[fantic]

I'm reading Frederick Taylor's 'Exorcising Hitler', and found out that the Nazi Germany not only contributed to Greek's wartime famine which killed 300,000 people, but also didn't return the gold in the Bank of Greece
(Greek Deputy PM Theodoros Pangalos said the latter in Feb 2010, commenting on modern GER's lack of generosity)

p 154; In WWII, 60% of Soviet prisoners died by Feb 1942(At that time, 800,000 Germans died because of naval blockade-hunger)

In WWI, a mere 5.4 % died in German captivity.

Also, the Germans DELIBERATELY failed to advance into Leningrad; the reason? THEY DIDN'T WANT TO FEED THEM.

So, in the 1st 11 months of the siege, around 650,000 citizen is reported to have died.

[SloKid]

And what exactly is your point if I may ask?

And yes, the Germans tried to starve Leningrad into surrender, but ultimately failing to break the spirit. I've read a book by Michael Jones, that offers a pretty thorough description of the siege and what people had to resort to in order to survive.

[fantic]

just wanted to post some infos about WWII that's all discussions will also be fine.

yeah I know, the citizens practically ate everything to survive, is what I've heard.

anyway, thus, Germans during the WWII never went hungry until almost the end..the result of their country's brutal policy..you can understand the Red Army soldiers getting mad when they saw how German people lived.

[fantic]

WWII history is such a fascinating topic because it was so apocalyptic;

after finishing that book will read;





and

[miffedmax]

The best thing about World War II:


Crusaders!!!

Don't try to reason with me about Crusaders. It's like trying to reason with me about Lena D.

Crusaders are the best.

I used to be one of those horrible WWII nerds who knew the speeds and armament of all the planes and tanks, but I can't remember it so well now.

(Some people will tell you the Crusader's awesome rhomboidal turret was really a shot trap, but that's a DAMNABLE LIE!!!)

[miffedmax]

Originally Posted by fantic

just wanted to post some infos about WWII that's all discussions will also be fine.

yeah I know, the citizens practically ate everything to survive, is what I've heard.

anyway, thus, Germans during the WWII never went hungry until almost the end..the result of their country's brutal policy..you can understand the Red Army soldiers getting mad when they saw how German people lived.

I remember reading about how many of the Soviet troops were asking "Why did they invade us when they have so much and we have so little?" when they reached Germany, and tales (perhaps apocryphal) of soldiers not knowing what toilets were for and using them to power wash potatoes.

[fantic]

Originally Posted by miffedmax

I remember reading about how many of the Soviet troops were asking "Why did they invade us when they have so much and we have so little?" when they reached Germany, and tales (perhaps apocryphal) of soldiers not knowing what toilets were for and using them to power wash potatoes.

That's exactly what I've just read from Taylor's book

Hence, the more anger..which resulted in mass killing and rape..

[fantic]

Originally Posted by miffedmax

The best thing about World War II:


Crusaders!!!

Don't try to reason with me about Crusaders. It's like trying to reason with me about Lena D.

Crusaders are the best.

I used to be one of those horrible WWII nerds who knew the speeds and armament of all the planes and tanks, but I can't remember it so well now.

(Some people will tell you the Crusader's awesome rhomboidal turret was really a shot trap, but that's a DAMNABLE LIE!!!)

Crusader? Never heard of'em: Which country's was that?

[Halardfan]

Originally Posted by fantic

That's exactly what I've just read from Taylor's book

Hence, the more anger..which resulted in mass killing and rape..

The Soviets seem to have required little reason for mass murder in World War 2, for example the Katyn Massacre of thousands of Poles.

[Lin Lin]

I would love to read

[Dani12]

I'm assuming this discussion is open to all thing WW2. I found it interesting to note that Japan never intended to invade Australia because the undertaking would have been too large. I was told from a young age in school that if it wasn't for our forces, we could be controlled by the Japanese.

I feel bad for the Australian troops that took such pride in defending our nation that the destruction of this myth would somehoe belittle their efforts. Anyway it shouldn't, they still did amazing and helped many other nations. Kokoda will always be a defining moment in Australian war history. The book is a great read for anyone interested in such topics.

[miffedmax]

Originally Posted by Halardfan

The Soviets seem to have required little reason for mass murder in World War 2, for example the Katyn Massacre of thousands of Poles.

Well, there was a reason for it--to make sure that these officers (who were not likely to collaborate with the Soviet's Polish liberation army) were eliminated.

It wasn't, perhaps, a good reason. But it was a reason.

A lot of people forget that just as the Western Allies had foreign contingents (Czechs, Poles, Free French, etc.) fighting for them, so did the Soviets.

[miffedmax]

Originally Posted by fantic

Crusader? Never heard of'em: Which country's was that?

British.

I have a dad who fought in the Pacific, and a horde of uncles who fought with the Commonwealth in Europe, so when it comes to the ETO I am really into the Commonwealth stuff. (Even one of my 'merican uncles was attached to a British unit).

Anyway, some people will tell you outrageous lies about the Crusader, like it was mechanically unreliable, undergunned and its armor was paper-thin. They will concede its speed, especially since crews often modified it by removing the governor from the engine enabling it to hit speeds approaching 40 mph.

[Halardfan]

Originally Posted by miffedmax

Well, there was a reason for it--to make sure that these officers (who were not likely to collaborate with the Soviet's Polish liberation army) were eliminated.

It wasn't, perhaps, a good reason. But it was a reason.

A lot of people forget that just as the Western Allies had foreign contingents (Czechs, Poles, Free French, etc.) fighting for them, so did the Soviets.

I think ultimately the Ruusians aims were fundementally different. There sacrifice in the war was enormous and that demands our respect. But for eastern Europe theirs was not an army of liberation but of exchanging one occupier for another.

The actions of the Russians in places like Poland and the willingness of western powers like Britain to appease them initially, are shameful.

The many Poles who came to Britain during the war, made a vital contribution to the winning of the war, and were betrayed after the war.

[miffedmax]

I agree with you. However, there were some Poles and others who fought for the Russians because they actually believed that communism was a viable choice to dictatorship (Poland had been a dictatorship before the war) and others who fought for the Soviets because they wanted to free their homeland and had no choice--it was either fight with the Soviets or live under the Germans. A lot of people underestimated Stalin and his plans for post-war Europe.

The Eastern European soldiers who fought for the USSR made many heroic contributions to the war effort and were just as betrayed as those who fought with the Commonwealth. Very few of them envisioned the future that actually happened.