How should the West contain Russia?

Indeed. I did not realize that Baltic Legion was formally part of SS. That, however, misrepresents their historic role.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waffen-SS says

Yes, your national heroes were part of SS, and fought on Hitler's side. Against Russians, Estonians, Poles and many other people who were in Soviet army.

These men mostly joined the German Army in 1944, when Germany had nearly lost the war, to protect Estonia against return of Soviet terror. The Battle of Синимяэ (Sinimäed, Blue Hills), commemoration of which is criticized, was defensive battle (and heroic one at that). And over my dead body is anybody going to call the men who fought there Nazis.

Defensive? It totally changes everything. Battle for Berlin was also defensive for Hitler.

Just in case, do you also think that for these people, killing Russian civilians was ok, because they were Russians, not Jews or Poles or whatever?
 
red_elk : You either doesn't understand or do not want to understand that the world is not black and white. Estonians didn't fight for Hitler but they fought against Soviets, how can you prove that Soviets liberated Estonia when Estonia declared independence after Germans left Estonia and before Soviets came here and didn't leave us for 50 years. Last Russian troop left Estonia in 1994.
 
red_elk : You either doesn't understand or do not want to understand that the world is not black and white. Estonians didn't fight for Hitler but they fought against Soviets, how can you prove that Soviets liberated Estonia when Estonia declared independence after Germans left Estonia and before Soviets came here and didn't leave us for 50 years. Last Russian troop left Estonia in 1994.

Estonian Waffen-SS legion did not fight against Hitler. They received orders from Germans, and did what they were ordered to. Including punitive missions. How can I call this? I wouldn't argue if they fought against both sides, but they were commanded by Germans.

I'm not talking about whole Estonian nation, there were many people who fought against Hitler. But currently your national policy is glorification of SS division members. It's a shame to your country.

As for liberation of Estonia, how do you think, Germans left Estonia in 1944 for no particular reason? They just became tired to be there and decided to withdraw? Or something happened before?
 
Whoa nelly. Are you actually saying that Estonia has a religion based upon the worship and deification of the Waffen SS?!
 
I think he is mocking something there.
 
Estonian Waffen-SS legion did not fight against Hitler. They received orders from Germans, and did what they were ordered to. Including punitive missions. How can I call this? I wouldn't argue if they fought against both sides, but they were commanded by Germans.

I'm not talking about whole Estonian nation, there were many people who fought against Hitler. But currently your national policy is glorification of SS division members. It's a shame to your country.

As for liberation of Estonia, how do you think, Germans left Estonia in 1944 for no particular reason? They just became tired to be there and decided to withdraw? Or something happened before?
There is no glorification of SS members , SS and Waffen SS are two different things.What is wrong with respecting our veterans , after all they didn't join the Waffen SS to fight for "the master race" or Hitler or anything like that,the germans were simply their best chance to get the soviets out.
 
The question is weather they were involved in the murders and Holocaust. Either way SS and Waffen SS is outlawed in most civilized nations including Germany itself and developed EU nations.
 
Estonian Waffen-SS legion did not fight against Hitler. They received orders from Germans, and did what they were ordered to. Including punitive missions. How can I call this? I wouldn't argue if they fought against both sides, but they were commanded by Germans.

I'm not talking about whole Estonian nation, there were many people who fought against Hitler. But currently your national policy is glorification of SS division members. It's a shame to your country.

As for liberation of Estonia, how do you think, Germans left Estonia in 1944 for no particular reason? They just became tired to be there and decided to withdraw? Or something happened before?

Germans left to defend Germany, so Estonian land was free of them, there was no need to liberate again and occupy for 50 years. There is no glorification of SS here instead there is glorification of Soviet troops and crimes in Russia, that should be shame. We had choice between two evils and if the first one who occupied us was Soviets then our people saw the second one as liberators. Is it very hard to understand? And it was very unfair for Finland that they had to pay reparations to USSR while the guilty was USSR.
 
The question is weather they were involved in the murders and Holocaust. Either way SS and Waffen SS is outlawed in most civilized nations including Germany itself and developed EU nations.

There is a huge difference between SS as the organization and the Waffen SS units.

Some baltic people joined the Waffen SS units formed there because it was the only way how to fight against the Soviets (asa regular, there were anti-soviet partisans too). Like it or not, Soviets attacked them first so the Germans were often seen there as the liberators (a very naive idea f you ask me, but you have to see it through their eyes).

Waffen SS was certainly more prone to war crimes than the regular army, but they were more like an elite combat units - something like the Guards divisions in the Red Army. There is no reason to think that all the people who served in these units were some inhuman monsters.
 
Very true, Winner...

Many of the SS were crack combat units, and only a notable series of divisions and groups were known for atrocities.

Mostly at the behest of charismatic and fanatical officers, whom the infantry obeyed mindlessly.

...
 
Yes, your national heroes were part of SS, and fought on Hitler's side.

I repeat: "The Baltic Waffen SS Units (Baltic Legions) are to be considered as separate and distinct in purpose, ideology, activities, and qualifications for membership from the German SS" That judgement comes from party which was at war with Germany and allied with USSR.

Defensive? It totally changes everything. Battle for Berlin was also defensive for Hitler.
You obviously did not read the article I asked you to. Which is a shame. The one obvious difference here is, that while Germany attacked USSR first (preemptively or not, we'll never know for sure), Estonia never attacked USSR. Men who fought at Sinimäed joined German army in 1944 for one certain purpose only - to prevent Red Army from returning.

Just in case, do you also think that for these people, killing Russian civilians was ok, because they were Russians, not Jews or Poles or whatever?
Killing civilians is never OK. However, this occurred in both sides. I posted a thread "War crime or not war crime" a while ago, concerning one particular mr Kononov, who was accused of war crimes in Latvia, namely killing of nine civilians, including pregnant woman who was burned alive. Originally sentenced for 20 months(!) in prison , EU court acquitted him of charges over some technical issues with 4 votes over 3. While I am not rooting for necessarily imprisoning someone who might pass away any day anyway, Mr Kononov expressed no regret whatsoever over his actions, being convinced that what he did was totally ok:mad:. And rallies were held in his support in Russia and Latvia (by local Russians) as well.
 
Estonian Waffen-SS legion did not fight against Hitler. They received orders from Germans, and did what they were ordered to. Including punitive missions. How can I call this? I wouldn't argue if they fought against both sides, but they were commanded by Germans.

As for liberation of Estonia, how do you think, Germans left Estonia in 1944 for no particular reason? They just became tired to be there and decided to withdraw? Or something happened before?

You might be interested to know, that when Hitler ordered German army to retreat from Estonia to prevent them from being cut off from south, permission was given to Baltic Legions to stay behind. However, Germans denied them any substantial military equipment in fear of it being captured y Soviets. This resulted in these men occasionally turning their weapons against the Germans and looting their supply trains for weaponry to fight off Red Army.

EDIT: I'll try to find some link about this...
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/20th_Waffen_Grenadier_Division_of_the_SS_(1st_Estonian)

"In April 13, 1950, a message from the U.S. High Commission in Germany (HICOG), signed by John McCloy to the Secretary of State, clarified the US position on the "Baltic Legions:" they were not to be seen as "movements," "volunteer," or "SS." In short, they had not been given the training, indoctrination, and induction normally given to SS members. Subsequently the US Displaced Persons Commission in September 1950 declared that:

The Baltic Waffen SS Units (Baltic Legions) are to be considered as separate and distinct in purpose, ideology, activities, and qualifications for membership from the German SS, and therefore the Commission holds them not to be a movement hostile to the Government of the United States. "

yadayada...

as a side note, waffen-ss was army for most of it's part(as in, not having to do with concentration camps). Dirlewanger, Kaminski and the likes was another story; however, would've made sense to condemn individual units at Nurenberg imho so the rest could've get their rights as veterans of war... But in the end, I'm not a war veteran, so couldn't care less... they should hire a lawyer or somethin'...
 
I repeat: "The Baltic Waffen SS Units (Baltic Legions) are to be considered as separate and distinct in purpose, ideology, activities, and qualifications for membership from the German SS" That judgement comes from party which was at war with Germany and allied with USSR.

This came from USA in 1950, cold war time. It's as anti-USSR as possible.

You obviously did not read the article I asked you to. Which is a shame. The one obvious difference here is, that while Germany attacked USSR first (preemptively or not, we'll never know for sure), Estonia never attacked USSR. Men who fought at Sinimäed joined German army in 1944 for one certain purpose only - to prevent Red Army from returning.

These people are responsible for committed crimes - killing civilians. The fact they were also defending Estonia agains USSR is excuse only for you, not for fair trial.

Killing civilians is never OK.
Some people think for Estonians it was ok, if civilians were Russians. We have one on this forum.

However, this occurred in both sides. I posted a thread "War crime or not war crime" a while ago, concerning one particular mr Kononov, who was accused of war crimes in Latvia, namely killing of nine civilians, including pregnant woman who was burned alive. Originally sentenced for 20 months(!) in prison , EU court acquitted him of charges over some technical issues with 4 votes over 3. While I am not rooting for necessarily imprisoning someone who might pass away any day anyway, Mr Kononov expressed no regret whatsoever over his actions, being convinced that what he did was totally ok:mad:. And rallies were held in his support in Russia and Latvia (by local Russians) as well.

If he really did this, he must be punished. There must be proofs, and fair and unbiased judicial trial.
 
This came from USA in 1950, cold war time. It's as anti-USSR as possible.
Afaik the opinion was given in relation whether refugees who had been members of these Legions should be accepted into US. No reason for US to paint them prettier if they were there.
These people are responsible for committed crimes - killing civilians. The fact they were also defending Estonia agains USSR is excuse only for you, not for fair trial.
What civilians? Keep in mind that majority of Estonians who joined German Army did so when the front had already fallen back to Narva River (border of Estonia). They could not be killing Russian civilians very well then, could they? Of course, Nazis committed war crimes and killed civilians during their campaign in Russia. Of course, some Estonians were involved. (After all, many were tried during Soviet era. Simple fact of having served - voluntarily or not - in German Army could very well mean Siberia for your entire family, war crimes or not.) But the fact that some who served in German Army committed crimes does not mean we should collectively forget and ban the men who chose to protect their homeland against terrible odds, does it? Didn't Russians commit war crimes - Katyn being the most famous example which comes to mind? Have you banned Red Army veterans from "marching through your cities" because of it? Has anybody ever been put to trial because of these murders? And from the neutral viewpoint of Estonians, Nazis treated us much better the Soviets. Or why else would our attitude be what it is?
Some people think for Estonians it was ok, if civilians were Russians. We have one on this forum.
reserved to check the actual post
EDIT: if you refer to post of SnowlyWhite on previous page, he never mentioned "civilians", but what he said strangely resembles mr Putin saying that Georgia as aggressor must bear responsibility for its actions. As for me, I stick to what I said: killing civilians is not OK.
If he really did this, he must be punished. There must be proofs, and fair and unbiased judicial trial.
The questions was not even whether he really did this, but whether he could be punished, because Geneva Code was not introduced yet... Actually how do you really punish an 80-year-old anyway? I'd be happy if he would understand he did something wrong at least, instead of sueing Latvian state for "moral damages" or whatever...
 
Afaik the opinion was given in relation whether refugees who had been members of these Legions should be accepted into US. No reason for US to paint them prettier if they were there.

Need to check this. Anyway, I wouldn't consider opinions from USA to USSR or USSR to USA in 1950 as unbiased.

What civilians? Keep in mind that majority of Estonians who joined German Army did so when the front had already fallen back to Narva River (border of Estonia). They could not be killing Russian civilians very well then, could they? Of course, Nazis committed war crimes and killed civilians during their campaign in Russia. Of course, some Estonians were involved. (After all, many were tried during Soviet era. Simple fact of having served - voluntarily or not - in German Army could very well mean Siberia for your entire family, war crimes or not.) But the fact that some who served in German Army committed crimes does not mean we should collectively forget and ban the men who chose to protect their homeland against terrible odds, does it? Didn't Russians commit war crimes - Katyn being the most famous example which comes to mind? Have you banned Red Army veterans from "marching through your cities" because of it? Has anybody ever been put to trial because of these murders? And from the neutral viewpoint of Estonians, Nazis treated us much better the Soviets. Or why else would our attitude be what it is?

Have you ever heard about parades of NKVD veterans in Moscow? After USSR collapse? You can't blame Red Army for Katyn. The difference is simple: SS was acknowledged as criminal organization by Nurenberg trial. Red Army wasn't. And it wasn't criminal organization.
As for "neutral" (:lol:) viewpoint of Estonians - it's because you weren't considered as untermenshen by Nazis, unlike Slavs. Ask Jews who was better for them, and what is their attitude to your SS parades. You'll hear neutral point of view.
For Red army veterans who was involved in murders - you won't believe, but there were trials, and many people were imprisoned even during WW2. As Estonians were. But for you, all of them certainly were victims of Stalin's repressions.

reserved to check the actual post
EDIT: if you refer to post of SnowlyWhite on previous page, he never mentioned "civilians", but what he said strangely resembles mr Putin saying that Georgia as aggressor must bear responsibility for its actions. As for me, I stick to what I said: killing civilians is not OK.

I asked, if it was ok for Estonians, killing Russian civilians. You answered no, he answered yes. You can check it.

red_elk: So, when Estonian SS-man was killing Jew civilian - it was a crime, when he was killing Russian civilian - it wasn't. Right?
SnowlyWhite: yep; want more land... fight for it and don't complain when you get a bloody nose. on the other hand, don't see what they had with the Jews; or I see, but it was dumb.


The questions was not even whether he really did this, but whether he could be punished, because Geneva Code was not introduced yet... Actually how do you really punish an 80-year-old anyway? I'd be happy if he would understand he did something wrong at least, instead of sueing Latvian state for "moral damages" or whatever...

I don't understand, if he didnt do this, he can't be punished. If he did, he must be punished. Whether he really did this is the main question.
 
Need to check this. Anyway, I wouldn't consider opinions from USA to USSR or USSR to USA in 1950 as unbiased. Have you ever heard about parades of NKVD veterans in Moscow? After USSR collapse? You can't blame Red Army for Katyn. The difference is simple: SS was acknowledged as criminal organization by Nurenberg trial. Red Army wasn't. And it wasn't criminal organization.
Sure, except the opinion was not given from USA to USSR but from USA Commission to USA government regarding formerly hostile party.
I'll make checking easier as well: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/20th_Waffen_Grenadier_Division_of_the_SS_(1st_Estonian)
Baltic Waffen SS units were combat units. Nothing more, nothing less. The above link also (under part "modern controversy") also shows that Waffen-SS was considered criminal with certain exceptions - and that Baltic Legions were one of such exceptions.
As for "neutral" (:lol:) viewpoint of Estonians - it's because you weren't considered as untermenshen by Nazis, unlike Slavs. Ask Jews who was better for them, and what is their attitude to your SS parades. You'll hear neutral point of view.
Why neutral with :lol:? We were occupied, harassed and conscripted by both sides, unlike Jews were. Why should the opinion of the Jews be relevant to Estonians? They have right to their own opinion of Nazis and I do not argue about that. However, most Jewish people I've spoken to, actually very well understand difficult situation and difficult choices small nations must face between larger powers. They have both firsthand experience and intelligence for that, so it is no surprise really. About "our SS parades"... random Jew living abroad can't really be expected to make fine distinctions between "SS" units or know first thing about our history. In few years, there will be no veterans left to gather anyway, so this problem will wane anyway.
For Red army veterans who was involved in murders - you won't believe, but there were trials, and many people were imprisoned even during WW2. As Estonians were. But for you, all of them certainly were victims of Stalin's repressions.
With my bolded question, I was actually referring to that one specific event: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katyn_Massacre
The Soviet Union continued to deny the massacres until 1990, when it finally acknowledged the massacre by the NKVD, as well as the subsequent cover-up.[3][9] The Russian government admitted Soviet responsibility for the massacres, yet does not classify this action as a war crime or as an act of genocide. This acknowledgement would have necessitated the prosecution of surviving perpetrators, which is what the Polish government had requested.[3][10] In addition the Russian government also does not classify the dead as victims of Stalinist repression, which bars formal posthumous rehabilitation
But yes, I am sure about many facing trial during the war. In another thread, I referred to a particular order given my Zhukov to execute families of those Russian soldiers fallen prisoner, for example.:cringe: I also believe, that those who participated in war crimes were often punished. For example, some claim that soldiers buried under our infamous "Bronze Soldier" were actually Red Army soldiers caught marauding and executed by Soviet officers - since Tallinn was retaken by Red Army without battle.
 
Back
Top Bottom