fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #3078 ]

⌈ Secret Post #3078 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

__________________________________________________

11.

__________________________________________________

12.

__________________________________________________

13.

__________________________________________________

14.

__________________________________________________

15.

__________________________________________________

16.

__________________________________________________

17.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 067 secrets from Secret Submission Post #440.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 1 2 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I guess what I lament is that the soldiers' sacrifice must be tied to the post-war political fallout by their leaders.

I mean, the Soviet Union didn't attack the Nazis. Hitler launched the assault on them.

And while I don't in any way disagree that the USSR itself was repressive and basically enslaved the Eastern bloc nations throughout the Cold War, it still doesn't sit right with me that the dead have to carry that burden, I suppose.

The point is that it's very difficult to get excited about the idea of a movie glorifying the rape-and-pillage juggernaut that was the Red Army's journey West*, even if we remove from the equation the fact that they also simply replaced German military occupation with Russian military occupation until such time as the USSR could set up a political occupation.

*Source: Inhabitants of former Soviet states, some of whom were THERE for it

I get that but...isn't it a bit unfair to lay that on ALL the Soviet soldiers?

I mean, there's a French Howlie, even though a lot of French people collaborated with the Nazis.

And, as I mentioned above, the rape and pillage is horrific, but it is by no means confined to the Red Army.

So fucking what if it isn't "confined to the Red Army"? First off, even the Nazis found the Soviets to be alarmingly brutal, and second, did you see the citation above where the Soviets repeatedly raped women who had been Nazi PRISONERS? That's not very liberating, nor is it at ALL a common occurrence that a liberating army's first move is to rape all the women they've just supposedly rescued from the enemy. Second, If the HUGE HUGE VAST MAJORITY of Soviet soldiers were doing this such that it's virtually impossible to even find an account of them NOT fucking shit up even worse for the people they "liberated" than shit had been previously fucked up by the Germans, then yes, it is fucking fair to lay that on all the Soviet soldiers, especially when they are KNOWN to have had a military culture that actively encouraged such behavior. Enough with the rape-and-pillaging-and-enslavement apologia. It's disgusting.

i have seen compelling arguments that call into question the kind of numbers that you're talking about, and especially that call into question the idea that Soviet military culture actively encouraged such behavior.

so, i mean, sorry, but i disagree

You should probably check out some sources that aren't written by Russians. Especially sources written by other Eastern Europeans.

I have, thank you. I don't deny that the Soviets did some pretty awful shit on the Eastern Front, and I don't deny that their post-war occupation was brutal and unjust. I do deny that it was as bad as you claim.

And I would point out, with respect, that if the perspective of being Russian gives one a bias in this matter, as you seem to think, so does the perspective of being Eastern European.

NAYRT, I don't dispute that there are biases everywhere, particularly when it comes to those who are writing their nationalistic history. But if you're going to disregard a conquered peoples for their bias, where exactly are you going to go to winnow out the "truth"?

There are also arguments that call into question the Holocaust and the number of people killed by the Nazis. Those arguments are complete bullshit and so are the arguments that downplay the number of Soviets' victims.

Germany has at least acknowledged their part in WWII, but Russians are still pretending to be the heroes of the story.

Well, Russia entered the territory of Poland on 17 of Septemeber 1939, effectively joining the II WW as an agressor, so, yeah, they didn't attack the Nazis, just the weaker nations, as was their agreement with Hitler. So it's always going to be hard to see Russian soldiers in as flattering light as American soldiers. Especially, from here (which in my case means Poland). Because it's not only the beginning of the war, it's also the infamous 1944, where the Russian army waited on one bank of the river till the rebeling Polish forces got killed off completely before they "liberated" the capital city (so that they didn't have to share any power over the territory), or purposeful killing off the military leaders at the end of the war and after its end, the terror that lasted until 1953, etc.

The human sacrifice required to "win" the II WW was unbelievable and the stories of what went on on the front are horrible. That's all true. We should also never forget that people who acctually fight in the wars are not responsible for political decisions of their leaders (although they do have their own sins to be blamed for). Still, I can't imagine any Howling-Commandos-style Russian heroes which I could accept as purely heroic, because the Soviet Russia is not the US - I can accept the "clean" US version of II WW heroism, because that's the one war where the narrative sort of matches the reality (at least, in Europe). You cannot create a parallel of that for Russia.

They invaded Poland in 1939, Stalin and Hitler divided Eastern Europe between each other and for the majority of the war were allies. If Hitler had not tried to take over Russia, Stalin wouldn't have moved a finger against him. You can't just forget about this context. It was not foot soldiers' fault, but, hell, a 20-year-old German guy dying in 1945 was also *just* a guy who tried to protest his country and most likely has never seen any death/work camps whatsoever/did not vote Hitler into pover/grew up brainwashed by propaganda and could have been a hero in any other context. But he wasn't. Because context matters. And war fucking sucks for everybody, but if you started it, then you have much less right to complain about it.

[ SECRET POST #3078 ]

Re: I think that the main reason we tend not to celebrate the USSR as liberators of Eastern Europe..

Re: I think that the main reason we tend not to celebrate the USSR as liberators of Eastern Europe..

Re: I think that the main reason we tend not to celebrate the USSR as liberators of Eastern Europe..

Re: I think that the main reason we tend not to celebrate the USSR as liberators of Eastern Europe..

Re: I think that the main reason we tend not to celebrate the USSR as liberators of Eastern Europe..

Re: I think that the main reason we tend not to celebrate the USSR as liberators of Eastern Europe..

Re: I think that the main reason we tend not to celebrate the USSR as liberators of Eastern Europe..

Re: I think that the main reason we tend not to celebrate the USSR as liberators of Eastern Europe..

Re: I think that the main reason we tend not to celebrate the USSR as liberators of Eastern Europe..

Re: I think that the main reason we tend not to celebrate the USSR as liberators of Eastern Europe..