Printable View
Stalin Buses to be Launched in 40 Former Soviet Cities | World | RIA Novosti
What do you think of this, folks? My comment is, even if a shepherd happens to be evil and kill a large part of herd, the herd will always have warm memories connected with him, because it's the shepherd.
Good or bad, it's history and aside from killing a million or two innocents every day, Stalin did some other unimportant things like winning a war, for example, and some other. But I agree, those gazillions of dead Soviets he ate personally are terrible, terrible crimes.
Eric, even though I don't have any warm sentiments towards Stalin, I think I have to explain to you the background the way I see it, so you could form a more informed opinion. Like Peter I, Stalin transformed the foundation of the country to be what it is today. His successors would probably only beef it up, but did not change much infrastructure-wise. And that what ultimately forms the country. (I'm not talking about the price right now, just about the achievements. And not about whether those achievements were the best of all possible course of actions.)
What many of the Russians think today is that since the new government took over in the 1992, there has been virtually next to no improvements in the infrastructure. Rather, the old infrastructure had been utilized over the possible limits designed. For many Russians, that is a sign that the new government is not building the future, meaning the government does not care about the country and the citizens. As the next step, they conclude that the old government did care more. Especially the government which had built the foundation. At that time the country was run by Stalin. Hence, the sentiments. The buses seem to me more of a gesture of the despise to the present government than the wish another Stalin would come.
Using your analogy, it's more like the herd reminding the new ignorant shepherd that the old evil shepherd had actually planted some grass.
I have no opinion. I suppose they will find out from the reaction of the public, whether it was a good idea or not. My guess is that the press coverage from Tallinn and Riga won't be very favourable though.
I DO object to endless villification of the Germans in connection with WW2 memorial events though though, and I hope this campaign can be tactful in that respect. The Germans regret what happened and have paid heavy damages. That's enough in my view, since the war was almost 70 years ago.
Personally I have always disliked films are talk about the war.
But I had the opportunity to see a traditional (?) 9 May celebration, last year in Gomel, Belarus. It was very cool and impressive and I love the catchy tunes that are played. People were out on the streets and in the parks all day and had a good time.
And if not for Stalin, this forum might be called MasterGerman.com. And Eric as an Eastern European might be in a coalmine in Siberia, digging coal for the Vaterland. If there is one thing I like about Stalin, it's the architecture from those days. Minsk has benefited from it and looks very grand in places.
That is probably an overstatement. The mistake Hitler had done attacking the USSR was a repetition of the mistake Napoleon had done. Both believed they could pose themselves in the eyes of Russians as heroes liberating the people from their oppressors. Using the conventional military technology dated back to Napoleon or Hitler, there was no way to conquer and have control over the territory of such magnitude.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanna
So, Stalin or no Stalin, there was no way Hitler could be successful in the long run. And, in my opinion, Stalin was greatly responsible that the war lasted that long and took such expensive toll. His impatience to defeat the enemy quickly and throw Germans back beyond the borders as fast as possible lead to a lot of losses during the entire campaign. Especially, in its initial phase.
What do you see as vilification??? The mention that it was Germans, who did these atrocious things? No one says that modern Germans are the same people or that they are guilty of their fathers sins. But whether they regret it or not it happened. I don't think that 70 years is enough to "forget" about 30+ millions of Russian/Soviet lives lost.Quote:
I DO object to endless villification of the Germans in connection with WW2 memorial events though though, and I hope this campaign can be tactful in that respect. The Germans regret what happened and have paid heavy damages. That's enough in my view, since the war was almost 70 years ago.
I find it strange that many people are quick to vilify Muslims, or Russians, or whoever else (sometimes based on rumors only), but when it's about Germans and WW2... or no! we hurt can their feelings. It looks like a club of popular kids, who defend their own.
I said "MIGHT" though, didn't I? Really, I just think Eric's "self loathing" is a bit sad.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crocodile
And yes, I agree with you Croc. I made the mistake of talking politics at work today and we were arguing about just this. As the discussion got more heated, my colleague asked what I though would have happened if the USA had not intervened in Europe.
I said that I thought there would have been a bit more damage to places like England, and perhaps even an invasion there. But eventually Hitler would have met his doom in the USSR anyway. It is simply not possible to win long term against Russia. If Hitler hadn't taken on the USSR, and if the US had never joined the war, then Germany could have kept the gains they made in the early days of the war, and I for one would probably have been German speaking, not to mention Nulle. Oh well!
Tschüs! ;-)
I'm not sure things would be as easy as that. First of all, the war with Britain was not over. And Britain is some die-hard dude. And even long before the direct involvement of the US troops, the British were able to mobilize some hidden reserves like Canada and that could have only get nastier. The French resistance could only get more intensive (and the history showed it did) and we all know how ugly a partisan war could turn for the [even more military able] invader. Overall, Germany is not so big a country to control everything and given the ideology of the super-people and the under-people they couldn't be that attractive in the long run in the eyes of the majority of Europe. I think the initial success of Germany in the WWII was in large part due to the enthusiasm of many Germans, the ability of the ideology to get people their national pride back, something they were deprived of during more than a decade. And enthusiasm is something short-lived by nature, you can't do a long run with it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanna
I don't disagree with you. Nobody could know for sure what would have happened. But didn't Canada fight on Britain's side already before the USA joined? I thought so. I think Australia did too. At the very least they sent some volunteers.
Anyway, the USA joined the war in, what '43, or was it 41?
What do you think would have happened if they had never come to Europe?
Exactly. They were fighting, but there was no mass-mobilization. But, there could be if the things got uglier than they were.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanna
They entered the war in December 1941. If they had never come to Europe, all the Europe would have been in the Sovieyt sphere of influence.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanna
Then Soviets would have probably conquered all of the Europe.Quote:
What do you think would have happened if they had never come to Europe?
Instead of only a half of it.
Thanks to Stalin - my grandparents did exactly that.Quote:
And if not for Stalin, this forum might be called MasterGerman.com. And Eric as an Eastern European might be in a coalmine in Siberia, digging coal for the Vaterland.
8 years in Siberia - working as slaves for Stalin and USSR while commies looted everything that they had.
And they are still alive and remember that.
I'm wondering - why...Quote:
My guess is that the press coverage from Tallinn and Riga won't be very favourable though.
Traditional 9th of May "celebrations" in Rīga:
krievu bardaks 9.maijā - YouTube
9 мая /
It is funny to see "На Берлин" and "За Победу" on loser-German made cars.
Why aren't they using cars made by victorious USSR/Russia is a mystery to me...
Buses with Stalin - I think it is disgusting and offensive to organize something like that - the same about the rest of these "celebrations".
Like launching buses with Hitler on them in Israel.
It should not be forgotten that Stalin wasn't at all opposed to Hitler in the beginning of the war, and that the two of them were in agreement about, for example, attacking Poland. Stalin had his fair share in starting WWII.
gRomoZeka, no offense, but do you have any idea what actually happens each time any German even dares to publicly mention Nazis and Hitler in any even slightly favorable way? Or dares to say anything even remotely negative about Israel, Jews, or even any individual who just happens to be a Jew? When a right wing party in Germany manages to get one person into any local parliament, there's a cry of outrage in the rest of Europe. But who cares about the much stronger right in the Netherlands, in France and elsewhere?Quote:
I find it strange that many people are quick to vilify Muslims, or Russians, or whoever else (sometimes based on rumors only), but when it's about Germans and WW2... or no! we hurt can their feelings. It looks like a club of popular kids, who defend their own.
Do you realize that up to the soccer world championship in 2006 which took place in Germany nobody in Germany would even have dared to display the German national flag privately? Can you imagine what discussion we had then when suddenly all those small German flags appeared on the cars? The French and British press already saw the ugly Nazi raise his head again! Even many Germans did. We Germans have learned not to feel any pride for our country. The German word for pride, Stolz, has been largely converted to a meaning of "pride for one's personal achievements", and nationality is not a personal achievement.
If even a remote village in Germany decided to put a Hitler sticker on the windshield of their single local bus it would make the title page of any British and French newspaper, I bet you.
Bitpicker is absolutely right. I didn't know you were still following the forum, Robin, or I probably wouldn't have joked about it. Like I said, I am completely against all the rubbishing of Germans because of the war. Germans are some of the biggest pacifist and solidaric Europeans. I will never forget an evening at the pub, in London, when a German colleague of mine actually started crying, because people kept making "funny" jokes about the war with her. She told me later that practically every day somebody would bring it up with her. She never knew what to say and one day she just couldn't take it anymore.
On the other hand, it's easy for me to not feel passionately about it. My country was not even in the war. Perhaps I should keep my mouth shut!
Russia and Germany had hundreds of years of politics even before XX century, so I guess it's pretty "normal"Quote:
Originally Posted by bitpicker
The Nazi idea was born on the ashes of WWI when Germany has been basically taken from a great empire pedestal and put to dirt. It was Germans' pride what created the Nazi idea. Many Germans thought that the dolchstoßlegende can't stay unpunished for long and that basically spoon-fed the Nazi idea. All people are racists, so that was easy. If Germans would have won the WWII it probably would have been greatest achievement for the Western Europe and greatest fall for the Eastern EuropeQuote:
Originally Posted by bitpicker
But since they didn't win - they paying the price
You know, there are funny facts of modern world: Turkey is very popular among Russian and German tourists but owners of Turkish resorts spend time to carefully accommodate Russian tourists apart of German tourists in the month of May, because Russia celebrate WWII victory on May 9th and Germans would be considered "enemies" by Russian tourists at this day and vice versa. It only brings head aches to Turkish guys
I think the WWII was the ugliest war of the mankind, when the war ends everybody has to live with consequences and the Nazi idea has made the consequences very dramatic
<trololo>Quote:
Originally Posted by bitpicker
Does the opinion of British and French newspapers so important to Germans?
And as soon as you comprise one Empire (EU) it looks more like internal regional relations.
The problem with Germans is their perfectionism. When they decided to be Nazis their implementation was perfectly devastating. I suspect that any social theoretical idea implemented by Germany can be devastating in the same way. UN should prohibit Germans to adopt any social theories, they should concentrate on the individual ideas to avoid uncontrollable cumulative effect.
BTW for similar reason Russians should not have central power...
</trololo>
Just so you know, I am not offended by anything you said. :) By the way, Marie LePen, the national socialist candidate for presidency in France, which is something we make sure we don't ever even have, made a whopping 20% yesterday.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanna
From my point of view, there is no such attitude in Russia towards Germans and Germany. At least it is rare and limited to old people, and not strong. Germans are wellcome and respected in modern Russia (this was not the case after the war). The victory is celebrated с большим размахом. But it is not connected with any anti-German sentiment.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanna
Maybe, but not necessarily. For example, it's possible that without the "distraction" created by the Americans, Hitler would have done a much better job of carrying out the invasion of the USSR (and he would've had more troops available for that front). While this would not necessarily have resulted in a Soviet loss, it would have left the USSR even more exhausted at the end of the war, and less able to project power into Europe. Although on the other hand, the Western European allies would also have been more exhausted (assuming the Nazis were eventually defeated), and less able to resist Soviet influence.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcus
There are other possibilities, too. Might German scientists have developed the atomic bomb first if the US hadn't gotten involved in Europe? Or alternatively, a far larger number of ex-Nazi scientists may have ended up getting "invitations" to the USSR after the war (with comparatively fewer getting snatched up by us Yanks), which obviously could've drastically changed the course of the nuclear race and the space race.
Then again, the war in the Pacific theater could've gone quite differently if the US had only been fighting on that front and stayed out of Europe. I don't know if that aspect would have made much difference for the USSR, though, since they were virtually uninvolved in the war against Japan.
Well, isn't it strange that immigration has worked out so well for America, and it's just so incredibly problematic in Europe....!Quote:
Originally Posted by bitpicker
And in some countries, due to history and political correctness, it is not even possible to openly talk about the problems and how to solve them. I agree that it's absolutely true that if a party like Le Pen's got 20% of the votes in Germany, then media in the rest of Europe and around the world would go absolutely berserk. Or if Anders Behring Breivik had been German.... There might be some kind of political action against Germany, even. Personally I am really torn in my feelings about immigration, refugees and all the issues related to it.
Another thing that's occurred to me -- similar to what was discussed in the "Propaganda against Russia" thread -- is how frustrating it must be, as a German, to see the completely un-nuanced picture of Germans in endless numbers of war movies.
Actually, no... But I don't like war movies anyway. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanna
I said clearly: "If they had never come to Europe", not "If they had never entered the war". By the time American troops appeared in Europe, it had become obvious that the Soviet Union would win. That's why they appeared. It would have been more difficult of course for the Soviet Union to defeat Germany, but Germany had no chances even with a nuclear bomb. Even after the opening of the second front, the eastern front held most German troops and was more important, except for a small period during the Ardennes offense.Quote:
Originally Posted by Throbert McGee
Other countries were either occupied or very weak that time, they wouldn't have resisted the Soviet Union and communists and prosoviet moods were very strong in Europe after the war.
"Officially" US involvement in Europe started March 11, 1941 with the passing of the Lend-Lease Act. Previously the US was "selling" to Canada and the ships got lost and ended up in England/Soviet Union. Cash and Carry to UK and SU.
Liberty Ships used to marshal for the North Atlantic Crossing near where I live. A Soviet ship has been discovered with ~$3 Billion in gold and platinum off the coast here.
Stalin buses. Are they modern functioning units or just big Lada/Zil/Trabant/Volga? From what I've seen of Eastern European buses, they would cause a lot of crying about pollution in the US.
There is a good article on this, here:
Stalinobusy – Buses of victory | | Independent Editor's choice Blogs
Stalin Bus drawing from RT:
Attachment 378
America was not in a position do do anything when WWII started, she had a military that was outdated in terms of operations and personel, the model was based upon WWI operations, the personal were conscripts.Quote:
Originally Posted by capecoddah
George Marshall changed all of that and was instrumental in Lend Lease, a great read is
Winning the Peace: The Marshall Plan and America's Coming of Age as a Superpower by Nicolaus Mills.
Also lets remember that there were the Baltic conveys that supplied aid and munitions to the Soviets.
Arctic convoys of World War II - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Is that the pot calling the kettle black again? In your country from what I understand, you hardly even HAVE a functioning bus service in most places! People are forced to drive a car, even those who can't afford it or don't want to! Considerably less environmentally friendly, and apalling economy for people on a low income.Quote:
Originally Posted by capecoddah
I have travelled a lot around Europe, West and recently also East. There is no particular problem with the standard of buses in Eastern Europe, compared with elsewhere. Pretty much all of the buses are updated since the 90s. What they've got is perfectly serviceable. Obviously they don't have the latest and greatest bus models, adapted to wheelchair users, with perfect climate control etc, etc.. but such buses are not common anywhere else either.
Plus, Eastern European cities usually have very extensive tram and trolleybus networks in central town, this hardly pollutes at all. Regular buses are probably only about a quarter of public transport. The rest is metro where it exists, trolleybus, tram and suburban train. It's well known that all the socialist countries were very good at public transport.
I think no German scientists were employed in the USSR after the war actually, even captured. Were they?Quote:
Originally Posted by Throbert McGee
There were Captured German scientists in the USSR, of course, but they were fewer than in the USA.Quote:
Originally Posted by Anixx
Aaaaaaaaaaaand you missed the bus.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan
OK. Back to reality. USA has many fine public transportation systems. And they are in Major Metropolitan areas. Just like Europe. Used them in Boston, Miami/ South Florida, Atlanta and Washington DC.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanna
We're not Europe. We were founded by Europeans that wanted some space. A n d w e a r e s p r e a d o u t.
My comment was regarding their pollution controls. Like we have here.
Cars? "My Kids" (read Eastern Europeans) love to ride in cars! A ride to town in comfort, a ride home after work with a bike in the back of the pick-up truck in the rain or a trip to the beach with the top down, A/C and tunes blasting.
Or ride the bus. Or the bike.
Thank you.
I'll stick with a sedan to get to work and drive more than 2 bags of groceries home. Not a luxury
A truck for a drive to the Recycle and Trash Transfer-station AND haul a boat AND work. Not a luxury
AND a nice old convertible to hit the beach with. Minor luxury. It's worth MAYBE $3,000
I worked hard to keep off the bus.
The EU has better pollution controls than the USA, which won't even sign the Kyoto protocol! You may think of your country as environmentally "superior" to Russia, but this side of Atlantic nobody does! Many US politicians won't even acknowledge global warming despite the overwhelming evidence. A bit of lobbying in Washington means that environmentally unsound companies can carry on with their devastation. You also have higher car ownership than anywhere else. Why? If all countries had the same car usage patterns as the USA, the world would go under from pollution in a matter of years. It is completely unsustainable.Quote:
Originally Posted by capecoddah
There is nothing shameful, dangerous or unpleasant about using well managed public transport! Quite the opposite. Plus it is the environmentally superior choice.
I am a high income earner who could afford an expensive car, but I don't care for it and use public transport or ocassionally taxis. Not saying everyone must be like me, but as a single person I have no issue at all managing without a car.
And for the record: I am not defending Russians in Moscow who drive unnecessarily - apparently the traffic situation is terrible and some people suddenly consider themselves too good for public transport! Why does everyone need a car in a city with good public transport?
