans towards the Slavic population they probably could’ve created three new army groups out of the “liberated” peoples
    It would’ve been the easiest thing, re-opening churches, bringing back white emigres, etc.
    那好吧

    • 回复: @Johnny Walker Read
  174. The main conclusions I drew from Suvoros are summarised in the following paragraphs from his book:

    For Stalin, German Nazism was an instrument which would break a path for the revolution through the solid ice – an icebreaker. German Nazism could begin the war and the war would lead to revolution. Let the icebreaker break Europe! Hitler could do what it did not suit Stalin to do. Stalin stated in 1927 that the second imperialist war was quite unavoidable, just as unavoidable, in fact, as the entry of the Soviet Union into that war. However, he did not want to take part in it himself from the first day. ‘We shall move, but we shall be the last to move, in order to throw our weight on to the scales and tip the balance.

    From 1927 onwards, Stalin made every effort to support the Nazis who were then striving for power, although he did not of course do so publicly. After 1933, Stalin would do everything possible to push the Nazis towards war. When they entered the war, Stalin
    would order communists living in democratic countries temporarily to become pacifists, to demoralize the armed forces of the Western countries, to open the way for the Nazis and to capitulate to them with demands that the ‘imperialist war’ should be stopped, while at the same time undermining the war effort of their own countries and governments.

    Considering the West may have had the same intention to use the Nazis against the Soviet Union, how else should have Stalin reacted?

    • 同意: Beefcake the Mighty
    • 回复: @S
  175. @ploni almoni

    我需要提醒你,斯大林(我相信他年轻时曾在伦敦接受过部分训练,就像伦敦从那时起就收容了无数伊斯兰恐怖分子,伦敦成为伦敦斯坦的头衔)继承了引发革命和援助的英国贵族的烂摊子。红军打败白军。

    现在领导层中的任何人要做什么?

    抛弃共产主义?

    英国的代理人,你知道是谁,几乎不会允许苏联的任何领导人这样做。
    许多真诚的俄罗斯社会主义者也不会允许这样做。

    斯大林勉强战胜了老卫兵和托洛茨基主义者。

    完全改变到某种更传统的制度是不可能的。

    就像你暗示的共产主义,由英国贵族培育和强加的,并不受欢迎。

    所有先前入侵的军队以及土地和贫困的蹂躏的背景与铁腕领导层的贡献一样大。

    此外,在战争条件下射击逃兵的方法也不是典型的。
    你认为美国人在内战期间做了什么?

    斯大林军队为此开枪射击了大约一万,而苏联总共损失了27万人,所以这十万人可能挽救了数千万甚至更多。 并使斯拉夫人免于被赶出乌拉尔。

  176. Wavelength 说:
    @L.K

    Just calling it “bullshit” because you don’t like what you’re hearing doesn’t make it so. The vast majority of the German-influenced version of the war comes from Franz Halder specifically, and his “mad man Hitler!” theory, along with these: “it was the winter!”, “there were too many of them we were simply outnumbered!”. All of these claims have been debunked.

    It was necessary for the Germans to portray themselves as the good guys to the western allies to sell themselves, and to portray the Soviets as the epitome of evil to make the Germans seem less guilty, often by exaggerating or just lying and making up crimes the Soviets have committed. To do that, they tried to distance themselves from Hitler, make it seem as if everything is solely his fault (“mad man Hitler!”), that the supposedly “professional” German army, who were still using horses for their transport by the way, didn’t commit any crimes in eastern Europe, or that all the German strategic failures are simply the result of mad man Hitler, “being outnumbered!” and “snow!”, and not the incompetence of the German generals.

    But you are right to say that for most of the time, Hollywood was portraying the war not positive to the Germans.. why would they? But they have, and still are portraying the war from an AMERICAN/WESTERN point of view! They are under the impression that WW2 was this one big anti-Semitic operation, stopped only by the Americans and the Brits.. which is absurd. They hardly ever mention the role USSR played, which had the biggest role in stopping the Nazis, or what was happening in eastern Europe, Lebensraum, attempted eradication and enslavement of the Slavic peoples, etc.

    While the notes and memoirs of captured Germans, like Halder, served as a source for many history books, documentary shows, etc. because the Germans got the story out first. And for a long time it couldn’t be challenged/debunked. So my original argument that the USSR couldn’t get the word out, and the official narrative remained heavily influenced by the Germans (combined with Hollywood Western narrative), still stands.

    The Russian archives have been open since the 90s, if one wants to know the truth, one will study both sides of the narrative, and decide for himself.

    And as for your:

    closed again by the Russian government

    statement.. it’s untrue:

    https://www.rt.com/news/478610-russia-fight-history-distortion-putin/

    • 回复: @Adûnâi
    , @L.K
  177. @Korenchkin

    Yep those WWII Bolsheviks were so wonderful, many of them joined the German army in their fight against Stalin.

    • 回复: @Korenchkin
  178. Special Report: Vladimir’s Venezuela – Leveraging loans to Caracas, Moscow snaps up oil assets
    CARACAS/HOUSTON (Reuters) – Venezuela’s unraveling socialist government is increasingly turning to ally Russia for the cash and credit it needs to survive – and offering prized state-owned oil assets in return, sources familiar with the negotiations told Reuters.
    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-venezuela-russia-oil-specialreport-idUSKBN1AR14U

    Tell me again how Putin is such a wonderful guy and not at all like those filthy American capitalist.

    • 回复: @Desert Fox
  179. Desert Fox 说:
    @Johnny Walker Read

    Putin is saving Syria from the terrorists created by the ZUS and Israel and ZBritain, and the worst terrorists wear suits in Tel Aviv and NYC and London, and you mock the man who is standing in the way of the NWO?

    • 回复: @Johnny Walker Read
  180. S 说:
    @Commentator Mike

    When they entered the war, Stalin would order communists living in democratic countries temporarily to become pacifists, to demoralize the armed forces of the Western countries, to open the way for the Nazis and to capitulate to them with demands that the ‘imperialist war’ should be stopped, while at the same time undermining the war effort of their own countries and governments.

    真正, the Capitalist US/UK and the Communist Soviet Union were attempting to use National Socialist Germany as a deadly pawn with which to bludgeon the other with.

    Below is a pic of the April 19, 1940 ‘peace strike’ at the University of California at Berkeley. The student pictured is an ROTC officer and the button he is wearing says ‘the Yanks are not coming’.


    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Peace_Mobilization

  181. Adûnâi 说:
    @Wavelength

    > “The video you referenced is not Russian, but Ukrainian. They speak Ukrainian there, and it is written in Ukrainian. But I guess, you not being able to speak Russian, don’t know the difference huh.”

    Little Russian is a dialect of Russian. You should have known that. Unless we are being here politically correct to my irrelevant pygmy nation of pseudohistorians and witches.

    https://old.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/f65rwb/why_do_so_many_educated_ukrainians_believe_in/

    > “didn’t commit any crimes in eastern Europe”

    Do you consider gassing Jews a crime?

    > “Hollywood was portraying the war not positive to the Germans.. why would they?”

    Because Germans and Americans are of the same racial stock and have no grudges against each other?

    > “But they have, and still are portraying the war from an AMERICAN/WESTERN point of view! They are under the impression that WW2 was this one big anti-Semitic operation, stopped only by the Americans and the Brits.. which is absurd.”

    True, Americans view wars not as international fights, but as some weird anarchist struggle for absolute good. Americans have no notion of being a country (as they live on an island). Their propaganda never concerns itself with states, only individuals. Compare Batman to the DPRK propaganda. Batman is one superhuman policeman fighting robbers in a big city, whereas Koreans are a collective of factory workers, farmers, intelligentsia and soldiers battling foreign invaders shoulder to shoulder.

    https://www.koreareaders.com/2020/01/dprk-posters-headon-breakthrough.html

    > “They hardly ever mention the role USSR played, which had the biggest role in stopping the Nazis, or what was happening in eastern Europe, Lebensraum, attempted eradication and enslavement of the Slavic peoples, etc.”

    What’s so bad about civilizing Slavdom? Wouldn’t you take it as a price for exterminating Jewry, Christianity, and saving the Nordic race?

    Although I will be the first to admit the German foolishness for not preparing for total war before February 1943, for not recognizing the Ukraine in Lemberg and Kiev, and for preferring Christtard Melnykians to Banderians.

  182. @Desert Fox

    You are being played my friend. It’s time to take a reality pill.
    ROTHSCHILD’S MAFIA THE NEW WORLD ORDER & THE RING THAT BINDS THEM ALL



    视频链接

    • 回复: @Desert Fox
  183. Desert Fox 说:
    @Johnny Walker Read

    Russia is returning to Christianity and Putin is a Christian and Russia is the only nation standing in the way of the zionist greater Israel agenda and the NWO and this was predicted by Edgar Cayce decades ago,

    If not for Russia , Syria would have been lost, God bless Putin and God bless Russia.

    • 回复: @Adûnâi
  184. L.K 说:
    @Wavelength

    The Anglo-Americans have produced their propaganda “version” of the war and so have the Russians and I don’t care for either.

    That you seem to believe the Russian archives are open since the 90s is clear proof of how deluded you are.
    For the record, I will repeat; the archives were PARTIALLY opened after the fall of the Soviet Union and after the so called “new Russian historians”, not to mention foreign ones, started to find a lot of documents that were “harmful” to the established propaganda version of the so called ‘Great Patriotic War”, the archives have largely been closed again. They are closely supervised, and only Court historians that can be trusted to perpetuate the approved story have better access. This is the case, for instance, with the Israeli Gabriel Gorodetsky.

    The situation is so bad that full access to independent Russian historians to the archives in order to determine exactly how many irrecoverable military losses the Soviets suffered has been made nearly impossible by the Russian authorities.

    This is because even the issue of Soviet casualties have been heavily politicized in Russia, a situation Russia inherited from the Soviet Union and did not change.
    Soviet and now Russian court historians have greatly downplayed the Soviet military losses while grotesquely exaggerating those of their Axis opponents, the Germans in particular.

    Russian military historians Boris Kavalerchik and Lev Lopukhovsky, both former Soviet officers, with Lopukhovsky having taught at the Frunze Military Academy & later becoming a professor in the Russian Federation’s Academy of Military Sciences, discuss in their book “The Price of Victory – The Red Army’s Casualties in the Great Patriotic War”, the difficulties to access the archival data. For ex, they write:

    …Russia’s military history must be liberated from the false dogmas and stratification resulting from the ideological tenets of the Central Committee of the CPSU. …

    For this, it is necessary to create the appropriate conditions: first and foremost, to open the remaining closed archive collections, particularly the General Staff collection; to digitize all archive materials for better storage and ease of access for all; and to actively continue to publish collections of archive documents.
    Unfortunately, those participating in the creation and reanimation of myths about the Great Patriotic War are hindering in any way possible the publication of the most important documents about the war, including those that concern casualties.

    Now, right after the end of the war, with the beginning of the Cold War, Stalin would have had objective reasons not to disclose how badly the Red Army had been bled. But now, it seems it is basically just HUBRIS.

    If at present, the Russian authorities cannot be transparent even on something as the number of casualties the Red Army incurred, clearly they are not when it comes to what really matters, i.e, the responsibilities of the Stalin regime in making a war with Germany all but impossible to avoid, its expansionist policies, etc.

  185. Truth3 说:
    @Korenchkin

    Once again, you don’t have a clue about logic and critical thinking.

    我们永远不会知道。

    That is an absolutely truthful and factual statement.

    Why? You might ask…

    Because history works that way.

    How do you know the absolute outcomes of a turn in a historical fork in time?

    你不知道

    So… again.

    You don’t know squat about logic or critical thinking.

    Save that for those intelligent enough to know what they do not know.

    Because those guys are problem solvers at the highest level.

    Did that for three decades plus. Was usually the third or fourth, but always the last, engineer hired.

    Now I know why I never bumped into you.

  186. L.K 说:
    @Epigon

    Is that you, Martyanov?

    Your 3 idiotic posts attacking me are just pure sophistry, obfuscation, distortion, misrepresentation… plus the usual propaganda. Truth3 really is quite correct about you.

    It is quite funny how you erect a bunch of strawman arguments & then proceed to knock them down!

    You do the same for Zaloga. Zaloga was referring only to the border battles during a period of less than 3 weeks from 22 June and as for the several hysterical objections you raise to Zaloga, it clearly shows that you have either NOT read him or that you are simply misrepresenting his positions, since Zaloga covers many of the points you raise. For just one example:

    The critical difference between the German and Soviet experience was that after the border battles, the Wehrmacht controlled the battlefield, so PzKpfw 38(t) tanks that broke down remained in German hands and could be recovered and serviced. Soviet BT-7 tanks that broke down or ran out of fuel remained behind enemy lines and so were total losses.

    Soviet tank losses for the full year of 1941 were higher than 20.000.

    The real problem with the Soviet armored forces in the early period of the war, and for the Red Army in general, was not that their equipment was obsolete. It was the human dimension.
    As Russian military historian Boris Kavalerchik recognizes, technical indicators don’t cover these problems:

    doesn’t reflect such critical qualitative characteristics as staffing levels, the level of combat training, the qualifications of the command staff, combat experience, and so on; in these criteria, the Red Army at the beginning of the war was noticeably inferior to the Wehrmacht.

    The Soviets improved slowly but never really caught up, and this is why even late in the war, the Red Army would still suffer painful tactical defeats.

    Russian military historian B. Kavalerchik notes that even though the Soviets had already detected the many inadequacies of their armored formations in terms of the operational art, tactics, training, as well as the advantages the Germans had in those regards, as early as August 1941, the same problems continued to plague the Red Army at the end of 1942.

    The inadequacies of the use of Soviet tanks, which are criticized in the aforementioned NKO Order No. 325 from 16 October 1942, ‘On the combat use of tank and mechanized units and formations’, look particularly sad against this backdrop: ( a very long list of these problems is given )

    Kavalerchik then comments

    It is even more frustrating that such mistakes continued to occur even after the accumulation of a year’s experience of intensive combat operations, acquired at the cost of the heaviest losses. After all, many of these failings had been mentioned as early as 21 August 1941 in his order to the troops of the Reserve Front No. 005 ‘On the shortcomings of using tanks and measures to eliminate them’ from its commander, General of the Army G.K. Zhukov

    In fact, as I said, the problems were never entirely solved.
    The Drive on Moscow 1941 – Operation Taifun and Germany’s First Crisis of World War II
    By Niklas Zetterling and Anders Frankson

    ..At the end of September, the Soviet defenders did not suffer from numerical inferiority, but there were other weaknesses to consider, the most fundamental of which was the lower combat power of the Soviet units, which resulted from inferior tactics, training and junior leadership.13( This difference would persist until the end of the war. We have discussed it previously, for example in N. Zetterling and A. Frankson, Kursk 1943—A Statisical Analysis (London: Frank Cass, 2000). …

    • 回复: @Korenchkin
    , @Korenchkin
    , @Epigon
  187. Korenchkin 说:
    @Johnny Walker Read

    Bolshevik awfulness is testimony to the Germans failure to get more anti-Bolshevik fighters on their side
    800 000 vs 12 million+

    • 同意: Adûnâi, Johnny Walker Read
  188. Korenchkin 说:
    @L.K

    You’re not even addressing what he wrote, Germans lost more then 400 tanks and the other part is after 1941
    Stop screeching and read the posts

    • 巨魔: L.K
  189. Korenchkin 说:
    @L.K

    And one other point you failed to address
    How did the Soviets supposedly lose so many tanks from 41 to 45 yet end up with such a large surplus at the end of the war

  190. Epigon 说:
    @L.K

    Zaloga was referring only to the border battles during a period of less than 3 weeks from 22 June

    So, in those 3 weeks German Panzers encountered 12 000 Soviet tanks in combat and destroyed them?
    Or Germans overall encountered 12 000 Soviet tanks in combat and destroyed them?

    Holy shit, the delusion! How I am supposed to debate this level of idiocy?

    Soviet tank losses for the full year of 1941 were higher than 20.000.

    Oh FFS I am done.

    • 回复: @Truth3
    , @L.K
  191. Seraphim 说:
    @Korenchkin

    People overlook the speed and precision of the massive evacuation of industries ( 2,593 industrial enterprises) and population (10 million at least), livestock (2,393,300 heads) from June 1941 to December 1941, beyond the Urals. It is a proof that they were prepared to meet the attack (in fact it was the time honored tactic of ‘scorched earth’ that broke the neck of Napoleon). It is impossible to believe that an operation on such massive scale was an ‘ad-hoc’ one and was not planned well in advance. The Germans were deprived of the use of Soviet industries, rolling stock, food stocks. Hitler fell into the same trap as Napoleon, with the same consequences.

    • 回复: @Korenchkin
  192. Adûnâi 说:
    @Desert Fox

    > “Russia is returning to Christianity and Putin is a Christian and Russia is the only nation standing in the way of the zionist greater Israel agenda and the NWO and this was predicted by Edgar Cayce decades ago,”

    How can you pray to the god of the Jews and oppose Israel?

    > “If not for Russia , Syria would have been lost”

    And?.. Why would any White man care about some shithole MENA country?

    North Koreans care – because they have a clear agenda of hurting the US geopolitical interests for the sake of their own proud nation. But you? You don’t hate America. You have nothing against the American people. You don’t even hate the Jews. You merely oppose the state of Israel because of the brown Palestinian children (who the cucked Israelis don’t actually dare to exterminate like the vermin they are).

    Christian anti-semitism strikingly resembles the anti-White whining of the Negroes. Neither Christians nor Negroes have built a country of their own. Both Christians and Negroes will only stop their incessant scowling when they return to the inanimate matter from which they came.

    • 回复: @Desert Fox
    , @Korenchkin
    , @anon
  193. Truth3 说:
    @Epigon

    Be Gone, Sophist. Take your Korn Muncher with you.

  194. Vaterland 说:
    @melpol

    Breaking news: Not so subtle Jewish supremacist informs audience that we shall never know the historical reality of the Soviet Union. It all comes down to collections of wonderful, imaginative stories.

    Spot on! It’s complicated, Rabbi: Some things happen, but are not true. Others never happened, but are the unquestionable truth.

    • 回复: @melpol
  195. vot tak 说:
    @Johnny Walker Read

    Hey, you’re the one searching for and then posting shirtless photos of Putin. 😀

    Why do you rightwingers obsess so much about male bodies? (rhetorical question, btw, since the answer is obvious…)

  196. Vaterland 说:
    @utu

    No, you are dead wrong. For most of my life, I hated and feared Hitler and loved the United States more than any other country on earth. I believe it to be the shining city on a hill destined to carry the light of democracy and liberation into all corners of this world. The other part was crushing ‘German guilt’ which works quite effectively in psychologically breaking a nation.

    I am however, step by step, revising my views on a lot of things. And weak counter-“arguments” such as yours, certainly don’t help your case. You bring ad hominems and strawmen, but do not refute any of Suvorov’s or Hoffman’s actual proposals or data.

    • 回复: @Seraphim
  197. Vaterland 说:
    @redmudhooch

    Yes, clearly a man on the CIA pay roll would write 200 years together, publicly condemn and criticize “the godless materialism of the West”, speak out against the NATO war against Serbia and be black listed by the entire Anglosphere MSM after the Gulag Archipelago while actually appreciated by Putin. That is also why the Gulag became part of the Russian curriculum. Makes perfect sense!!

    What I do see is a lot of Team Russia, or rather Team 红色 fanboys freaking out that we aren’t buying their crap, after we have rejected Uncle Sam’s poison. Get used to it, Comrades.

    Back to Mr. S. 用他自己的话说:

    SPIEGEL: Thirteen years ago when you returned from exile, you were disappointed to see the new Russia. You turned down a prize proposed by Gorbachev, and you also refused to accept an award Yeltsin wanted to give you. Yet now you have accepted the State Prize which was awarded to you by Putin, the former head of the FSB intelligence agency, whose predecessor the KGB persecuted and denounced you so cruelly. How does this all fit together?

    Solzhenitsyn: The prize in 1990 was proposed not by Gorbachev, but by the Council of Ministers of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic, then a part of the USSR. The prize was to be for “The Gulag Archipelago.” I declined the proposal, since I could not accept an award for a book written in the blood of millions.

    In 1998, it was the county’s low point, with people in misery; this was the year when I published the book “Russia in Collapse.” Yeltsin decreed I be honored the highest state order. I replied that I was unable to receive an award from a government that had led Russia into such dire straits.

    The current State Prize is awarded not by the president personally, but by a community of top experts. The Council on Science that nominated me for the award and the Council on Culture that supported the idea include some of the most highly respected people of the country, all of them authorities in their respective disciplines. The president, as head of state, awards the laureates on the national holiday. In accepting the award I expressed the hope that the bitter Russian experience, which I have been studying and describing all my life, will be for us a lesson that keeps us from new disastrous breakdowns.

    Vladimir Putin — yes, he was an officer of the intelligence services, but he was not a KGB investigator, nor was he the head of a camp in the gulag. As for service in foreign intelligence, that is not a negative in any country — sometimes it even draws praise. George Bush Sr. was not much criticized for being the ex-head of the CIA, for example.

    https://www.spiegel.de/international/world/spiegel-interview-with-alexander-solzhenitsyn-i-am-not-afraid-of-death-a-496211.html

    • 回复: @Johnny Walker Read
    , @S
  198. Anon[423]• 免责声明 说:

    Wait — why does the Saker think that Krushchev was a bad leader, let alone the worst Russian leader ever, which seems insane? He exposed Stalin’s crimes and 1954-64 appear to have been a relatively peaceful and prosperous time for the USSR?

  199. Hans Vogel 说:
    @S

    Yes indeed, we are being lied to and the fact that the antithesis was fake is indeed becoming apparent.

    As for multiculturalism, that is such an obviously sterile and nonsensical concept that any thinking person with a modicum of intelligence ought to see right through it from the outset.

    The best remedy against credulity is still (and will probably remain so) a sound education, based on the Greek and Roman classics. That is precisely the reason why the educational system in the “West” has been demolished since the 1960s and at a more accelerated pace since the fall of the Berlin Wall.

    • 回复: @S
  200. Korenchkin 说:
    @Seraphim

    It is impossible to believe that an operation on such massive scale was an ‘ad-hoc’ one and was not planned well in advance

    It is perfectly believable when you read how they went about it
    Piles of factory parts lying in the grass with scavengers sent to find what was needed at the moment, train cars carrying factory parts and their contents and destination marked with chalk on the outside that got erased by the snow and rain so they had to do guesswork where it was intended, etc.

    This was very likely a worse case scenario plan that was never to even be used (kinda like Operation Unthinkable)
    I seriously doubt anyone in the high command expected to surrender Kiev or Sevastopol, although it’s possible those that did likely ended up in a gulag

    • 回复: @Seraphim
  201. Korenchkin 说:
    @Adûnâi

    Neither Christians nor Negroes have built a country of their own

    Genesis of Slavic Eastern European countries is thoroughly Christian, right down to the alphabet which was created to convert them to Christianity
    Several American countries exist thanks to Christian missions aswell, although that influence is largely is lost today

  202. melpol 说:
    @Vaterland

    Placing Jews as leaders of Soviet atrocities is false history. Jews by their innate Nature fear violence because it might be directed against them. Bolsheviks were supporting a free market economy by helping disband Czarist monopolies. Free markets is the dream of all Jews not equality of outcome. Jews support a Meritocracy not governments where the slow minded earns the same income as the smart and clever.

    • 巨魔: Lol just lol
  203. @Vaterland

    What I do see is a lot of Team Russia, or rather Team Red fanboys freaking out that we aren’t buying their crap, after we have rejected Uncle Sam’s poison. Get used to it, Comrades.
    确切地..

    [更多]

    • 不同意: Desert Fox
  204. S 说:
    @Hans Vogel

    The best remedy against credulity is still (and will probably remain so) a sound education, based on the Greek and Roman classics.

    Sounds like a good plan, particularly if one is of Euro stock.

    The only thing I might add to it, as part of ‘a sound education’, is people need to start understanding, and then walking away, lock, stock, and barrel, from this manufactured and controlled Hegelian Dialectic that’s been at play since 1776 and 1789.

    Of course, it’s on the back of every other person’s mind that this whole Right vs Left, etc, dialectic might not be real, but we’ve all been conditioned (crimethink) to not think it, let alone speak it, which to do so are two truly revolutionary acts in today’s paradigm.

    People need to start thinking and speaking it though, and leave that burdensome dialectical ‘bad trip’ behind in the waste bin of history, where it should of been placed over two hundred years ago.

    • 回复: @Hans Vogel
  205. S 说:
    @Vaterland

    publicly condemn and criticize “the godless materialism of the West”

    I’ve read the transcript of Solzhenitsyn’s Harvard speech where he spoke about ‘a world split apart’ between Capitalism and Communism. I think he pretty quickly saw through the entire establishment ‘progressive’ Right/Left dialectic for the fraud it was.

    I recall how the US/UK corporate media were happy to cynically attempt to use him during the ‘Cold War’, after his defection to the West. Got to make the ‘fight against Communism’ at least look real

    I saw also upon his death how the BBC disgraced itself, by turning against him, and attempting to besmirch him when he of course then couldn’t respond.

    As imperfect as he may well have been, Solzhenitsyn truly cared about his people, the Russian people, which in so doing allowed him to display a certain real empathy towards others.

    He didn’t sell out.

    In the inverted world of Multi-Culturalism, that’s what they call ‘hate’.

    • 同意: John Regan
  206. Seraphim 说:
    @Vaterland

    What you should revise is your view that the United States are the ‘city on the hill’ destined to carry democracy…, same-sex marriage, LGBTQ rights around the world, etc. The hill is obviously the ‘New Zion’ destined to rebuild Sodom, which resulted in 250 years of revolutions, wars, massacres, misery inflicted on the ‘unenlightened’.

    • 同意: Desert Fox
  207. Seraphim 说:
    @Korenchkin

    You wouldn’t, on the other hand, expect such a massive operation not to have some shortcomings, mistakes and setbacks. It was for sure a worse case scenario. Sure, it did not plan every detail in advance, but I can’t think it was thought that it would never be used. That’s to pay tribute to the idea that Stalin did neglect defense only because he was prepared to invade Europe. In fact the Soviet leadership begun to devote considerable attention and resources (admittedly not enough) to the rapid development of a second major industrial complex in the eastern regions of the USSR at least in the late 30s. The fact that a Council for Evacuation under the Council of People’s Commissars was formed on the 24 June with large mandate suggests that the Soviet leadership switched immediately to the ‘worse case scenario’. Hitler understood better the importance of capturing the industries and resources, when he delayed the attack on Moscow.

  208. L.K 说:
    @Epigon

    The figure of Soviet tank losses for the year of 1941, which is given as 20.500, derives from the research of the Russian military historian, Col Krivosheev & his team, p.252-253. The worst year for Soviet tank losses was actually 1943.

    Krivosheev and his team have done much research in the Russian archives and produced what is generally seen as a semi-official Russian account of Soviet losses in WW2.
    Their work is highly biased in that K and his team greatly downplay Soviet irrecoverable losses while ridiculously exaggerating those of the Germans and their allies...
    Therefore Krivosheev is certainly not providing grist for my mill.

    Russian military historians B. Kavalerchik and L. Lopukhovsky state the following re the work of Krivosheev and his team:

    Thus, we discover a constant and clear attempt on the part of Krivosheev’s team to reduce the USSR armed forces’ irrecoverable losses so as not to exceed the number reported by the Central Committee of the CPSU: 11,444,100.

    The opposite trend can be seen in their determination of the enemy’s irrecoverable losses, above all those of the Red Army’s main adversary, the Wehrmacht. Here the authors of the statistical study indulged in increasing the irrecoverable losses of the German armed forces in any way they could.

    It becomes all too clear why you cut and ran, after throwing a tantrum and hiding behind your usual smokescreens… as always, you had egg on your face… so off with Martyanov’s “clone”, the clown ‘Epigon’.

    • 回复: @Epigon
    , @Korenchkin
  209. Hans Vogel 说:
    @S

    Actually, the “left-right” dichotomy has been a manifest fake since the Fall of the Berlin Wall and the and the collapse of “real existing socialism” between 1989 and 1991. From that moment, all European “social democratic” parties have adopted neoliberalism. Same in China, where a neoliberal capitalist economy was created under the guidance of a “Communist” party.

    Of course between 1776 and 1848 the Ancien Régime was killed and buried in the “West”, as part of a process that ended in 1917 in Russia.

    Once there was the notion of “noblesse oblige” which, although certainly not heeded by all of the nobility, did serve as a kind of internalized impediment to all kinds of abuse. During the Ancien Regime, nobles were educated in line with this adage. It taught them that power and privilege came at a price and that there was always a chance the populace would one day rise in rebellion if they felt cheated.

    Modern elites don’t even know that valuable principle and that is why we are in such a mess today. When you are truly rich and truly powerful, you can get way with anything. Maybe not just yet in China, which in turn might explain its recent successes, maybe not in Russia under Putin, but certainly the US, Western Europe and the rest of the US empire. On the contrary, it is there that one achieves success with the most abject deeds, witness for instance the trail of dead bodies ‘all “suicides”) behind the Clintons.

    • 回复: @S
  210. Epigon 说:
    @L.K

    Boris Kavalerchik is neither Russian, nor historian, especially not a Russian historian.

    How do you manage to fail at such simple things?
    你有多迟钝?

    I have already advised you to seek professional help.

    1. Krivosheev exaggerated Soviet AFV losses.

    2. If you don’t trust me, post the balance between tanks manufactured, received under LL on one, and losses claimed by Krivosheev on the other, then compare it to Soviet tank inventory at the end of the war.

    The simpleton Krivosheev literally takes each supposed end of the year total armor strength, adds a newly produced armor figure for that year, and arrives at his next year’s January 1 available figures. This is mind-boggingly stupid for obvious reasons, and wrong.

    Whenever I encounter delusional tards of your breed, I am prompted to insist on EXACT, PRECISE discussion of YEARLY PRODUCTION and YEARLY LOSSES, BY AFV TYPE.

    So, Wehraboo slime, lets do the Soviet AFV inventory balance sheet, year by year. Think you’re up to the task? Lets see which excuse, strawman, goalpost shifting and non sequitur will you to resort to this time.

    • 哈哈: L.K
    • 巨魔: Beefcake the Mighty
  211. S 说:
    @Hans Vogel

    Good point about the demolition of the Berlin Wall, and as you allude, the corresponding ‘Fall of Communism’ between 1989-91, and the resulting rise of ‘neo-liberalism’.

    As with the example you provide, there have been plenty of other hints something was amiss. One would be the ‘untimely deaths’/murder of ‘true believers’, such as Patton, Forrestal, Trotsky, amongst likely others, who believed too strongly and fought too hard for the actual triumph of either Capitalism, (or Communism) over the other closely paralleling ideology, rather than their global convergance/synthesis as promoted by tptb.

    As for the utterly surreal Berlin Wall itself, and the just too pat symbolic (and otherwise) division of Europe between Capitalism and Communism, perfectly and ever so (too) neatly right down the middle of Europe, that should have been a strong hint in and of itself that this Hegelian Dialectic was not ‘spontaneous’ or naturally occurring.

    • 回复: @Hans Vogel
    , @Korenchkin
  212. Hans Vogel 说:
    @S

    Well, yes, but that division also meant that common folk, the workers and lower middle classes in Eastern Europe, had a very decent life, free education and free health care, and a secure life as pensioners. That is why the US through the CIA sponsored the social democratic parties in Europe, because they were the best defence against the spread of communism in the “West.” It meant that therefore workers and the lower middle classes in the “West” were also given decent conditions (the Welfare State).

    Once the Wall had fallen, there was no need to retain the facade and the social democrats betrayed their electorates. Hence the rise of “rightwing populism” in Europe since the 1990s.

    The right-left dichotomy is fake alright, but the elites still don’t realize they cannot be too selfish and need to engage in “Christian” charity and benevolence towards their fellow human beings

  213. Korenchkin 说:
    @L.K

    Dude, how do they physically destroy 12000 tanks in 3 weeks??

  214. Korenchkin 说:
    @S

    Trotsky, amongst likely others, who believed too strongly and fought too hard

    There is no proof that Stalin and his cohorts weren’t true believers, even in private they still talked about the proleteriat, world communism and other nonsense
    As for the fight. Trotsky managed to install Communism into one country, Stalin got it into about two dozen encompassing a good chunk of the global population and almost half of Eurasia
    His successors continued his work and the dominos kept falling
    Then they got old and senile and when the younger generation got the reins they decided it didn’t work
    Gorbachev was the first General Secretary who had never lived in a capitalist system, total indoctrination from birth failed to produce the Soviet man they had desired and so it all fell apart

    The Berlin wall seems surreal to you, but the further East you go the more retarded Communism got, you should try checking out Maoism and the Khmer Rouge

    • 回复: @Adûnâi
  215. Begemot 说:
    @Ron Unz

    I’ve been highly skeptical of this Suvorov business, but I decided that I would look at Suvorov’s writing directly to see if he can make a convincing case on his own. I located a PDF copy of Icebreaker that was published in 1990 by Hamish Hamilton Ltd (( https://archive.org/details/ViktorSuvorovIcebreakerWhoStartedWorldWarTwo/mode/2up )

    You state in your essay:

    But the other central claim of the Suvorov Hypothesis—that the Soviets were themselves on the verge of attacking when the Germans struck—is an extremely factual question, which can be evaluated based on hard evidence. I find the case quite compelling, at least if the facts and details that Suvorov cites in support are not totally spurious, which seems unlikely with the Naval Academy Press as his publisher.

    So we will look at the facts Suvorov presents. I got to Chapter 3, Why Arms for the Communists? and encountered Suvorov’s discussion on the BT tanks.

    You yourself talk about this in your essay on Suvorov, so it is an important part of Suvorov’s case: the nature and purpose of the BT tanks. I will use this as a gauge for assessing if Suvorov should be trusted as a reliable source of information.

    In your essay you say:

    The Soviets had produced a remarkable line of light BT tanks, easily able to shed their tracks and continue on wheels, achieving a top speed of 60 miles per hour, two or three times faster than any other comparable armored vehicle, and ideally suited to exploitation drives deep into enemy territory. However, such wheeled operation was only effective on paved highways, of which Soviet territory had none, hence were ideally suited for travel on Germany’s large network of autobahns. In 1941 Stalin deployed almost 6,500 of these autobahn-oriented tanks, more than the rest of the world’s tanks combined.

    From Suvorov’s Icebreaker:

    The Mark BT is an aggressor tank. In all its characteristics, it is remarkably similar to the small but completely mobile cavalry warrior who emerged from the countless hordes of Ghenghis Khan … [who] destroyed his enemies … by swift manoeuvre in depth. Ghenghis Khan did not need slow, sluggish knights, but hordes of light, fast-moving troops, capable of covering vast distances, fording rivers and moving deep into the rear of enemy territory.

    Curiously, this notion is also in the concept behind the British cruiser tank:

    The cruiser tank (also called cavalry tank or fast tank) was a British concept of the interwar period for tanks designed as modernised armoured and mechanised cavalry … The cruiser tank concept was conceived by Gifford Le Quesne Martel, who preferred many small light tanks to swarm an opponent … [British] Armoured division theory emphasised the speed of cruiser tanks and independent action to protect flanks, attack the opponent’s flanks and rear, to counter-attack and conduct pursuit operations.

    When gaps had been forced through the opponent’s front by the infantry tanks, cruisers were to penetrate to the rear and attack lines of supply and communication centres in accordance with the theories of J.F.C. Fuller, Percy Hobart and B.H Liddell Hart.

    [The] Czechoslovak Army in 1930’s divided its tank[s] into three categories: light tanks – cavalry, light tanks – infantry and medium tanks. The cavalry category was analogical to the cruiser-tank concept. The cruiser-tank concept was also employed by the Soviet Union in the 1930s, as exemplified by the BT tank series (Russian: bystrokhodniy tank, [fast tank]).

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cruiser_tank

    So what Suvorov seems to be implying as a unique and sinister Soviet idea of a light cavalry/deep penetration/exploitation tank was common in the period between WW1 and WW2. Thus, Suvorov’s conclusion:

    Mark BT tanks could only be used in an aggressive war, only in the rear of the enemy and only in a swift offensive operation, in which masses of tanks suddenly burst into enemy territory, bypassing his centres of resistance and racing into the depth of his heartland, where there were no enemy troops, but his towns, bridges, factories, aerodromes, ports, depots, command posts and communications centres were situated.

    This accusation of aggressive war intention could then be hung onto the British as well as any forward thinking armored war theorists of the period. The deep armor penetration that Suvorov is describing above is what became known as blitzkrieg, the ideal of armored war theorists.

    Is Suvorov unaware of this or is he ignoring inconvenient facts to enhance his case?

    Suvorov makes much of the capability of the BT tanks to shed their treads and use their road wheels as regular wheels but he claims that the BT’s wheels were only capable of being used on paved roads:

    The strikingly belligerent qualities of the Mark BT tank were also achieved by means of a unique system of tracks and suspension. On unmade [British for unpaved] roads, the Mark BT operated on … tracks, but on a good road, the tracks were discarded and it shot ahead on wheels, like a racing car. It is, however, well known that speed is not compatible with crosscountry performance. The choice is therefore between, on the one hand, a high-speed car which will go only on good roads, or on the other, a slow moving tractor, which will go anywhere … Thus, the Mark BT tanks were quite powerless on Soviet territory. When Hitler began Operation Barbarossa, practically all the Mark BT tanks were cast aside. It was almost impossible to use them off the roads, even with caterpillar tracks. They were never used on wheels … The Mark BT was created to operate on foreign territory only and … only on territory where there were good roads …

    Most of the Soviet Union’s roads were dirt at the time the BTs were active. So if wheeled vehicles couldn’t use these roads then very little vehicular transport could function in the Soviet Union. But we know, because there are numerous photos that show it, that not only tanks but trucks (both German and Soviet) could travel these dirt roads (more difficult in the rasputitsa periods, of course). So why would a BT not be able to use its wheels on a Russian dirt road, but a German or Russian truck or cart could?

    https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=https%3A%2F%2Fpbeyecandy.wordpress.com%2F2012%2F07%2F30%2Fbt-artillery-tank%2F&psig=AOvVaw2fXpVRWYns6h9yGJNWLJN9&ust=1583015227520000&source=images&cd=vfe&ved=0CAIQjRxqFwoTCNCz7b2l9ecCFQAAAAAdAAAAABAD

    Above is a picture of a BT sans tracks in a field. Looks like a BT could move about on wheels without pavement under its wheels.

    Is Suvorov unaware of this or is he ignoring inconvenient facts to enhance his case?

    Given the above, therefore, Suvorov’s claim that the BT tank could only be used in central or southern Europe seems nonsensical.

    Now, Suvorov claims:

    When Hitler began Operation Barbarossa, practically all the Mark BT tanks were cast aside.

    Well there are lots of pictures of BT tanks being or having been used by the Red Army in 1941.

    根据在物品上 militaryfactory.com ( https://www.militaryfactory.com/armor/detail.asp?armor_id=347 ):

    With the BT-7’s role all but completed in the West, Soviet authorities rerouted the tank for use in the August 1945 Soviet invasion of Manchuria in operations against the Japanese Army along the Russian border …

    This would be the last recorded combat actions for all BT tanks …

    Thus it seems the BT tanks were not “cast aside” very quickly if they were still being used in 1945.

    So how does Suvorov stand to me so far? On this topic I think Suvorov has proven unconvincing in his treatment of the BT tanks, and even dishonest with the truth. This doesn’t disprove his larger thesis, but it suggests to me that he is to be approached with great caution and great skepticism.

    向前。

    • 回复: @Simpleguest
    , @Ron Unz
    , @FB
  216. Adûnâi 说:
    @Korenchkin

    > “Gorbachev was the first General Secretary who had never lived in a capitalist system, total indoctrination from birth failed to produce the Soviet man they had desired and so it all fell apart”

    Well, that’s because Communism was built by the White man – everything built by White men turns to dust. Is the Capitalist West faring any better? At the precipice of oblivion currently.

    Why has the DPR of Korea then succeeded in producing a man faithful to his country? Why is Kim Jong Un upholding Juche? Because traitors are rarer in the Korean race, yet the fidelious are uncommon among the Aryans.

    So funny to see you discuss the matters of ideologies when all you have seen is European cucks. When you have shit fundamentals, no wonder everything turns to shit. It is deeply ingrained in the European psyche to pray to foreign gods and to despise our own blood.

  217. Korenchkin 说:
    @Adûnâi

    We Slavs are not white, please do not associate us with Honkeys

    • 回复: @Beefcake the Mighty
  218. @Begemot

    The Mark BT is an aggressor tank. In all its characteristics, it is remarkably similar to the small but completely mobile cavalry warrior who emerged from the countless hordes of Ghenghis Khan … [who] destroyed his enemies … by swift manoeuvre in depth. Ghenghis Khan did not need slow, sluggish knights, but hordes of light, fast-moving troops, capable of covering vast distances, fording rivers and moving deep into the rear of enemy territory.

    Yep. Totally convincing.
    No doubt, pesky Soviets were just about to invade Europe and conquer it all the way to Paris.

    No matter the issues of supplies and logistics required by a dreadnought Soviet army fighting a war, say, just 500 km from the Soviet border.

    No matter the total lack of any air-superiority on the Soviet side. This, on its own, would have made Soviet logistics impossible.

    No matter a plethora of “bellow the radar” issues, like difference between Soviet and European rail gauges etc.

    You know, things very relevant to 20th century warfare.

    But hey, what’s that compared to the ultimate proof: Ghengis Khan and his 14th century war strategy that Soviets planned ti implement.

    Comedy staff. This guy Suvorov must be laughing his pants off.

  219. Ron Unz 说:
    @Begemot

    Your very long comment seems rather confused:

    (1) No one claims that the BT was a uniquely “sinister” weapon, merely that it was an obviously *进攻* tank, designed for armored thrusts on paved roads. Russia had no paved roads, while Germany and the rest of Western Europe did. The British and French had some numbers of light, high-speed tanks for the same reason, to be used in armored offensives.

    (2) After the Germans attacked, the BTs were far less effective on defense, but the Russians were absolutely desperate, so they obviously used them, along with everything else they had. They were mostly destroyed, along with all the other Soviet tanks, which were enormous in number.

    For more than a quarter-century the Suvorov Hypothesis has been hotly debated in military academic circles, but since the English-language MSM has refused to admit it existed, the debate has almost entirely been conducted in Russian and German.

    Upthread, L.K. brought to my attention a 2000 book by American Prof. Albert Weeks on the topic, which I ordered a few days ago, and have now read. Although the book is rather short, he reviews some of the key Russian academic articles from the late 1990s, and generally comes down in favor of the Suvorov Hypothesis.

    The Hoffman book, by a leading German military scholar, takes much the same position in far greater detail. So far, I have seen absolutely no effective refutation of any of the vast number of arguments advanced, and I’d say it is far more likely than not that the Suvorov Hypothesis is essentially correct.

    • 同意: Lol just lol, John Regan
    • 哈哈: FB
    • 回复: @L.K
  220. FB 说: • 您的网站
    @Sean

    Wow…you are probably the most seriously ill mental patient on this website…

  221. FB 说: • 您的网站
    @Johnny Walker Read

    Stupid Americans, buying into the lie Putin is a nationalist who loves all people…

    I guess you’d rather have Pete Buttplug…?

    • 同意: Beefcake the Mighty
  222. FB 说: • 您的网站
    @Johnny Walker Read

    Russia is not out friend, just as Israel is not our friend. They are both doing all they can to see America destroyed.

    America is destroying itself…and guess what, brainwashed sheeple like you are playing the lead part…

    • 回复: @Desert Fox
  223. “No one claims that the BT was a uniquely “sinister” weapon, merely that it was an obviously *进攻* tank, designed for armored thrusts on paved roads. Russia had no paved roads, while Germany and the rest of Western Europe did. The British and French had some numbers of light, high-speed tanks for the same reason, to be used in armored offensives.”

    Every weapon under the sun can be used for both offense and defense.
    An army can be used for both offensive and defensive operations.
    The real question is: has an army been used in an act of aggression or not.

    So, hypothesizing about the posture of Soviet Armies in June of 1941 within the Soviet borders is meaningless and an exercise in futility.

    I would concentrate my search for answers in previous “track records” of both parties.
    In 1939 – 1941 Nazi Germany:
    – annexed Czechoslovakia
    – attacked and conquered Poland;
    – attacked and conquered France;
    – attacked and conquered Greece and Yugoslavia;
    – was at war with Great Britain;

    In 1941, Soviet Union, having previously annexed parts of Poland and the Baltics, was not at war with anyone.

    In June of 1941, at it’s western frontiers, the Soviet Union was facing the German Wehrmacht, experienced, confident and in its prime, as well as the combined armies of German allies, Romania and Hungary. Attacking the Wehrmacht under these circumstances would have been plain suicide.

    So no, I definitely don’t find any offensive intent in positioning 3 million or so Soviet solders and 12000 or so tanks towards the western border.

    Furthermore, in June of 1941, Nazi Germany was faced with an existential strategic dilemma: what to do next?

    While Soviet Union had all the time in the world, Nazi Germany had to act quickly: in 2 or 3 years time Great Britain would recuperate and the Soviet Union would grow much stronger.
    And the two could possibly align against Germany.

    So, Nazi Germany decided not to wait and to strike first and to the East.
    The rest is, as they say, history.

    • 巨魔: Beefcake the Mighty
    • 回复: @FB
  224. FB 说: • 您的网站
    @Begemot

    Thanks Begemot…

    I see that the serious ‘historian’ Ron Unz was able to answer your very factual and insightful discussion about light tanks with a 湿面…哈哈

    A very interesting exchange…it seems Mr Unz is quite ‘knowledgable’ about tanks and even roads…

    • 巨魔: L.K
  225. FB 说: • 您的网站
    @Simpleguest

    Excellent comment…but fear not, the simple method of deductive reasoning is something that our eminent host here on this site is still learning…LOL

  226. L.K 说:
    @Ron Unz

    众所周知,德国领导人低估了苏联的战争能力,但鲜为人知的是,斯大林高估了苏联的军事能力并低估了德国人的军事能力。

    苏联共产党中央委员会机关报《真理报》在1991年XNUMX月也曾说过:

    由于高估了我们自己的能力而低估了敌人的能力,战前制定了不切实际的进攻性质的[苏联]计划。 根据这些计划,我们开始在西部边境部署我们的部队。 但是敌人打败了我们。=

    On May 5, 1941, Stalin delivered a speech at a ceremonial banquet in the Kremlin to graduates of the Frunze Military Academy, which underscores the points made in the 1991 Pravda article:

    “我们的战争计划已经准备好了……我们可以在接下来的两个月内与德国开战……与德国达成和平条约,但这只是一个骗局,或者是一个窗帘,我们可以在后面公开开展工作……”

    “和平政策确保了我们国家的和平……但是,现在,随着我们重组后的军队在技术上为现代战争做好准备,既然我们强大了,我们现在就必须从防御转向进攻。

    “在充分捍卫我们的国家时,我们有义务采取进攻行动。 我们大多数人从国防转向军事进攻政策。 我们必须以一种进攻精神重组我们的宣传,鼓动和媒体。 红军是一支现代化的军队,现代军队是一支进攻性的军队。

    “苏维埃政府和平政策的座右铭已经过时,并已被各种事件所取代……苏维埃国家发展的新时代已经开始,其边界扩张的时代开始了,而不是像以前那样通过和平政策,而是通过武力。 我国已经为此提供了所有必要条件。

    “德军之所以成功,是因为它没有遇到同样强大的对手。 一些苏联指挥官错误地高估了德军的成功……

    “因此,我向在我们社会主义祖国发展中崭露头角的新时代举杯敬酒。 苏联国家积极的进攻政策万岁!”

    当然,苏联的政策毫无和平可言,正如他们入侵波兰、占领该国一半以上、入侵芬兰、吞并爱沙尼亚、拉脱维亚和立陶宛以及罗马尼亚的比萨拉比亚和布科维纳所强调的那样……

    • 同意: Beefcake the Mighty
    • 回复: @FB
    , @Simpleguest
    , @Truth3
    , @Korenchkin
  227. FB 说: • 您的网站
    @L.K

    This is what happens when amateurs decide to delve into professional matters of military planning…

    Every scenario is considered…when to go on the offense and when to concentrate on defense…

  228. a.hall 说:

    The Saker is a Moron; Kruschev and JFK stopped the US Joint Chiefs from launching World War 3 over the Cuba Missile Crisis. They both had seen Heavy Combat Casualties in Stalingrad and the American War in the Pacific against the Japanese. Curtis LeMay talked about 40 Million acceptable American Deaths in a Nuclear Exchange with Russia.

  229. but we all understand that the Nobel Committee is just a front for the AngloZionist PR machine.

    This true only if by “we all” you are speaking of the willfully obtuse. People like you Saker.

  230. @L.K

    当然,苏联的政策毫无和平可言,正如他们入侵波兰、占领该国一半以上、入侵芬兰、吞并爱沙尼亚、拉脱维亚和立陶宛以及罗马尼亚的比萨拉比亚和布科维纳所强调的那样……

    In my previous post I missed to include in Soviet’s “score” the war with Finland and annexation of Bess./Bukovina.
    At the same time I also missed to include in Germany’s score the occupation of Belgium, Denmark, Holland and Norway.

    Now, I will argue that all actions taken by the Soviet Union were defensive in nature – they all resulted in providing some additional buffer zones against any potential invader:
    – Finnish war resulted in expanding the security zone around the city of Leningrad. It even ended with a formal piece treaty between SU and Finland, which I think the latter did not violate even when Germans were at the doorsteps of Leningrad.
    – The annexed parts of Poland, Baltics and Bessar./Buk. provided the same thing but in other strategic directions. All were annexed without a fight.

    这与德国对 9 个国家的全面入侵和占领非常不同。
    I will not argue that Soviet Union’s actions were peaceful, but I will argue that they were defensive in nature.

    Re. Stalin’s speech, I doubt that any statesman would utter such words in public, even at (presumably closed?) ceremony for military cadets.

    • 回复: @Bukowski
  231. @Truth3

    The German mistake was Hitler directing Guderian’s Panzer Army to the south to assist Army Group South. The Germans had the ability to completely invest Moscow in August, and had they done that, Stalin would have been in their arms as he had already stated that he would not leave Moscow. It would also have cut communications across the Soviet Union as Moscow was, and still is, the communications hub of the empire. That also would have made mobilization of more troops far more difficult. By the time the rasputitsa rolled around, Germany had lost the war.

    • 回复: @FB
    , @Korenchkin
    , @Epigon
    , @Truth3
  232. Saker despises Suvarov because Suvarov tells the truth, which Saker has a serious problem with.

  233. Truth3 说:
    @L.K

    Truth. Hated by Jews and Morons everywhere.

    真相。 这是一件美妙的事情。

    • 回复: @SeekerofthePresence
  234. @Truth3

    Neocon truth is a bullet in somebody else’s head.

    • 回复: @Truth3
  235. @Korenchkin

    Yes, Slavs are the niggers of Europe, no doubt.

    • 回复: @Korenchkin
  236. FB 说: • 您的网站
    @Quartermaster

    德国人 民政事务总署 the ability to completely invest Moscow in August, and 民政事务总署 they done that, Stalin have been in their arms…

    Hey Fartstain…your ‘woulda coulda shoulda’ analysis is most entertaining…

    Here’s a more interesting ‘what if’ scenario…

    If ‘Quartermaster’ had been born with a functional brain, he not be the object of guffaws and ridicule in public fora such as this…LOL

  237. Korenchkin 说:
    @L.K

    Of course there was NOTHING peaceful about Soviet policy

    Nothing peaceful about German policy either
    As underscored by their invasion of Poland, Holland, Belgium, Norway, Yugoslavia, Greece, etc.
    None of these were Communist countries, in fact Yugoslavia was a massive White Emigre haven (Belgrade was 1/6th Russian at one point), so the crusade against Bolshevism meme is really tiresome

    And further more, Japanese, British and Italian policy wasn’t all that peaceful either, all of them were fighting wars and invading countries in the run up to 1939, trying to portray the Soviets as somehow special in this sense is disingenuous

    Ofcourse all of their propaganda portrayed them as peaceful, Soviets were building the Socialist paradise, the Japanese were liberating Asia from the white devils and creating the co-prosperity sphere the Italians and British were civilizing the Arabs and Africans etc.
    In reality they were committing various degrees mass murder, but that’s part and parcel of building strong empires
    Yet for some reason clowns here fall for the “Germans were just fighting a crusade against Mongol Bolshevism” propaganda talking points, Germans were acting under real-politik just like everyone else
    Hitler was willing to cooperate with Stalin until it stopped being useful just like Churchill, except Churchill had the ultimate peacemaker on his side (well the Americans did anyway) the Atom bomb

  238. Korenchkin 说:
    @Quartermaster

    Their supply lines were already stretched paper thin by the time they reached Moscow, so much so that the winter clothing wasn’t arriving to the frontline on time, how were they supposed to support Guderian?
    If they started an offensive with too small of a force and allowed it to be destroyed then they’d be back to square one by the time more troops arrived, and if they waited for the supply lines to catch up then the Soviets would either have time to dig or would sabotage their efforts with more counter-offensives

  239. Epigon 说:
    @Quartermaster

    Why yes, Germans should have ignored Ukraine, Kiev and Southwestern front, leave a 800 000 man strong salient in their deep rear to enter urban combat in a city several several times larger than Stalingrad, with extensive metro and sewer system underground.

    他们将 *确实* capture Moscow, their logistics overstreched and exposed (Ukraine is bypassed), especially seeing how they *容易地* won at Stalingrad.

    嘴唇

    • 回复: @Seraphim
  240. Seraphim 说:
    @Epigon

    Hitler was right in diverting troops to Ukraine and South-East, because conquest of Ukraine with its endless cornfields and coal mines and iron ore, Crimea, Caucasus and the Caspian with its petrol, was the real aim of the invasion. Had the Germans firmly secured these regions first, Germany would have had all the resources to end the war sooner.
    Napoleon ‘conquered’ Moscow and we know the consequences. He realized quickly that he has fallen into a trap and rushed to leave Russia. German generals were not as quick witted as Napoleon.

    • 同意: Epigon, John Regan
  241. Truth3 说:
    @SeekerofthePresence

    It ain’t Truth. It’s Lies… when (((Jew Neocons))) use their sophistic talents to bury truth.

  242. balkan 说:

    i’m still reading the article I’m half way down to end and I had to jump to write a comment already. I’m a serb from hard communist family and I salute you writer of this article you are smart and decent man. You don’t need me to tell you but I had a need for that. Thank you

  243. Truth3 说:
    @Quartermaster

    The German mistake was Hitler directing Guderian’s Panzer Army to the south to assist Army Group South.

    没有

    The mistake was Operation Typhoon. OKH wanted Moscow.

    The supply lines were too thin (horse drawn mostly) to support a broad front advancing War of Movement with colossal expenditures in heavy ammunition for 30,000 guns and fuel for 1,500+ panzers and 200,000+ other vehicles and supplying 3 million men with all manner of supply requisitions and small arms ammo and supply for 500,000 horses over a 2,000 km front in mud and snow nearly 1,500 km from their own Capitol.

    What were OKH orders? Guderian was tasked with attacking south of Moscow torwards Gorki. In the November words of Guderian’s Chief of Staff… “This is not the month of May, and we are not fighting in France!”

    The losses the Wehrmacht took in November 1941 thru March 1942 meant that Germany could only achieve local superiority in 1942.

    Digging in on a line Narva – Pskov – Vitebsk – Orsha – Dnepr would allow the troops to shelter and conserve strength for a new summer campaign. OKH (& Hitler) gambled, and lost.

  244. Bukowski 说:
    @Simpleguest

    您还忽略了 1941 年 2 月苏联与纳粹战争开始两个月后苏联对伊朗的入侵。 英国人也参加了。
    https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=12152

    • 回复: @Simpleguest
  245. Seraphim 说:

    Occupation of Iran suggests that the Soviets were aware that the real goal of the invasion was the oil fields of the Middle East.

  246. @Bukowski

    您还忽略了 1941 年 2 月苏联与纳粹战争开始两个月后苏联对伊朗的入侵。 英国人也参加了。

    确实我有。 正如您自己所说,这是德国袭击SU后的2个月。
    根据维基百科:

    英苏入侵伊朗,又称英苏入侵波斯,是1941年XNUMX月英苏联合入侵伊朗。
    The invasion began exactly two months after the Axis invasion of the Soviet Union and the Soviet Union’s subsequent alliance with the United Kingdom. The invasion’s strategic purpose was to ensure the safety of Allied supply lines to the USSR (see the Persian Corridor), secure Iranian oil fields and limit German influence in Iran (Reza Shah was considered friendly to Nazi Germany).

    所以2件事:
    – it was an Anglo-Soviet allied undertaking;
    – it was aimed to block any real or perceived moves by Nazi Germany in that region.

    不和平,但绝对是一种防御性(或先发制人,如果您愿意)采取的行动。
    By the way, WWII witnessed some very bizarre things done in preemption, like the destruction of the French fleet in French Algeria by the British. But that’s war. Once started, it has a mind of its own.

  247. 第一代布尔什维克非常擅长屠杀大量无辜平民,但作为军事指挥官,他们是大胖零

    我对俄罗斯历史一无所知,所以我总是觉得这很令人困惑。 我的理解是,在内战中,白人有军队站在他们一边,那么一群银行劫匪和恐怖分子是如何击败专业人士的? 最后我查了一下维基百科,他们把它归结为一些关于托洛茨基的组织能力和鼓舞人心的演讲的垃圾,但这并没有通过嗅觉测试。 有人知道吗?

当前评论者
说:

发表评论-对超过两周的文章发表评论,将在质量和语气上进行更严格的判断


 记得 我的信息为什么?
 电子邮件回复我的评论
$
提交的评论已被许可给 Unz评论 并可以由后者自行决定在其他地方重新发布
在翻译模式下禁用评论
通过RSS订阅此评论主题 通过RSS订阅所有The Saker评论