Mini-history wars
Users browsing this topic:0 Registered, 0 Hidden and 0 Guests Registered Users: None |
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Tannin
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006 Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
Post subject: | |
|
David wrote: | The use of a euphemistic term "Central Europe Campaign" as opposed to "invasion". I don't think there's anything terribly controversial about what I'm saying—all war histories reflect writers' prejudices, right down to certain word choices. |
Oh. Is that all? The Americans use the word "invasion" just like anyone else. It's commonplace in their histories. You shouldn't get so hung up on minor details of expression - except, of course, in cases where the expression used is deliberately and grossly offensive and misleading, which is where we started this thread! _________________ �Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
|
3.14159
Joined: 12 Sep 2009
|
Post subject: | |
|
[quote="Wokko"]
The T-34 was deployed in 1940 as was the KV-1. Many of the Russian modern monoplanes like the Mig 1 & 3, Lagg 1 & 3 and Yak 1 were all in service in 1940.
Not going to write an essay with footnotes on the issue of planned Soviet aggression, but here's a good start. As with any historical debate there are claims, counter claims, arguments about veracity of sources, allies, enemies etc. In fact the study of history is almost as brutal and Macchiavellian as history itself
[quote]
The T 34 was deployed in 40 but the production numbers deployments were very small. When war broke out plants were moved to the Urals to escape German ground advances and air attacks.
They produced an ungraded tank the T 34M that won it's laurels at Kurst (and every other battle it fought in).
Same with the Lags, Migs and Yaks.
All still undergoing production design and development in 41 and VERY FEW were available for year of the war.
The main fighter defending the Russians was the Polikarpov I-153, a biplane developed from the Ratta and the Stormovic ground attack aircraft which was used and an interceptor because the Russians had nothing better to defend themselves with. * see attached image.
As I said, numbers aren't all ways an indicator of strength.
Add to that Russia's best officers were killed off in the purges and the USSR couldn't possibly be ready to do any serious invading until at least 1947.
This planned Soviet aggression you talk about is a myth also.
Poland and Eastern Europe were the traditional attack routes taken to Russia.
Russia had seen Poland used as a autobahn/run-way yet again and there was no way they were going to leave that rout open after suffering millions dead and a large Army camped at start line and rattling it's sabres at them.
I cant think of many places the Ruskies have invaded, Afganistan, Czechoslvakia (briefly), err arr I know there are others but the names Korea, Vietnam, Panama, Egypt, Granada, Borneo, Iraq, Cuba (and many more) and many more spring readily to mind as examples of Counties with an "Expansionist Invasive Foreign policy.
Retreat to 39 boarders?
There was no way they were going to retreat to 1939 boarders while a large Allied force occupied West Europe.
Was is the 39 boarder to them anyway? As I've pointed out, Poland was doing land snatches back then too so talk of it as some kind of golden age it's kind of totally irrelevant.
As I've pointed out Europe was in a state of flux and for them the war didn't start until 41.
The Allies repaired their conquered enemies economies?
Mate, German Japan (and to an extent Italy) were economic powerhouses before the war. They Had the knowledge and recourses to to rebuild.
The Warsaw pact countries were economic basket cases before the war and remained so afterwards particulary when to consider the USA did just about everything it could to deny the East access to world markets.
The Soviets raped and robbed their conquered countries?
There all perjorative words and phrases.
There has been plenty of pillaging and plundering done both sides since the second world war ended.
My fear is people that like to stir up anti Russian emotions won't be satisfied till have a world war 3 and a chance to right the historical wrongs of those dark days.
Personally I'd rather we started forgetting about who did what to whom way back when and getting with tackling the issues of world politics with-out the encumbrance of history.
There is saying, People who don't learn the lessons of history are bound to repeat them... (Just a thought from an uppity Pole).
Last edited by 3.14159 on Mon Apr 21, 2014 11:49 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
|
|
|
HAL
Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
|
Post subject: | |
|
What happened to it? |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003 Location: Andromeda
|
Post subject: | |
|
3.14159 wrote: | The Soviets raped and robbed their conquered countries?
There all perjorative words and phrases.
There has been plenty of pillaging and plundering done both sides since the second world war ended. |
But it's not pejorative to describe rape as rape. Well, not any more than it ought to be, anyway.
I agree with you that all war atrocities need to be acknowledged and (where possible) apologised for. I do consider the slaughters in Dresden, Tokyo and elsewhere to be even worse than the mass rapes committed by the Russian army. But all of these were horrific war crimes, and I think they need to be acknowledged as such. _________________ All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
Tannin
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006 Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
Post subject: | |
|
a: "Aboriginal people are rapists."
b: "The Russians invaded Germany and were barbaric."
Discuss .... _________________ �Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003 Location: Andromeda
|
Post subject: | |
|
Well, let's at least get the quote right:
Quote: | the barbarity of the Russian invasion of Germany |
Otherwise, I'm not sure where you're coming from there. And watch my damn video already! I didn't make it for my own amusement (well, ok, perhaps a little...). _________________ All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
3.14159
Joined: 12 Sep 2009
|
Post subject: | |
|
David wrote: |
But it's not pejorative to describe rape as rape. Well, not any more than it ought to be, anyway.
|
When your using it stir up an emotional response to bolster your argument it is perjorative.
Russia didn'y literally rape the Warsaw block countries anymore than the US did in Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia Afganistan and Iraq yet Wokko implies any raping (metaphoric or otherwise) is only done by one side.
Pejorative Language Definition and Examples
grammar.about.com › ... › Paired Construction - Quotative
The label pejorative (or derogatory) is sometimes used in dictionaries and glossaries to identify expressions that offend or belittle a subject. |
|
|
|
|
Tannin
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006 Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
Post subject: | |
|
David wrote: | Otherwise, I'm not sure where you're coming from there. |
3. seems to understand it OK. But I'll explain it for you. Simply, why is it that you come down like a ton of bricks on anyone making pejorative generalisations about (say) gays or Aborigines designed to distort, mislead, and offend, but you leap to the defence of people making exactly the same sort of comments about Russians? What have the Russians ever done to you?
(But if you want to say bad stuff about that maniac Putin and his cronies, go right ahead, of course.) _________________ �Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
|
3.14159
Joined: 12 Sep 2009
|
Post subject: | |
|
David wrote: | I agree with you that all war atrocities need to be acknowledged and (where possible) apologised for. I do consider the slaughters in Dresden, Tokyo and elsewhere to be even worse than the mass rapes committed by the Russian army. But all of these were horrific war crimes, and I think they need to be acknowledged as such. |
They are crimes of accountancy and the dollar.
Germany bombed Spanish, British, Russian, Italian civilians but never decisively.
HE (high explosive) bombs are not good at destroying civilian housing or civilian morale (a euphemism for "collateral damage"). Add to that early Allied HE bombs were notoriously unreliable, as many 6 out of 10 failing to explode and the inability of bombers to find their targets meant that less than 1 in 20 were exploding with-in 5 miles of their targets and they were expensive.
It is is cheaper and more effective to use fire bombs
Fire bombing didn't require a direct hit and it illuminated the target for for follow-up bombers to improve their accuracy.
Also with HE bombs too much if the blast is absorbed by the walls to knock down more than one or two houses.
Fire bombing destroyed whole neighbourhoods but required less accuracy
specially when the targets are the close huddled wooden houses found in Germany and Japan.
Japanese civilian losses were in the 100,000 per raid after Doolittle switched from HE to fire-bombs, saving the US millions into the bargain.
With the A bomb this economy of scale was put to telling effect, 1 plane, 1 bomb. Much cheaper, much more effective.
Germany and Japan did little very little fire-bombing.
The Allies learned the economic, technical and production lessons of the first years of the war.
The Japanese and Germans didn't.
Last edited by 3.14159 on Tue Apr 22, 2014 12:36 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003 Location: Andromeda
|
Post subject: | |
|
Tannin wrote: | David wrote: | Otherwise, I'm not sure where you're coming from there. |
3. seems to understand it OK. But I'll explain it for you. Simply, why is it that you come down like a ton of bricks on anyone making pejorative generalisations about (say) gays or Aborigines designed to distort, mislead, and offend, but you leap to the defence of people making exactly the same sort of comments about Russians? What have the Russians ever done to you? |
I don't see anyone here making negative generalisations about Russians. Even Lynch is talking about the history of the Soviet Union and its successor state, not ethnic Russians per se (though I'm not here to defend him—you can draw your own conclusions about his intentions from the linked article).
I think it's pretty clear why I oppose negative (or, really, any) generalisations regarding social groups but don't see a reference to the barbarity of a certain country's army as offensive. Surely you can see that. What's next, condemnation of references to "the barbarity of the Nazi invasion of Belorussia" because there happened to be some nice German soldiers who didn't do anything wrong? I think we all need to take a proverbial glass of concrete. _________________ All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
Tannin
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006 Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
Post subject: | |
|
David wrote: | I don't see anyone here making negative generalisations about Russians. |
No. But Lynch did, and in a way which would have you screaming angry if he'd chosen some other race to smear and vilify. That's what all the fuss is about.
The difference between remarking on the barbarity of a particular episode in history in general (which is a perfectly OK thing to do) and Lynch's screed is that Lynch grossly misrepresented history in order to smear some people he doesn't like. He very clearly and unambiguously implied that the Soviet war to repulse the Nazis was an aggressive and barbaric thing, in keeping with these aggressive and barbaric people. _________________ �Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives!
Last edited by Tannin on Tue Apr 22, 2014 1:08 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003 Location: Andromeda
|
Post subject: | |
|
Well, not quite:
http://www.change.org/en-AU/petitions/demand-for-a-public-apology-from-timothy-lynch-for-calling-russians-barbarians-and-invaders-of-germany-in-the-newspaper-the-age
Quote: | The Russian-speaking community in Australia is outraged by the article published in your newspaper on 4th March 2014 by Timothy Lynch, director of the Graduate School of Humanities and Social Sciences, Melbourne University. http://www.theage.com.au/comment/russia-reveals-both-its-strength-and-weakness-in-the-invasion-of-ukraine-20140303-3409n.html
In his article, Mr Lynch seems to suggest the people of the Soviet Union are Russian barbarians* in his reference to "the barbarity of the Russian invasion of Germany in 1944-45".
His statements are false, discriminatory and inflammatory to a great many members of the Russian-speaking population in Australia and around the world and potentially psychologically traumatic to some. The Soviet Union's Red Army, which involved people from former Soviet republics, was fighting against Nazis and freeing the territories of the Hitler's army.
We will not tolerate highly offensive, bullying and degrading statements by Mr Lynch and your newspaper. Millions of people from the USSR gave their lives for the world we live in.
You might not be aware that our country (the Soviet Union at the time) lost some 28, 000 000 lives in fighting the war against fascism. You also might be unaware that Ukrainians fought alongside Russians and represented a quarter of the 28 million casualties.
Almost every one of us has a grandparent or a family member who died at war, in concentration camps, gas chambers or from famine and disease in the Nazi occupied regions.
Our heritage of peoples from former republics of the USSR was thrown in the dirt by Tim Lynch. |
*[a common but clear comprehension error in which "calling an act barbaric" becomes "calling the kind of person who committed it barbaric"—surprised to see you fall for it, Tannin]
What do you think the outrage is really about, though? I'll give you a clue: the picture at the top of the page shows a woman kissing an old serviceman. Pick up a copy of the Herald Sun some time this week and you'll see heaps of stuff like this. It's all about "disrespecting our troops". Always bound to generate a measured, rational reaction, that one.
The trouble is that, in this case, at least a significant minority of the war heroes did in fact take part in atrocities committed against civilians. But I suspect they didn't teach that one in the Russian history textbooks. _________________ All watched over by machines of loving grace
Last edited by David on Tue Apr 22, 2014 1:13 am; edited 2 times in total |
|
|
|
|
Tannin
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006 Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
Post subject: | |
|
Thankyou for the link. I signed the petition. So should you. _________________ �Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
|
Tannin
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006 Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
Post subject: | |
|
David wrote: | a common but clear comprehension error in which "calling an act barbaric" becomes "calling the kind of person who committed it barbaric"—surprised to see you fall for it, Tannin |
Rubbish. There is no other way to interpret Lynch's screed as anything other than an attempt to distort and smear, which it did. His intention shines through as clear as a bell. It is written in the form of a smear campaign, with obvious intent to match. This is not "falling for" anything, it is taking the clearly-expressed intent of the writer exactly as written. _________________ �Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003 Location: Andromeda
|
Post subject: | |
|
It's a criticism of current Russian foreign policy via analysis of current supposed socioeconomic pressures and appeal to past incidents of crushing opponents. His central argument is that Russia is throwing its weight around the region in a bid to recapture days of former Soviet glory and inflame local nationalist sentiment (many people have said the same; I'm inclined to believe that this is indeed one of Putin's main motivations in Ukraine, as it was in Georgia). PTID's valid critique of ascribing motivations to nebulous entities aside, it's actually a fairly decent overview. The only really controversial bit is the sentence quoted in the change.org petition. I still maintain that it's controversial for the wrong reasons. _________________ All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You cannot download files in this forum
|
|