The German invasion of Russia: - Page 5




 
--
 
October 20th, 2007  
Kunikov
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ollie Garchy
You can cite all the sources that you want. How about a million more? None of this changes the fact that the Sovs got creamed. And, they got creamed throughout the war -- the war kept the Russians in the stone age. That was all they could ever have achieved. It was a "miracle" from a Slavic perspective, but they only gave up millions to allow the Americans to win.

Let me introduce a conjectural point...after all this crap, that is the least that one could allow me. What about a war between Germany and the Soviets without the air war and the two fronts in Italy and France? Come on, who are you trying to convince? I live in the real world. How about you guys? Germany would have won.

And, anyway, look at Russia today, what have they won? 60 years after WWII, I have to say that Germany won, anyway.
Thanks, I'll be ignoring you from now on.
October 20th, 2007  
senojekips
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kunikov
I'll lose my hostile tone when I see you using something aside from baseless opinions when writing posts.
In other words you are saying. "Agree with me, or I am quite justified in my enormous arrogance" You are not looking for informed debate, you are merely trolling.

Did it ever occur to you that, that is what a debate is, peoples opinions. Two people can read the same book and arrive at completely different opinions as to the outcome. This is often shaped by external influences such as in this case.

There is absolutely nothing to say that your opinion carries any more weight than that of anyone else. All you seem to be saying is that you think you have read more books on the subject at hand. Well.... that may be so, but it does not necessarily follow that your opinions are any the wiser for it.

Having read endless books on anatomy doesn't make you a surgeon.
October 20th, 2007  
Kunikov
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by senojekips
In other words you are saying. "Agree with me, or I am quite justified in my enormous arrogance" You are not looking for informed debate, you are merely trolling.

Did it ever occur to you that, that is what a debate is, peoples opinions. Two people can read the same book and arrive at completely different opinions as to the outcome. This is often shaped by external influences such as in this case.

There is absolutely nothing to say that your opinion carries any more weight than that of anyone else. All you seem to be saying is that you think you have read more books on the subject at hand. Well.... that may be so, but it does not necessarily follow that your opinions are any the wiser for it.

Having read endless books on anatomy doesn't make you a surgeon.
Maybe you and the rest should stop assuming what I mean or meant or am thinking, etc? Address what I've written if you want to say something to me, this is pointless bickering, which I'm not here for. My opinions are backed up by factual information, most of yours aren't. You are free to believe what you want, but believing is different from knowing and understanding.
--
October 20th, 2007  
senojekips
 
 
My assumptions and no doubt those of others, as to what you mean, are formed exactly the same way as yours are about the material that you have read. They are formed based on what you say, I have no alternative unless you know of a crystal ball.

Quote:
but believing is different from knowing and understanding.
This is exactly my point, we only "believe", you profess to "know". It sounds more like old soviet era propaganda every minute. As I said earlier, your ignorance is only exceeded by your enormous arrogance, and I think that is a very accurate assumption.
October 20th, 2007  
Kunikov
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by senojekips
My assumptions and no doubt those of others, as to what you mean, are formed exactly the same way as yours are about the material that you have read. They are formed based on what you say, I have no alternative unless you know of a crystal ball.

This is exactly my point, we only "believe", you profess to "know". It sounds more like old soviet era propaganda every minute. As I said earlier, your ignorance is only exceeded by your enormous arrogance, and I think that is a very accurate assumption.
I'm ignorant now? Please, show me where I have professed something close to ignorance.
October 20th, 2007  
senojekips
 
 
By professing to "know" information, whereas you say that others only "believe", you ably demonstrate that you are ignorant of the facts in this regard.

It appears that you have made the grave mistake of interpreting a reasonable expectation of respect for the views of others as a weakness, this is both ignorant and arrogant in the extreme.
October 21st, 2007  
Kunikov
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by senojekips
By professing to "know" information, whereas you say that others only "believe", you ably demonstrate that you are ignorant of the facts in this regard.

It appears that you have made the grave mistake of interpreting a reasonable expectation of respect for the views of others as a weakness, this is both ignorant and arrogant in the extreme.
You are reaching. This is now going into the realm of fantasy. If you'd like to discuss the topic at hand go ahead, I'm tired of you going off on tangents and I, personally, won't be doing it again. If you'd like to disprove or address something I've said in regards to the title of this thread, go ahead, otherwise stop wasting my time.
October 21st, 2007  
senojekips
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kunikov
I'm ignorant now? Please, show me where I have professed something close to ignorance.
You asked the question. Don't blame me if you don't like being told the answer. Or better still don't ask the question.
October 21st, 2007  
Del Boy
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kunikov
Sorge did not predict June 20th either. The closest he got was June 15. He sent a message on June 20th that said 'war is inevitable' or something to that effect. The following is a list of sources I used for my paper, not counting at least two books in Russian:


Bibliography




Axell, Albert. Stalin’s War Through The Eyes of his Commanders. Arms and Armour: London,
1997.

Barros, James and Gregor, Richard. Double Deception: Stalin, Hitler and the Invasion of
Russia. Northern Illinois University Press: DeKalb, 1995.

Broekmeyer, Marius. Stalin, the Russians, and Their War 1941-1945. The University of
Wisconsin Press: Wisconsin, 2004.

Damaskin, Igor A. Stalin I Razvedka. Moscow, 2004.

Erickson, John. The Road to Stalingrad: Stalin’s War with Germany. Yale University Press:
London, 1999.

Gorbunov, Evgenii. Skhvatka s Chyernim Drakonom. Tajnaya Vojna na Dalnyem Vostoke.
Veche, 2002.

Gorodetsky, Gabriel. Grand Delusion. Yale University Press: New Haven, 1999.

Leonard, Raymond W. Secret Soldiers of the Revolution: Soviet Military Intelligence, 1918-1933. Greenwood Press: London, 1999.

Mawdsley, Evan. Thunder in the East. Hodder Arnold: Great Britain, 2005.

Murphy, David E. What Stalin Knew: The Enigma of Barbarossa. Yale University Press: New
Haven, 2005.

Overy, Richard. Russia’s War: A History of the Soviet War Effort: 1941-1945. Penguin Books:
New York, 1997.

Petrov, Vladimir. Soviet Historians and the German Invasion “June 22 1941” University of
South Carolina Press: Columbia S.C., 1968.

Pikhalov, Igor. Velikaya Obolgannaya Voyna. Eksmo: Yauza, 2005.

Prange, Gordon W. Target Tokyo: The Story of the Sorge Spy Ring. McGraw-Hill Book
Company: New York, 1984.

Pleshakov, Constantine. Stalin’s Folly. Houghton Mifflin Company: New York, 2005.

Prudnikova, Ye. et al. Legendi GRU. Moscow, 2005.

Salisbury, Harrison E. The 900 Days: The Siege of Leningrad. Da Capo Press: New York, 1985.

Stepashin, S. V. ed., Organy Gosudarstvennoy Bezopasnosti SSR v Velikoy Otechestvennoy
Voine. Moscow, 1995. Book 2.

Sudoplatov, Pavel and Anatoli. Special Tasks. Back Bay Books: New York, 1994.
Whymant, Robert. Stalin’s Spy. St. Martin’s Press: New York, 1996.
Yakovlev, Alexander N. ed., 1941 god. Moscow, 1998. 2 Volumes.

Ziemke, Earl F. Moscow to Stalingrad: Decision in the East. Center of Military History:
Washington, D. C., 1987.



Websites





http://nvo.ng.ru/history/2000-10-27/5_ramzay.html http://www.newlibrary.ru/read/korolkov_yurii/chelovek_dlja_kotorogo_ne_bylo_tain.html
http://www.lib.ru/MEMUARY/ZHZL/zorge.txt


Read Whymant's book "Stalin's Spy" if you want the messages he sent translated. Read Murphy to see the contradictory information coming into the GRU and NKVD from abroad. Use your common sense, and if that fails logic, to understand Stalin's and Golikov's situation, amongst others, when viewing the reports coming in.



Well Guys, you asked for it, and that looks a pretty impressive list to me. Kunikov, I take my hat off to you. My apologies for pulling your leg earlier. I can now see that you are a serious student of your subject. I was merely attempting to pay Russia, in an ironic nut-shell, a historic compliment on their use of their immense natural resources. My compliments to you.
October 21st, 2007  
MontyB
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kunikov
You are reaching. This is now going into the realm of fantasy. If you'd like to discuss the topic at hand go ahead, I'm tired of you going off on tangents and I, personally, won't be doing it again. If you'd like to disprove or address something I've said in regards to the title of this thread, go ahead, otherwise stop wasting my time.
Perhaps I can make this easier for all of us, if you don't like what people say on the boards and you are not prepared to put some effort into proving your point why are you wasting your and our time by posting here?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kunikov
What you profess on a forum says more than enough about what you've read and how much you know.
I agree so spare us the self promotion and self righteous indignation and either say something useful or go away so that others can, its really not that difficult.
 


Similar Topics
"Tommy's Dictionary Of The Trenches" WWI
Germany the guardian of peace
Funny Fact
The US roll in central & south America.
Allies and neutrals in WW2