Russians deserved the art a hell of a lot more than the French - The Monuments Men (2014) Discussion

[–] zumbinis 11 years ago

The art that was taken from France was rightly returned there. The art that was taken from other museums in other countries in Europe should be returned to them. Art looted from private collectors should be returned to their owners or their heirs.

The Russians merely justified the wrong *they* did, taking what didn't belong to them, with the reparations idea. Two wrongs don't make a right, though.

reply

[–] cableaddict 11 years ago

Well, you can't exactly blame the French for giving up without much of a fight, that's absurd. They didn't have a well-developed army.

But to some extent, the OP actually has a point.

reply

[–] Onaryc 11 years ago

But to some extent, the OP actually has a point.

No he doesn't.

"Y a pas d'hélice hélas.
- C'est là qu'est l'os."

reply

[–] lezardormeurgeant 10 years ago

Onaryc,
let the cliches say what they want.

The fact is that there is such a thing called treason that plagues all Democracies, like it or not.

As is made clearer and clearer today.

As for those mentioned by the o.p., just read Alexis De Tocqueville's
contrasting them with the Americans in "Democracy In America",
chapter 'Dangers to Democracy'.

Nothing else needs be said.

reply

[–] alexander-iv 9 years ago

Yeah, he does.

reply

[–] gsfsu 11 years ago

You don't know your history. France had the world's largest standing army in the late 1930's but it wasn't as modern as the German Wehrmacht (who had better equipment and modern tactics such as the blitzkrieg). France tended to put its trust in a line of underground forts known as the Maginot Line on the border with Germany. Unfortunately, the Germans simply flew over it and marched around it (invading the Low Countries).

When Hitler ordered the invasion of Alsace-Lorraine his generals were aghast because they thought the French would fight and it would be the end of the Wehrmacht. The French chose not to fight and that was the last time Hitler could have been defeated prior to the outbreak of war in 1939.

reply

[–] Onaryc 11 years ago

Oh no. Not again.

I thought French bashing had become kind of... "passé".

So here I go again, teaching some American (probably, and right wing nut, just as probably) some history:

Americans seem to forget (if they ever knew) a couple of things about WW2.

- First, the French were not the only ones defeated by the German army in 1940. The Brits were too. Nobody calls them cowards for that, even though they scampered back across the English Channel back to their island, their hasty retreat being helped by the French (military and civilian) who protected them and even helped them across with fishboats and so on. At least the Brits had an island to flee back to. The French didn't, and so had to officially surrender. But that's because France was the ONLY country sharing a border with Germany that declared war on Germany. The only one. Other countries didn't even declare war on Germany, or were invaded without a fight, and to this day no one has called them cowards.

- In 1940, no army in the world could have defeated Germany. It actually took years for the Allies to put together armies and strategies to finally defeat the nazis with coordinated actions on all fronts.

- Which brings me to another thing Americans and other nations seem to ignore: the German Russian non aggression pact. See, when the USA came to liberate western europe, they did a great job side by side with the now reconstructed British armed forces (four years after the 1940 debacle)and the French are forever thankful for that, as they showed once again in the recent celebration of the Normandy invasion. But that must not stop Americans from acknowledging that in 1944, only 20 % of the German forces were on the western front, 80% fighting on the eastern front against the Russians. In 1940, ALL of the German forces were fighting against France and Britain. The population of Germany at the time was twice as big as that of France. And Germany still had their air force in 1940(which they didn't in 1944). Plus, most of that 20 % were actually stationed much more to the north of France, thanks to the British amazing so-called Operation Fortitude that fooled the Germans into believing the invasion would take place in the north. And you know what, even THEN the Normandy invasion was no walk in the park, even with all the Allied forces and all.

- France had suffered millions deaths just 20 years before in WW1, the new generation that had had seen their fathers and elder brothers die in the millions were asked to go again, and they WENT. Imagine if young people in the USA had been asked to go to Vietnam again in, say, 1995...

- Should I mention that they were fights and battles in 1940, even not far from Paris, unlike what some people believe. Should I mention the sacrifices on the part of the French, with whole towns destroyed, bombed by the Germans for weeks in 1940 (imagine a 911 every day for weeks, with whole families as the victims, whole towns destroyed), or even by the Allies in 1944 (look up Caen bombing for instance). Should I mention the humiliation of being defeated and having to live with your conquerors and suffer food restrictions, curfews and so on? Should I mention the French Resistance, who suffered many losses, young people tortured and shot (one guy actually threw himself out of the window while held in captivity and tortured - to avoid having to talk and betray his friends -, landed on a balcony, managed to get up again and jumped to his death). One American general said the French resistance did as much damage to the Germans as a whole US army division. Do I have to mention the Ouradour massacre? Look it up too...

What I'm saying is, no, the French were no cowards. Au contraire. Get that right.

Oh, and it's "Napoléon". You spelled it wrong. Get that right too.

"Y a pas d'hélice hélas.
- C'est là qu'est l'os."

reply

[–] BuddyLove63 11 years ago

First, the French were not the only ones defeated by the German army in 1940. The Brits were too. Nobody calls them cowards for that, even though they scampered back across the English Channel back to their island, their hasty retreat being helped by the French (military and civilian) who protected them and even helped them across with fishboats and so on. At least the Brits had an island to flee back to. The French didn't, and so had to officially surrender. But that's because France was the ONLY country sharing a border with Germany that declared war on Germany. The only one.

The reason why the Brits are not referred as cowards is because Hitler offered Britain peace......and Britain turned it down and chose to fight on, even though the fight looked to be one they might lose. The British didn't stay out of it or agree to peace, which most other countries would have done if given the opportunity by Hitler. Instead the British fought the Germans (well Axis by then) in the Atlantic, the Mediterranean, North Africa etc and kept plugging away valiantly and held the fort somewhat until the Soviets and then the USA became involved.

Other countries didn't even declare war on Germany, or were invaded without a fight, and to this day no one has called them cowards.

I hear what you are saying there and you are right. The British do not refer to the French as cowards by the way. In Britain it is the Italians who are stereotyped as the cowards/yellow.

But that must not stop Americans from acknowledging that in 1944, only 20 % of the German forces were on the western front, 80% fighting on the eastern front against the Russians.

This is one of the biggest myths of WW2. It was not 80/20 in 1944. Nowhere near it.

For example in summer 1944 there were ten German panzer divisions in Normandy alone which was about 1/3 of the panzer divisions that they had in total on all fronts combined.

Hitler gave more priority to the Battle from France in summer 1944 than he did to Bagration in the USSR that same summer. He sent nearly 2,000 tanks and other AFVs to Normandy as opposed to less than 1,000 to White Russia to combat Bagration at the same time.

Even in 1941 when the Germans invaded the USSR there was still over one million plus German troops stationed in the west either guarding or fighting, from Norway down to North Africa (400,000 in Norway alone). That's not 80/20 either.

Also, we must not forget that the majority of the Luftwaffe was not in the east from 1943 onwards. By Jan 1943 only 25% of the Luftwaffe was in the east. By Jan 1944 this went down further to just 17% of the Luftwaffe in the east. By 1944 Germany had to have nearly one million anti aircraft personnel in the German homeland guarding and fighting against the British-American bombing campaign.

reply

[–] Onaryc 11 years ago

The reason why the Brits are not referred as cowards is because Hitler offered Britain peace......and Britain turned it down and chose to fight on, even though the fight looked to be one they might lose. The British didn't stay out of it or agree to peace, which most other countries would have done if given the opportunity by Hitler. Instead the British fought the Germans (well Axis by then) in the Atlantic, the Mediterranean, North Africa etc and kept plugging away valiantly and held the fort somewhat until the Soviets and then the USA became involved.

Let me put it this way: if France had been located on that island and all the islands around it where Britain is, and Britain had been where France was (and still is) as far as geography's concerned, then there's no reason not to think that the Brits would have been defeated in 1940 (because they were) and that the French forces would have retreated back to their island (like the Brits did) and would have done exactly what the Brits did afterwards. The Brits would have been occupied. It's easier to "hold the fort" when you have the sea to protect you between you and the enemy (rather than the Rhine river and Belgium) and a country to back you up with supplies, industries and such (which are confiscated from you and used by the enemy when you are occupied). All I am saying is the "French were cowards" business is based on the assumption that everybody had the same deal of the cards, when they didn't. But of course, it's easier to ignore that and look the big hero who saves those poor weak cowardly French.

This is one of the biggest myths of WW2. It was not 80/20 in 1944. Nowhere near it.

It seems to me the myth is quite the opposite, ie that the USA single-handledly took on and defeated the nazis and saved the whole western world, with the help of a few Brits, Canadians, Australians... Many Americans don't even know that there were more British soldiers than American soldiers in the Normandy invasion. But in WW2 movies, there seem to be more Americans... I suppose it is understandable, but still it creates a myth.

But you're right, it was not 80/20, more like 76/24. I'm talking footsoldiers, not tanks. And the Luftwaffe was non existent by 1944, unlike in 1940. Also, the Allies in the west were often surprised to find very young german soldiers, almost kids, fighting in France. The german army had a low morale and was much weaker in 1944. In 1940, they were all gung ho and ready and all, with plenty of modern equipment too. Those are other differences between '40 and '44 that are easily forgotten.

"Y a pas d'hélice hélas.
- C'est là qu'est l'os."

reply

[–] BuddyLove63 11 years ago

Let me put it this way: if France had been located on that island and all the islands around it where Britain is, and Britain had been where France was (and still is) as far as geography's concerned, then there's no reason not to think that the Brits would have been defeated in 1940 (because they were)

We don't know this. The entire makeup of Britain would have been completely different and there might not have even BEEN a Germany because the Spanish or Napoleon might have defeated Britain in the centuries before and so Europe itself may have been vastly different.

It's easier to "hold the fort" when you have the sea to protect you between you and the enemy

But the British were fighting in the Med and North Africa as well. And on the high seas of the Atlantic. They weren't just 'backed up' on their island.

Do you know that first time any German army was forced back into retreat in WW2 was during Operation Crusader in North Africa in November 1941?? Yes including Rommel.

Many countries (Im going out on a limb here and saying no other European country)would have done what Britain did and carried on the fight when it looked hopeless after Dunkirk. Britain was offered peace but turned it down...even though they had just been defeated in the Battle of France and the Axis grew (Italy joined Hitler in June 1940).

All I am saying is the "French were cowards" business is based on the assumption that everybody had the same deal of the cards, when they didn't.

But I'm not saying the French were cowards. We don't have that perception in Britain. As I said that is reserved for the Italians.

I personally have no idea why some Americans call the French cowards. The French declared war on Germany and fought Germany. They just ended up getting beat. That's not cowardice.'

It seems to me the myth is quite the opposite, ie that the USA single-handledly took on and defeated the nazis and saved the whole western world, with the help of a few Brits, Canadians, Australians...

Well that's a silly myth as well and far from the actual truth.

Many Americans don't even know that there were more British soldiers than American soldiers in the Normandy invasion. But in WW2 movies, there seem to be more Americans... I suppose it is understandable, but still it creates a myth.

I know. Or that 90% of the German's near 2,000 AFVs in Normandy were in the British/Canadian sector around Caen. Hell, even most Brits don't even know that either.

But you're right, it was not 80/20, more like 76/24.

No, it wasn't that either. Not in 1944.

I'm talking footsoldiers, not tanks.

Tanks and the panzer divisions were the iron fist of the German army. It was their battering ram. Without them, ground forces cannot accomplish too much. A great many of the numbers of German soldiers in the USSR in 1944 were second rate and/or the divisions were divisions in name only. Very weak and with regards to Bagration especially lacking armour support. There were very few 'top quality' divisions destroyed in Bagration compared to the very top divisions destroyed in Normandy.

By 1944 Hitler started sending many of his top panzer divisions (his iron fist) west.

He sent FIVE of the seven most powerful Waffen SS panzer divisions to Normandy and not to White Russia. 1st SS, 2nd SS, 9th SS, 10th SS and 12th SS. How many of his precious pampered Waffen SS divisions were sent to White Russia to combat Bagration? A big fat ZERO. 5th SS only turned up near Warsaw near the end of the campaign. It wasn't sent to combat Bagration proper but rather to protect Warsaw.

And the Luftwaffe was non existent by 1944, unlike in 1940.

Because it got caught up in an attritional fight to the death against the western bombing campaigns of 1943/44. The majority of the Luftwaffe was on the home front guarding Germany itself. Since late 1942 the German army in the east became increasingly devoid of Luftwaffe support. The Luftwaffe ended up becoming almost non existent because of the western allies, not because of the Soviets. It's no coincidence that the Germans started being pushed back in the east at the time the German air force began dwindling from the skies.

Also, the Allies in the west were often surprised to find very young german soldiers, almost kids, fighting in France.

Same as in the east in 1945. The vast majority of German soldiers in Normandy once the invasion began were not almost kids. Before the invasion began it was a quiet zone with mostly rabble defending it. That all changed soon enough. Anyway 12th SS Panzer Division Hitlerjugend had mostly very young soldiers....yet was one of the most fanatical and hard fighting in Hitler's arsenal. It met the Canadians on D-day plus 1.

The german army had a low morale and was much weaker in 1944.

Their morale going into Normandy was very high, especially amongst the Waffen SS.

In 1940, they were all gung ho and ready and all, with plenty of modern equipment too.

They had overall comparatively better equipment than their enemy in 1944 compared to 1940.

reply

[–] Onaryc 11 years ago

We don't know this. The entire makeup of Britain would have been completely different and there might not have even BEEN a Germany because the Spanish or Napoleon might have defeated Britain in the centuries before and so Europe itself may have been vastly different.

I meant with the exact same makeup of Britain of course. I was using a hypothesis just to make a point.

But the British were fighting in the Med and North Africa as well. And on the high seas of the Atlantic. They weren't just 'backed up' on their island.

But any army needs supplies, or it cannot function. An occupied country cannot fight because of that. And yet there some free french forces fighting (in Africa and Italy, you seem to be the big expert on WW2, you tell me). You never see those French forces in Hollywood movies...

But I'm not saying the French were cowards

I was replying to the OP. And French bashing is a thing, and it is based mainly on those WW2 misconceptions.

Btw, I'm pretty sure the figues show that 80% of the german soldiers who died in WW2 were killed by the Russians.

And whatever the figures are, there was a pact between Germany and the USSR in 1940 which had ceased to be in 1944, so what I said at first is still valid: much less german troops, equipment and so on on the western front in 1940 than in 1944.

And again, german air force in 1940 vs no german air force in 1944.

You can argue on the figures and who did what, but what I'm saying remains valid as far as French bashing is concerned (see a perfect example in the OP).

Thanks for your info anyway.

"Y a pas d'hélice hélas.
- C'est là qu'est l'os."

reply

[–] linop90 8 years ago

The Italians were not cowards, some of their elite units kicked Yank and brit ass.
Did well in Russia.
They simply did not have enough resources for a full and long scale war.

The OP is talking *beep* a bit... the Russians are barbarians, like americans have turned into today.

By the way.
Why hasn't the Monalisa been returned to Italy?
it was painted there.

Eat the Neocons.

reply

[–] gsfsu 11 years ago

Very accurate and appropriate reply.

reply

[–] anngela 10 years ago

Thank you, and the other educated people in this thread. I'm french, and the OP made me sick. I didn't think people would take time to give a proper answer to this, and I felt kind of relieved when I read the other posts here. So again, thanks.

reply

[–] ladyoftheisland 10 years ago

No, the Russians didn't deserve the art... the people the art was stolen from deserved it.

about says it all

the Russians did play a huge role defeating Hilter, no question, but that's not the issue

reply

[–] AimC 9 years ago

"Nobody calls them cowards for that, even though they scampered back across the English Channel back to their island"

Don't be jealous of the brits, All of Europe except the USSR and Switzerland were incompetent imbeciles who could not enforce a treaty to keep Germany unarmed. And then to keep losing to a micromanaging commander in chief who got as high as the venerable rank of corporal in his own army.

If you want to split hairs, though, Britain did not surrender. Surely the channel made a huge difference as it always has, and the US came to help. Doesn't make much difference from the American POV; both were battered kids who needed adult intervention.

reply

[–] Ed in MO 11 years ago

The French lost WWII in 1916. After the horrendous blood-letting at Verdun, they just did not have the heart for total war. The French army mutinied in 1917 and that was pretty much the end of the French army for the first world war and the second one.

They are much like the Italians that way. The Italians never really recovered from their horrendous loss at Caporetto in 1917. The record of Italian victories after that is a very slim one, and usually against mediocre opponents like the Ethiopians and Albanians.

Some have hypothesized that the southern European countries like Spain, France, Italy and Greece were just too peaceful and civilized for the total war of WWII, which was generally fought by the northern European countries of Russia, Germany and Britain.

reply

[–] linop90 8 years ago

Go and get farked.... big time.

The Italians won in the risirgimento, ww1. certain battles of ww2.
Like at Kasserine pass, kicked Yank ass.... who like usual... have no business being in the fight.

101 Italian victories

11.01.1941 Italian Air Force disables HMS Ilustrious, allowing the safe arrival of the Afrika Korps.
24.01.1941 BCS fight the first sucessfull action against a British armoured force near Derna.
25.01.1941 Bersaglieri fight a sucessfull delaying action near Derna.
27.01.1941 Bersaglieri mount a very strong counterattack on the Australians, buying much valuable time.
??.04.1941 Ariete captures Msus
08.04.1941 Ariete captures Mechili. Bersaglieri capture 3,000 Allied troops.
01.05.1941 Ariete & Brescia capture overrun 7 Australian strongpoints ( R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7 and R8) outside Tobruk
04.05.1941 Australians counterattack but the Trento, Pavia & Ariete defeat the attacks.
17.05.1941 Brescia penetrates the sectors of the Australian 2/9th and 2/10th Battalions, forcing the Australians to abandon the S8, S9 and S10 strongpoints.
24.05.1941 Brescia defeats an attacking infantry force, supported by tanks.
02.08.1941 Bersaglieri defeat the 2/43rd and 2/28th Battalions, in a final Australian attempt to recover the lost strongpoints.
15.05.1941 Bersaglieri anti-tank gunners derail the British offensive, known as Operation Brevity. A German Colonel later praised the Bersaglieri anti-tank gunners, saying they defended Halfaya Pass "...with lionlike courage until the last man against stronger enemy forces. The greatest part of them died faithful to the flag."
Mid-June 1941 Italian anti-tank gunners under Major Leopoldo Pardi destroy several British tanks, derailing Operation Battleaxe in the process.
27.05.1941 Ariete overruns the British-officered 3rd Indian Brigade.
29.05.1941 Ariete successfully defends the Afrika Korps rearguard
30.05.1941 Trieste successfully delivers food and provision to the Afrika Korps preventing their entire capitulation.
05.06.1941 Ariete again successfully defends the Afrika Korps rearguard
26.08.1941 Italian troops repell several Russian attacks on the Don front.
27.10.1941 Italians repell strong Russian attack in the Donets Basin, capturing several hundred.
10.11.1941 Italians defeat a Russian attempt to cross the Don River.
19.11.1941 Ariete blunts British offensive named Operation Crusader. 40 Crusader tanks are knocked out.
19.11.1941 Pavia repell column of British tanks in the area of El Adem. British forced to retreat.
20.11.1941 Bologna infantry and anti-tank gunners derail advance of the British 7th Armoured Brigade.
21.11.1941 Bologna defenders of the 'Tugun' strongpoint derail the advance of the British 70th Division
22.11.1941 'Tugun' defenders successfully defend their postion again.
23.11.1941 Pavia defeats British attempt to smash through the Bologna
25.11.1941 The Trento successfully defends the 'Bondi' strongpoint outside Tobruk.
26.11.1941 Bersaglieri defeat renewed British attempt to smash through the Bologna
29.11.1941 Ariete overruns the 21st New Zealand Battalion.
29.11.1941 Bersaglieri capture 1,800 Allied wounded, medical staff & guards. 200 German POWs are freed.
01.12.1941 Trento defeats an armoured attack outside Tobruk
01.12.1941 Trieste cuts off the link the New Zealanders had established with the Tobruk defenders.
04.12.1941 Pavia and Trento recapture ‘Plonk and ‘Doc’ strongpoints outside Tobruk.
06.12.1941 Pavia makes a successful stand on Point 157
07.12.1941 Bologna covers the retreat of the German Afrika Division
10.12.1941 Brescia covers the German retreat from Acroma Hill.
12.12.1941 Bologna, Brescia, Pavia, Trieste & Trento successfully hold the Gazala Line
13.12.1941 Trieste successfully defends Point 208
15.12.1941 Brescia, Pavia & Trento repell a stong Polish-New Zealand attack
15.12.1941 Ariete overruns The Buffs
12.06.1942 Trieste helps destroy the British 2nd & 4th Armoured Brigades by cornering them.
16.06.1942 Italians overrun & capture 6, 000 Allied troops outside Tobruk.
17.01.1942 Savona surrenders. It had defeated several Allied attacks. Rommel is very impressed.
11.07.1942 Bersaglieri overrun part of the Australian 2/48th Battalion.
14.07.1942 Colonel Angelozzi's 1st Battalion from the supposedly destroyed Sabratha recaptures Tel el Eisa from the Australians.
15.07.1942 Colonel Angelozzi's men defeat the Australian 2/23rd Battalion's attempt to recapture the position.
15.07.1942 Pavia & Brescia successfully defend their principal positions on Ruweisat Ridge. New Zealander battalion caught out on the open as a result and is captured with the arrival of German tanks.
17.07.1942 A battalion of the Trento overruns part of the Australian 2/32nd Battalion.
21.07.1942 Trieste & Brescia sucessfully defend their main positions on Ruweisat Ridge. Several hundred New Zealanders are captured thanks to their efforts, that allow German tanks to mount a counterattack.
27.07.1942 3rd Battalion of the 61st Trento Infantry Regiment derails the attack of the 2/28th Battalion.
27.07.1942 Armoured car squadron of the Brescia encircle and capture the Australian 2/28 Battalion
30.06.1942 Littorio surrounds Mersa Matruh & Bersaglieri capture 6,500 Allied soldiers.
01.07.1942 1,000 New Zealanders captured
??.09.1942 Bologna overruns defenders of Point 211 during the Battle of Alam el Halfa.
??.09.1942 Trieste, Brescia, Ariete & Littorio force British & New Zealanders to retreat several kilometres.
04.09.1942 Folgore defeat the 6th New Zealand Brigade & capture 200 attackers, including Brigadier G.M. Clifton.
14.09.1942 San Marco Marines defeat Allied seaborne landings aimed at recapturing Tobruk. 1,000 Allied killed, wounded or captured.
30.09.1942 Fogore defeat 131st Queens Brigade, over 300 British killed or captured.
24.10.1942 Ariete, Brescia & Folgore successfully hold the Alamein line.
25.10.1942 12th Bersaglieri overruns the Austalian 2/17th Battalion.
28.10.1942 Littorio overruns part of the British 133rd Brigade
29.10.1942 7th Bersaglieri derails the advance of the Austalian 26th Brigade and creates a salient in the Australian sector.
30.10.1942 7th Bersaglieri defeats several Australian attacks to force them out of this salient.
03.11.1942 Ariete successfully covers the retreat of Rommel
03.12.1943 Bersaglieri capture part of the British 2nd Parachute Battalion.
12.12.1942 Italian troops attack Russian battalions capturing prisoners a much equipment
18.02.1943. While the Germans fail taking Sbiba Pass, the 7th Bersaglieri smash the US lines at Kasserine Pass.
18.02.1943 Centauro Division overruns the US 19th Combat Engineers Regiment.
24.02.1943 5th Bersaglieri successfully covers the retreat of Rommel

*****3,000 Allied troops surrendered at Mechili. About 500 Australians were captured manning the Tobruk defences. Some 3,500 Allied troops fell into Italian hands during Operation Crusader. 1,000 Indian troops surrendered to the Ariete on 27 May 1942. 6,000 Allied troops surrendered to the Italians outside Tobruk on 16 June 1942. Some 7,000 Allied troops surrendered to the Italians in the area of Mersa Matruh in late June and early July 1942, including 1,000 New Zealanders abandoned in the desert. During the Battle of Kasserine Pass, the Bersaglieri and Centauro Division overran some 2,500 Americans.

forgetting Vietnam? you yanks always seem to amazingly.

Eat the Neocons.

reply

[–] Shimmer_Me_Timbers 11 years ago

No, the Russians didn't deserve the art... the people the art was stolen from deserved it.

reply

[–] tally1-934-484232 11 years ago

The Soviets did suffer badly at the hands of the Nazi invaders.

But the Soviets hardly come out of the war smelling of roses. As others have pointed out, the 1939 non-aggression pact between Hitler and Stalin allowed the Soviets to steamroll into the independent Baltic nations and divided Poland between the two countries and allowed the Soviets to take a good portion of Romania. The Soviets did this completely unprovoked by any of these former countries.

Hitler did do a turnaround and invaded the Soviet Union in 1941, two years after the pact. God knows why he did this. And yes, his armies committed atrocious acts against the Soviet population. But when the Red Army regrouped and pushed back in 1944-1945, the Red Army committed its own atrocious acts against the civilian populations of not just Germany, but Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic and Romania. Russian soldiers routinely shot civilians suspected of being upper or middle class, raped hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of non-German women, and deliberately played politically strategic games with the resistance movements in those countries, particularly Poland, and idly watched as they were slaughtered by the Nazis before moving in and taking over. The Polish resistance in Warsaw is a perfect example of this

Then after the war, the Soviets didn't retreat. They set up puppet states in these former nations, held on to former Polish and Romanian territories and radically altered the lives of millions of people in those countries and denied them their freedom and liberties.

Contrast this to the behavior of the Americans and British and other allied nations during the war.

reply

[–] freedom-from-sanity 10 years ago

Actually all sides did terrible things during the last days of the war, and after the fall of Berlin. Troops, including allied troops (particularly the French, due to the occupation) raped many innocent German women as they marched through the country. To some women it became a part of daily life. A bunch of troops would come by and have their fun with them then move on. A day later more troops would do the same.

When war brakes out its good against bad but the longer it goes on the more blurred that definition becomes. Until eventually there are no real good guys and bad guys, just winners and losers.

The winners get to write the history books and thus paint them selves whiter than white.

What the Russians did after the war wasn't much better than what hitler would have done but the world was in no fit state to fight again. So we let them be, much to our shame.

reply

[–] katjoeus 10 years ago

VERY well said!!!

reply

[–] pzkpfw6 10 years ago

The murdering, raping russian thieves didn't deserve *beep*

reply

[–] IzzardRox 10 years ago

Um, because it was theirs!!! You really need that explained to you. The art was given back to the rightful owners, as it should be!!

Cake or Death?

reply

[–] Finalreminder 10 years ago

Fool. If the USA or UK was positioned geographically where France was in WW2, either one would have got railroaded.
It was a new type of warfare no one was prepared for, hence why everyone collapsed in the face of the blitkrieg.
Only those countries that were buffered, that were given time to analyse the situation and adapt to it came back with boxing gloves on.

Sick of these idiotic swings at France for being cowards since that war. They were in an almost perpetual war with Englad for almost 1,000 years. They are so far away from cowards it's idiotic to call them so.

Go read up on the Battle of Verdun, then say the French were cowards. Foolish person.

reply

[–] astockton_uk 10 years ago

If France had not allied itself with the thirteen colonies during our revolutionary war, ALL of North America above the Rio Grande would be called Canada today. France also gave us the Statue of Liberty.

I got so sick of hearing France denounced during the run-up to the second Iraq war for failing to support the invasion of a country that didn't attack the United States. France has had enough experience with war, and on this issue they were absolutely right.

reply

[–] dannieboy20906 10 years ago

The French army actually outnumbered the Wehrmacht when France and England declared war against Germany on 3 September 1939 in retaliation for Germany's invasion of Poland. They had tanks that were technologically on a par with the German's tanks of the time and the French had more. The Germans only advantages in war making capability lay in her larger air force and in her tactics.

The English and the French sat and waited for months, allowing Germany to amass their forces and seize the initiative. The French depended entirely on the Maginot Line to defend. When the Germans bypassed the Maginot Line and invaded France through Belgium (just as they had in WW1) they caught the French and the British by surprise, again. They would also catch the Americans, the English, and the French by surprise attacking through Belgium's Ardennes Forest again in December 1944. Go figure. We seem to be slow learners regardless of our heritage.

People are people and I don't think that the French people are on average significantly more stupid or cowardly than the rest of us. But, they screwed up badly at the beginning of WW2. They and the English were terrified of repeating WW1.

None of that changes that the art should be returned to those who owned it before the Nazis seized it. If the Russians are different than the Germans it is in that they are even more ruthless. They lost millions fighting the Germans mostly due to the stupidity of their own government, especially Joseph Stalin, and because the Nazis hated Slavs. That doesn't give them a right to the art.

reply

[–] DBloodnok 9 years ago

dannieboy - British, not English. If I only spoke of Californians, when I should to refer to Americans, that might irk other Americans.

The OP is a disgrace. Look at the military history of France, particularly in World War One. And, during the Second World War, the French Expeditionary Force in Italy did some sterling work.

"Someone has been tampering with Hank's memories."

reply

[–] Squeeth2 9 years ago

To be fair much of the French military effort after 1940 was made by non-French soldiers, who were rewarded in 1945 by being bleached and their families massacred.

Marlon, Claudia and Dimby the cats 1989-2005, 2007 and 2010.

reply

[–] dannieboy20906 9 years ago

Point taken; it would be interesting to engage in a debate over the relative homogeneity of British and American culture. Such as, is the variation between Californian and South Carolinian culture greater than that between English and Welsh culture.

The best diplomat I know is a fully charged phaser bank.

reply

[–] Squeeth2 9 years ago

British culture? Slim volume! Slim volume! 

Marlon, Claudia and Dimby the cats 1989-2005, 2007 and 2010.

reply

[–] DBloodnok 9 years ago

Dannyboy / Squeeth - salient points from you both, thanks

"Someone has been tampering with Hank's memories."

reply

[–] Squeeth2 9 years ago

Our public demands no less. ;O))

Marlon, Claudia and Dimby the cats 1989-2005, 2007 and 2010.

reply