A point on WW2 documentaries

JOC

Active member
I recently observed several (so called) documentaries about WW2. They mentioned the Battle of the Bulge as the tide turning battle that changed the course of the war. The Battle of the Bulge was stated to be the largest battle of WW2. Not to in any way take away from the allies merits - heroics who suffered enormous losses during the battle of the Bulge.

However some of the largest battles of WW2 never receive mention. Cases in point: the Battle for the Dnieper River and the Battle of Nava. Soviet losses can be hard to summarize precisely. However from my understanding the Soviet casualties during the battle for the Dnieper River may have been the highest in the war. The combined German and Soviet losses during the battle for Nava were enormous. When following the course of the war these struggles fail to receive mention. It’s like the Red Army goes from Stalingrad to Berlin in one fell swoop.
 
Last edited:
results of the Cold War & the Allie (sp?) becoming the enemy. just doesn't get the coverage in the West.
 
Have any of you watched the Soviet Storm documentaries?

I liked the Scorched Earth series. It covers the epic battles in the east
 
Have any of you watched the Soviet Storm documentaries?

I liked the Scorched Earth series. It covers the epic battles in the east

The German Soviet war doesnt really interest me. Having said that, I sometimes wonder what the world would have been like if the Soviets had been defeated.

I'm working on memory but I seem to remember someone like Himmler trying to get a cease fire with the Western Allies so Germany could concentrating on defeating the Soviets.
 
The German Soviet war doesnt really interest me. Having said that, I sometimes wonder what the world would have been like if the Soviets had been defeated.

I'm working on memory but I seem to remember someone like Himmler trying to get a cease fire with the Western Allies so Germany could concentrating on defeating the Soviets.

Himmler tried to get a crease fire with the Western Allies at the end of the war when he was negotiating with the Swedish Count Folke Bernadotte. (Bernadotte is the surname of our Royal family. Similar as Tudor, Lancaster, York etc were the surname/last name/house of the English Royal families)
 
Himmler tried to get a crease fire with the Western Allies at the end of the war when he was negotiating with the Swedish Count Folke Bernadotte. (Bernadotte is the surname of our Royal family. Similar as Tudor, Lancaster, York etc were the surname/last name/house of the English Royal families)

Again I'm working from memory, I think it was Churchill who dismissed the idea out of hand.
 
The German Soviet war doesnt really interest me. Having said that, I sometimes wonder what the world would have been like if the Soviets had been defeated.

I'm working on memory but I seem to remember someone like Himmler trying to get a cease fire with the Western Allies so Germany could concentrating on defeating the Soviets.


I think the west would have had there hands full w ~ 2/3 or more of the German army tied up in the east.


Himmler did desire a separate peace as did Goering, Rommel and Rundstedt. I remember Hitler threatened to have Goering shot if he mentioned this again and we all know what happened to Rommel.
 
Last edited:
I think the west would have had there hands full w/o ~ 2/3 or more of the German army tied up in the east.


Himmler did desire a separate peace as did Goering, Rommel and Rundstedt. I remember Hitler threatened to have Goering shot if he mentioned this again and we all know what happened to Rommel.

if I speculate. I think Rommel, Rundstedt wanted a peace when they realized were this was going. I am not certain if Goering and Himmler saw it like that. Maybe they wanted to try to save their own asses when they saw they were going into the abyss.

As a Swede, I know a bit about the White Buses, an effort to save a lot of KZ prisoners (I am not comfortable with the term prisoners about them so please help me with another term for them, is inmates a better term to use?) Anyway, Folke Bernadotte was able to negotiate a release of them and brought them to Sweden for treatment. While he did that, Himmler tried to use him as a negotiator between him and the Western Allies. It didn't work out well for Himmler
 
if I speculate. I think Rommel, Rundstedt wanted a peace when they realized were this was going. I am not certain if Goering and Himmler saw it like that. Maybe they wanted to try to save their own asses when they saw they were going into the abyss.

As a Swede, I know a bit about the White Buses, an effort to save a lot of KZ prisoners (I am not comfortable with the term prisoners about them so please help me with another term for them, is inmates a better term to use?) Anyway, Folke Bernadotte was able to negotiate a release of them and brought them to Sweden for treatment. While he did that, Himmler tried to use him as a negotiator between him and the Western Allies. It didn't work out well for Himmler


I don't see an issue with the term prisoner, detainee or inmate when talking about concentration camps although detainee probably shouldn't apply as that indicates they were at some point going to be released, they meet the definition of both inmate and prisoner.



Hard to say how it would have worked out for Himmler as he killed himself prior to any trial unlike Goering who knew his fate (I expect Himmler would have received the same sentence though).
 
Back
Top