Operation Barbarossa Was A Preventive Attack

All aspects including lead-in to hostilities and results.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
avatar
Werd
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 967
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 2:23 am

Re: Operation Barbarossa Was A Preventive Attack

Postby Werd » 2 years 5 months ago (Sat Dec 27, 2014 1:03 am)

Is this right or wrong?
If the data in the table transcribed above are accurate, the Red Army was still equal in numbers at best and outnumbered at worst, thus far from achieving the numerical superiority of at least two to one that Stalin considered mandatory to launch a successful offensive. Which may have been the reason why Stalin rejected the proposal forwarded by Zhukov and Timoshenko in May 1941.


Same question.
A middle position taken by mainstream historians would be Hitler and Stalin was planning to attack each other and the Molotov-Ribbentrop is only a pact of convenience (for Hitler to focus his efforts on the Western Europe whereas for Stalin to prepare the Red Army for the invasion of Europe only after Hitler has been bled white in the West.)

Due to the Soviet purges in the 30s, it is highly unlikely for the Soviet General Staff to prepare invasion plans without the express approval or authorization from the Politburo or Stalin. Marshal Tukhachevsky, the Soviet inventor of the deep operations, was executed due to tendency of Tukhachevsky being independent due to his prestige and influence rather han subservient to Stalin

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... 8#p1446078

Stalin wanted an offensive in 1942, not in 1941. No amount of context shifting of quotes as demonstrated to have been done by Suvorov in "Icebreaker" will change that.



User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 8988
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: Operation Barbarossa Was A Preventive Attack

Postby Hannover » 2 years 5 months ago (Sat Dec 27, 2014 9:26 am)

If the data in the table transcribed above are accurate, the Red Army was still equal in numbers at best and outnumbered at worst, thus far from achieving the numerical superiority of at least two to one that Stalin considered mandatory to launch a successful offensive. Which may have been the reason why Stalin rejected the proposal forwarded by Zhukov and Timoshenko in May 1941.

Due to the Soviet purges in the 30s, it is highly unlikely for the Soviet General Staff to prepare invasion plans without the express approval or authorization from the Politburo or Stalin. Marshal Tukhachevsky, the Soviet inventor of the deep operations, was executed due to tendency of Tukhachevsky being independent due to his prestige and influence rather than subservient to Stalin

Stalin wanted an offensive in 1942, not in 1941. No amount of context shifting of quotes as demonstrated to have been done by Suvorov in "Icebreaker" will change that.
As for this questionable table, see again:
http://www.wintersonnenwende.com/script ... plans.html
In addition, citing an Axis Forum discussion adds no authority to the argument.

No "context shifting", but physical facts, making Suvorov somewhat irrelevant . Suvorov simply tells us what was already known.

- There's the facts on the ground, IOW what the Germans actually found as they advanced; massive amounts of pre-positioned armaments, munitions, food stuffs, medical supplies, fuel, personnel, aircraft galore, on & on ... much of which would not have lasted until 1942 and would have been exposed to further German intelligence for a much increased period of time.
- Then's there's the statements by Soviet personnel.
- There's the maps found on said personnel.
- There was German 1941 intelligence photos, data acquired pre-invasion.
- The fact of German language phrase books in the hands of Soviet personnel.

Why would Stalin have undertaken the purges if he thought they weakened his vaunted Red Army? Makes no sense. The perception of Germany as a military threat was well established prior to the purges. Obviously Stalin thought his military would not be weakened. Stalin was many things but he was not stupid or self destructive.
Meltyukhov also contributed to a recently published collection of articles on Viktor Suvorov's ideas.[6] Meltyukhov supported some ideas of Suvorov in general but criticized him for inaccuracies. In his latest work, Stalin's Liberation Campaign,[7] he deals with Joseph Stalin's attempts to re-gain 'lost territories' of the Russian empire, for example, Bessarabia. He presents a hypothesis that precisely at the time of Soviet occupation of Bessarabia did Adolf Hitler make the decision to invade the Soviet Union, because he realized that Red Army can quickly cut Germany off its oil reserves in Romania by a strike from Bessarabia. This thesis was put forward earlier by Viktor Suvorov who described Soviet preparations for the strike.
This not contentious in the least. Of course, protecting an oil supply was important effect of hitting the Soviets before they hit Germany, so what? Nothing startling about that. Why is this even worthy of debate?

Mulegino's previous reference to Grigorenko stands tall, difficult to understand why it was ignored, especially when compared to physical facts actually found on the ground.

True enough those sympathetic to the communists rely on conjecture and wishful thinking rather than very real physical proof. Sounds incredibly like their stances on the absurd 'holocaust' storyline. I submit their feeble attempts to explain away the obviously planned Soviet invasion in 1941 is connected. They just can't bear to admit any facts in favor of NS Germany. That is not serious, detached, propaganda free scholarship on their part.
Stalin wanted an offensive in 1942, not in 1941.
Even accepting that date, which I really do not, means that Hitler was prudent in attacking first. A date in 1942 changes little.

- Hannover
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

User avatar
Mulegino1
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 259
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2014 4:15 pm

Re: Operation Barbarossa Was A Preventive Attack

Postby Mulegino1 » 2 years 5 months ago (Sat Dec 27, 2014 4:03 pm)

Hannover wrote:
If the data in the table transcribed above are accurate, the Red Army was still equal in numbers at best and outnumbered at worst, thus far from achieving the numerical superiority of at least two to one that Stalin considered mandatory to launch a successful offensive. Which may have been the reason why Stalin rejected the proposal forwarded by Zhukov and Timoshenko in May 1941.

Due to the Soviet purges in the 30s, it is highly unlikely for the Soviet General Staff to prepare invasion plans without the express approval or authorization from the Politburo or Stalin. Marshal Tukhachevsky, the Soviet inventor of the deep operations, was executed due to tendency of Tukhachevsky being independent due to his prestige and influence rather than subservient to Stalin

Stalin wanted an offensive in 1942, not in 1941. No amount of context shifting of quotes as demonstrated to have been done by Suvorov in "Icebreaker" will change that.
As for this questionable table, see again:
http://www.wintersonnenwende.com/script ... plans.html
In addition, citing an Axis Forum discussion adds no authority to the argument.

No "context shifting", but physical facts, making Suvorov somewhat irrelevant . Suvorov simply tells us what was already known.

- There's the facts on the ground, IOW what the Germans actually found as they advanced; massive amounts of pre-positioned armaments, munitions, food stuffs, medical supplies, fuel, personnel, aircraft galore, on & on ... much of which would not have lasted until 1942 and would have been exposed to further German intelligence for a much increased period of time.
- Then's there's the statements by Soviet personnel.
- There's the maps found on said personnel.
- There was German 1941 intelligence photos, data acquired pre-invasion.
- The fact of German language phrase books in the hands of Soviet personnel.

Why would Stalin have undertaken the purges if he thought they weakened his vaunted Red Army? Makes no sense. The perception of Germany as a military threat was well established prior to the purges. Obviously Stalin thought his military would not be weakened. Stalin was many things but he was not stupid or self destructive.
Meltyukhov also contributed to a recently published collection of articles on Viktor Suvorov's ideas.[6] Meltyukhov supported some ideas of Suvorov in general but criticized him for inaccuracies. In his latest work, Stalin's Liberation Campaign,[7] he deals with Joseph Stalin's attempts to re-gain 'lost territories' of the Russian empire, for example, Bessarabia. He presents a hypothesis that precisely at the time of Soviet occupation of Bessarabia did Adolf Hitler make the decision to invade the Soviet Union, because he realized that Red Army can quickly cut Germany off its oil reserves in Romania by a strike from Bessarabia. This thesis was put forward earlier by Viktor Suvorov who described Soviet preparations for the strike.
This not contentious in the least. Of course, protecting an oil supply was important effect of hitting the Soviets before they hit Germany, so what? Nothing startling about that. Why is this even worthy of debate?

Mulegino's previous reference to Grigorenko stands tall, difficult to understand why it was ignored, especially when compared to physical facts actually found on the ground.

True enough those sympathetic to the communists rely on conjecture and wishful thinking rather than very real physical proof. Sounds incredibly like their stances on the absurd 'holocaust' storyline. I submit their feeble attempts to explain away the obviously planned Soviet invasion in 1941 is connected. They just can't bear to admit any facts in favor of NS Germany. That is not serious, detached, propaganda free scholarship on their part.
Stalin wanted an offensive in 1942, not in 1941.
Even accepting that date, which I really do not, means that Hitler was prudent in attacking first. A date in 1942 changes little.

- Hannover


Also keep in mind that the Red Army was hardly the "Staggering Colossus" that establishment historians such as David Glantz would have us believe.

For example, the Red Army crushed the Japanese 6th Army at the Battle of Khalkhin Gol in August of 1939. The commander in charge of the decisive attack was none other than General Zhukov.

Despite the enormous losses suffered in the Winter War against Finland, the Red Army did breach the formidable Mannerheim Line, which itself was no mean feat.

The defense of the Brest fortress showed that the Russian soldiers were capable of fierce resistance when fighting in fortified positions. Hitler himself praised the Russian defenders and ordered that they be given privileged treatment as prisoners of war.

avatar
Werd
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 967
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 2:23 am

Re: Operation Barbarossa Was A Preventive Attack

Postby Werd » 2 years 5 months ago (Sat Dec 27, 2014 7:24 pm)

- There's the facts on the ground, IOW what the Germans actually found as they advanced; massive amounts of pre-positioned armaments, munitions, food stuffs, medical supplies, fuel, personnel, aircraft galore, on & on ... much of which would not have lasted until 1942 and would have been exposed to further German intelligence for a much increased period of time.
- Then's there's the statements by Soviet personnel.
- There's the maps found on said personnel.
- There was German 1941 intelligence photos, data acquired pre-invasion.
- The fact of German language phrase books in the hands of Soviet personnel.

And it couldn't possibly be for defensive measures given that there was cross penetration of intelligence agencies on both sides, and both Stalin and Hitler knew one was eventually planning to attack the other?
Plans submitted by Zukhov and Vatutin were offensive based. For reasons known only to the Maximum Leader, Stalin shelved them.
[...]
Anyhow, the Generals of the Soviet Union would certainly liked to have staged a pre-emptive assault, especially Zukhov. It is to Stalin's credit that they did not, for the nature of the suprise assault meant (combined, of course with the nature of German occupation policy) meant that the Soviets had won the war of hearts and minds for their diverse peoples befor the first campaigning season was underway.

http://www.ww2f.com/topic/31660-stalins ... ntry379101

Also,
That guy provided Hitler with fuel and raw materials:Barbarossa would have been impossible without the German - Soviet comercial-agreement.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German%E2% ... ment_(1940 )


RE: Meltyukhov
hannover wrote:This not contentious in the least. Of course, protecting an oil supply was important effect of hitting the Soviets before they hit Germany, so what? Nothing startling about that. Why is this even worthy of debate?

Mulegino's previous reference to Grigorenko stands tall, difficult to understand why it was ignored, especially when compared to physical facts actually found on the ground.

Okay.

Did Soviet Spies in Germany Tip Off Stalin To Barbarossa?
http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=8774
by Mortimer » Mon Aug 25, 2014 6:44 am

Soviet spies in Germany definitely existed. http://en.wikipedia.org/Rote_Kapelle
It's true that Stalin was tipped off that Barbarossa was in preparation. But according to Igor Bunich it is also true that Hitler was tipped off about Operation Thunderstorm (Operatsiya Groza) which was the code name for the Soviet invasion of Germany. If you look at the following article there is info about a conversation between the German intelligence chief Schellenberg and the Soviet ambassador to Germany Dekanosov where over drinks the former admitted he knew about Operation Thunderstorm (Operatsiya Groza) and the latter admitted he knew about Operation Barbarossa. Moreover, plans for Operation Thunderstorm (Operatsiya Groza) went into preparation in September 1940 while Operation Barbarossa plans didn't begin until December 1940. Igor Bunich has written about this in his book on the planned Soviet attack which so far is only available in Russian language. It would be good if a revisionist publisher could get out a copy in English as soon as possible.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Igor_Bunich

So the question is, how soon did the Germans know what the Soviets were planning? What were they expecting and when? Again, according to some, the Germans did not view the Soviets as an immediate threat on the eve of Barbarossa. If there is ANY German documentation indicating they feared the Soviets on the eve of Barbarossa, then it would shut up the other side for sure.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 8988
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: Operation Barbarossa Was A Preventive Attack

Postby Hannover » 2 years 5 months ago (Sat Dec 27, 2014 10:00 pm)

Hey Werd,

Hitler and the Wehrmacht general staff certainly knew the problems of a multi-front war, recall WWI, and they weren't eager to get into it with the Soviets while the western front was unsettled. The last thing Germany wanted was to be tied up with Britain, resistance groups in nations who had surrendered, the USSR, and the US.
The US, while not yet in a 'declared' war with Germany, were de facto fighting Germany with their hostile acts against German U-boats, massive armaments and war materiel support to Britain, all in violation of it's supposed neutrality. The Germans knew it was a matter of time before FDR got the US in officially on the side of Britain and 'the Allies'.
Attacking the USSR was not in Germany's interest BUT it had no choice, and that attack hoped for a quick victory before the US could become fully engaged with it's huge unmolested industrial base, resources, military manpower, etc.

Agenda driven historians like to claim that 'Hitler was stupid in attacking the USSR' which is part of the 'Hitler was a mad man' canard. Germany had no choice but to attack or be attacked. The facts on the ground and German intelligence, as you now agree, were an overwhelming, a 'dead giveaway as it's called.
As for Suvorov, I can accept that every detail of his account is not necessarily perfect, it would have nearly impossible for him to know all the minutiae; but overall he has it right. His detractors can nitpick the irrelevant, but the physical facts confirm Suvorov.
So the question is, how soon did the Germans know what the Soviets were planning? What were they expecting and when? Again, according to some, the Germans did not view the Soviets as an immediate threat on the eve of Barbarossa. If there is ANY German documentation indicating they feared the Soviets on the eve of Barbarossa, then it would shut up the other side for sure.
I believe that Germany and the National Socialists saw the USSR as a threat from day one. The Red Army was enormous and Stalin was not troubled in sending huge numbers to their deaths. Look at their losses vs. Finland. Look at the USSR's other expansionist acts prior to Barbarossa, a long list. Look at the openly stated agenda of Soviet communism, it was an ever expanding movement of conquest. Their anthem ... 'The Internationale'. These facts alone are documentation. A blind man could see that Stalin was not going to let Germany stand, especially in lieu of Germany's compromised position of being already at war.

I believe that Goering, Speer, and others mentioned this. Certainly Hitler mentioned it. But think about it, their statements will be labelled lies by those who have an agenda, and as I said, the whole anti preemptive attack position is designed in support of the false 'holocaust' narrative.

Thanks, Hannover
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

avatar
Werd
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 967
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 2:23 am

Re: Operation Barbarossa Was A Preventive Attack

Postby Werd » 2 years 5 months ago (Sun Dec 28, 2014 12:14 am)

As for Suvorov, I can accept that every detail of his account is not necessarily perfect, it would have nearly impossible for him to know all the minutiae; but overall he has it right. His detractors can nitpick the irrelevant, but the physical facts confirm Suvorov.

I would say that if Suvorov took SOME testimonials of ex soviet military men out of context, it was probably by accident in the 80's when writing Icebreaker. I would not be surprised if his book THE CHIEF CULPRIT is better documented since there is about twenty years of extra research he could have done to fill that book up. I also think that anything in English by Meltyukhov would be a good way to temper Suvorov's works. I did however read this article:
http://www.wintersonnenwende.com/script ... plans.html
I do like how near the end, Richard Tedor has some praise for Glantz, but also some constructive criticism. I have to resepct him for that. I would love to read more of his work on this issue if it is available somewhere. I suspect Meltyuhkov and Tedor are the perfect balance between Suvorov and Glantz.

avatar
Werd
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 967
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 2:23 am

Re: Operation Barbarossa Was A Preventive Attack

Postby Werd » 2 years 4 months ago (Mon Dec 29, 2014 12:12 am)

http://www.allworldwars.com/news-commen ... ld-war-ii/

Viktor Suvorov . Chief Culprit: Stalin’s Grand Design to Start World War II
Posted on October 7, 2011 by admin

17 years since the appearence of his famous Icebreaker: Who Started the Second World War?, Suvorov published his second book in English Chief Culprit: Stalin’s Grand Design to Start World War II about Stalin’s alleged plans to conquer Europe and establish communist rule on the continent. “Icebreaker”, and several follow-up volumes (Day M. When did WWII begin?, Cleansing. Why Stalin Decapitated his Army?, The Last Republic. Why Soviet Union lost WWII, The Suicide. Why Hitler attacked Soviet Union?, Taking my Words Back, Shadow of Victory, The Sacred Business – published in Russian), ignited a firestorm of controversy both in German and Russian historical science, and two last decades were spent in major feud between adepts of traditional history of the Second World War and revisionists. Fortunately, “Chief Culprit” is not a second volume of “Icebreaker”, it’s an updated version, where old claims are revisited, and many more new claims added, so it’s not necessary to read Icebreaker first. To the delight of his readers, this time Suvorov included the list of the sources he is using, which makes easier to follow his logic and check foundations of his claims.

No doubt, Viktor Suvorov is a very gifted, imaginative writer, and his new book can be recommended to anybody, who is interested in conspiracy theories about the origins of the Second World War and communist attempts to establish world domination. Author describes the very consistent, meticulously thought-out Soviet strategy to include Europe in the communist world order, first using Hitler’s Germany as a tool to crush European independent states. According to Suvorov, this attempt would have all chances to succeed, if not Hitler, who, increasingly alarmed by Stalin’s acquisitions in Eastern Europe (Baltic States, parts of Romania and Finland), started German large-scale offensive on June 22 1941, which caught Stalin’s armies in the middle of their own offensive deployment, disrupting Soviet plans of conquest and, eventually, world domination.

Unfortunately, Suvorov is not a historian, as he was quick to admit himself, and any of his books, Chief Culprit included, can’t be categorized as a historical research and belongs more to the realm of iconoclastic speculations. If an academically trained researcher would prefer to collect all necessary sources, and only then move to the more or less balanced and well-supported conclusions, Suvorov, on the contrary, starts from his hypothesis, and then proceeds to the facts, supporting his views, without mentioning everything that isn’t.

There is no piece of evidence to support Suvorov’s signature claim that “Stalin fathered Nazi Germany and put Hitler in power”. Brief period of military cooperation between Soviet Union and Weimar Republic in 1920s was fading even before Hitler became a Reichchencellor in 1933 and soon was cancelled altogether. And indeed, from Stalin’s point of view, miniscule army of Weimar Germany, without Panzer Force, Air Force and Navy would be much easier target than Hitler’s Wehrmacht in 1941.


I wonder if this reviewer has ever heard of the works of Meltyuhkov and Tedor. - Werd

avatar
Werd
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 967
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 2:23 am

Re: Operation Barbarossa Was A Preventive Attack

Postby Werd » 2 years 4 months ago (Mon Dec 29, 2014 12:29 am)

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=94642

Postby timotheus » 30 Jan 2006, 09:22

Ok just found something interesting by going into Wikipedia.

Supposedly Mikhail Ivanovich Meltyukhov, a Russian historian, wrote a book supportnig Suvorov's thesis titled "Stalin's Missed Chance".

The kicker here is that unlike Suvorov's opinionated books, this one is supposedly all based on Russian archival sources.

My question - is anybody familiar with this book? And how would I lay my twitching hands on this book? :D

Links:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalin%27s_Missed_Chance

Postby Docent P » 30 Jan 2006, 16:02
It's available in Russian here:

http://militera.lib.ru/research/meltyukhov/index.html

I doubt it's gonna be translated in English soon.

Personally I like Meltyukhov, though his language sometimes is too academic for me (no comparison with Suvorov).

Weeks

Quote

Postby Lars Gyllenhaal » 28 Feb 2006, 09:41
Hi!

Two authors have recently published books in English making use of Meltiukhov´s book:

1. Stalin´s Folly by C. Pleshakov
2. Stalin´s Other War by A. Weeks

I have read vital parts of Pleshakov´s book and did not find it very convincing, although it is mostly well-written.

I have browsed through Stalin´s Other War by Albert Weeks and thought to myself: "here is a guy that perhaps has been able to do a better job than Suvorov, Pleshakov etc". So - the next time I order books Stalin´s Other War will be among them. As you understand I cannot now state just how credible Weeks is - but I can tell you that browsing through his book I got some positive vibes.

BTW I have read most of Meltiukhov´s book. It is pretty tough to read - but a very important souce.

Cheerio,

Lars

This leads to another article on Weeks' book.

http://www.fpp.co.uk/online/03/04/Stalin_plans.html
Stalin's Aggressive War Plans Disclosed

Thomas Titura

Albert Weeks: "Stalin's Other War: Soviet Grand Strategy 1939-1941" Rowman & Littlefield, 2003, paperback

HERE is an important new book by an expert on Soviet history, who finally sets the record straight on one of the most distorted subjects in the writing of modern world history, and World War II in particular.

In his latest book, Professor Albert Weeks presents the reader with an analysis of a large amount of newly discovered secret information contained in documents from formerly closed Soviet archives. The documents reveal that Stalin was planning to wage offensive war against Germany and, in fact, the West as a whole as a "windfall" from a second world war.

Among the telltale documents are transcripts of Stalin's famous toast to graduates of the Soviet military academies, May 5, 1941. The author also reproduces the text of Stalin's previously hotly disputed secret speech to the Soviet Politburo of Aug. 19, 1939.

This was just days before the signing of the Hitler-Stalin pact, known as the Molotov-Ribbentrop, or Nazi-Soviet pact, which included secret protocols about the territorial division of Poland, the Baltics and Bessarabia.

The Stalin text was discovered in Russian archives and has been confirmed by diary entries of Comintern head Georgi Dimitrov. In his speech Stalin predicts that Germany will have to fight a long war against France and England that will allow the Soviet Union to sovietize not only defeated Germany but also France.

An even more important document is from the Soviet General Staff. It is a war plan drawn up against Germany. It calls outright for a pre-emptive strike against German forces. The document, titled "Considerations of the Plan for the Strategic Deployment of the Armed forces of the Soviet Union in Case of War with Germany and its Allies," is dated May 15, 1941.

StalinThe document was prepared by General, later Marshal, A. Vasilievsky, Deputy Head of the Operations Department of the Soviet General Staff (Stavka), and presented to Stalin by Commissar of Defense S. Timoshenko and Chief of the General Staff G. Zhukov. The 15-page document calls explicitly for a pre-emptive strike against German forces.

This fully conforms to the offensive military doctrine of the Soviets that called for "deep operations" into enemy territory (a fact confirmed by many Soviet officers and historians, but neglected and disputed by various foreign authors (e.g., David Glantz and historian Gabriel Gorodetsky, who tend to use pro-Soviet arguments throughout their books). Weeks, in fact, convincingly critiques Glantz's and Gorodetsky's arguments.

It seems clear to this reviewer that both of these authors were granted access to Soviet archives precisely because they stuck to the line of official Soviet historiography. Their books, moreover, are customarily given favorable reviews in Russian publications that hew to traditional views while ignoring the new findings of the younger, post-Soviet historians who were canvassed by Weeks.

Weeks uses a number of books and documents that have only recently been published in Russia. He thereby allows the reader to form his own opinion based on these materials. This is a great advantage over many other books that try to ignore every little detail that might contradict the author's arguments.

Some of the documents in this book have never been published before in English in their entirety. The wealth of information Weeks presents documenting Stalin's "offensist" intentions is convincing to anyone with an open mind.

There can be no doubt that Stalin was developing detailed plans for attacking Hitler -- either in 1941 or certainly by 1942. As it happened, Hitler managed to strike first against Soviet forces that were not quite ready to realize their own aggressive plans.

Anyone with an interest in the latest revelations from Stalin's archives and who is curious about Stalin's own plans with respect to World War II should read this fascinating book. Highly recommended!



David Irving comments:

WELL, well. So Stalin's notorious speech of May 5, 1941, delivered to his generals at the Frunse Acdemy in Moscow, the existence of which I first revealed in my book Hitler's War in 1975, is finally accepted to have happened.
In it, Stalin described his coming war against western Europe as a foregone conclusion. Three Soviet generals who were present described independently what he had said to German interrogators a few months later, and these interrogation reports are in German foreign ministry archives.
Without asking me, Wolf Jobst Siedler, publisher of the Ullstein edition of my Hitler biography Hitler und seine Feldherren, cut the whole passage out of the German edition, fearing to anagonize the Soviets (he even feared a libel writ from Moscow!). Justifying his action, Siedler wrote to me that the speech was completely unknown to German historians he had consulted. Well, what would he expect?
Interestingly, the May 1941 speech is correctly summarised in the Soviet (Russian language) edition of Marshal Zhukov's memoirs, but is omitted from the German and other foreign editions.
I banned further sale of the book in Germany forthwith. In the long run, Real History is what matters, not an author's royalties.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 8988
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: Operation Barbarossa Was A Preventive Attack

Postby Hannover » 2 years 4 months ago (Mon Dec 29, 2014 11:42 am)

Werd posted:
avid Irving comments:

WELL, well. So Stalin's notorious speech of May 5, 1941, delivered to his generals at the Frunse Acdemy in Moscow, the existence of which I first revealed in my book Hitler's War in 1975, is finally accepted to have happened.
In it, Stalin described his coming war against western Europe as a foregone conclusion. Three Soviet generals who were present described independently what he had said to German interrogators a few months later, and these interrogation reports are in German foreign ministry archives.
Without asking me, Wolf Jobst Siedler, publisher of the Ullstein edition of my Hitler biography Hitler und seine Feldherren, cut the whole passage out of the German edition, fearing to anagonize the Soviets (he even feared a libel writ from Moscow!). Justifying his action, Siedler wrote to me that the speech was completely unknown to German historians he had consulted. Well, what would he expect?
Interestingly, the May 1941 speech is correctly summarised in the Soviet (Russian language) edition of Marshal Zhukov's memoirs, but is omitted from the German and other foreign editions.
I banned further sale of the book in Germany forthwith. In the long run, Real History is what matters, not an author's royalties.
Indeed, this is the speech that I previously mentioned in this thread.
Obviously not all Soviet generals knew about the planning, troop & equipment placement that had been occurring prior to this speech.
Thanks.

H.
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

avatar
Werd
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 967
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 2:23 am

Re: Operation Barbarossa Was A Preventive Attack

Postby Werd » 2 years 4 months ago (Mon Dec 29, 2014 3:54 pm)

In my searches and finds for the mistakes and shoddy behaviour of Irving in the past at times, one of the many sources I found took issue with Irving's claim about this speech.

Fakes & Frauds II: David Irving

The Pathologist's Report:
An autopsy on the remains of David Irving

By Gregory Douglas
_____________________________________________________________________________
Also in "Hitler's War", on page 260, Irving speaks of a "secret meeting" held at the Kremlin by Josef Stalin on May 5, 1941. Present at this alleged meeting were top members of his government. In this "secret meeting", Irving claims that Stalin outlined his plans to attack Hitler. This episode was tailor-made by Irving to support his thesis that Hitler did not have any reason to attack Stalin in 1941. Unfortunately, this "secret" speech (and another one on the following evening) was not secret and copies of it survive in the Russian archives. In them, Stalin speaks of the need for not upsetting Hitler and provoking a military attack. There is no mention whatsoever of any Soviet attacks on Germany in these speeches but of course as this is at odds with Irving's ideas, he manages to create a scenario more to his liking. Irving, who once had access to Russian archives, must doubtlessly have seen these files that are certainly not secret nor permitted to be viewed by only a select few, among whom Irving, by inference, includes himself.

If he ever had such a positive relationship with the Russian archives, it was quickly terminated when the archive authorities discovered that Irving had been systematically pilfering their papers and selling them to document collectors. The brilliant historian was promptly jailed and, looking like an unshaven and sockless refugee from Bosnia, was physically expelled from the country. Once he had gained the safety of England, one heard his loud cries of Jewish persecution for his heroic activities in search of the Real Truth as he likes to term his pathological flights of fancy.

Now that is Gregory's interpretation of it. Does the full text of that speech show up anywhere and does it reflect what Gregory Douglas claims? What was that article saying again...
In his latest book, Professor Albert Weeks presents the reader with an analysis of a large amount of newly discovered secret information contained in documents from formerly closed Soviet archives. The documents reveal that Stalin was planning to wage offensive war against Germany and, in fact, the West as a whole as a "windfall" from a second world war.

Among the telltale documents are transcripts of Stalin's famous toast to graduates of the Soviet military academies, May 5, 1941. The author also reproduces the text of Stalin's previously hotly disputed secret speech to the Soviet Politburo of Aug. 19, 1939.

This was just days before the signing of the Hitler-Stalin pact, known as the Molotov-Ribbentrop, or Nazi-Soviet pact, which included secret protocols about the territorial division of Poland, the Baltics and Bessarabia.

The Stalin text was discovered in Russian archives and has been confirmed by diary entries of Comintern head Georgi Dimitrov. In his speech Stalin predicts that Germany will have to fight a long war against France and England that will allow the Soviet Union to sovietize not only defeated Germany but also France.

An even more important document is from the Soviet General Staff. It is a war plan drawn up against Germany. It calls outright for a pre-emptive strike against German forces. The document, titled "Considerations of the Plan for the Strategic Deployment of the Armed forces of the Soviet Union in Case of War with Germany and its Allies," is dated May 15, 1941.


The document was prepared by General, later Marshal, A. Vasilievsky, Deputy Head of the Operations Department of the Soviet General Staff (Stavka), and presented to Stalin by Commissar of Defense S. Timoshenko and Chief of the General Staff G. Zhukov. The 15-page document calls explicitly for a pre-emptive strike against German forces.

This fully conforms to the offensive military doctrine of the Soviets that called for "deep operations" into enemy territory (a fact confirmed by many Soviet officers and historians, but neglected and disputed by various foreign authors (e.g., David Glantz and historian Gabriel Gorodetsky, who tend to use pro-Soviet arguments throughout their books). Weeks, in fact, convincingly critiques Glantz's and Gorodetsky's arguments.

It seems clear to this reviewer that both of these authors were granted access to Soviet archives precisely because they stuck to the line of official Soviet historiography. Their books, moreover, are customarily given favorable reviews in Russian publications that hew to traditional views while ignoring the new findings of the younger, post-Soviet historians who were canvassed by Weeks.

I bet Gregory Douglas has not read Albert Weeks nor has he seen this damning document from May 15. After all I have read/posted/looked for in this thread and in other places, I think I may have warmed up to "The Chief Culprit" provided I can get anything translated into English from Mikhail Ivanovich Meltyukhov as well as Igor Bunich - added of course to anything on Stalin by Richard Tedor.

avatar
Werd
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 967
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 2:23 am

Re: Operation Barbarossa Was A Preventive Attack

Postby Werd » 2 years 4 months ago (Mon Dec 29, 2014 9:40 pm)

In other words, the following works should be enough to substantiate the whole thesis in this thread.

The Chief Culprit - Victor Suvorov (English)
Stalin's Other War - Albert Weeks (English)
Stalin's Secret War Plans - Richard Tedor (English)
Who Started World War II Truth for a War-Torn World By Udo Walendy (English)
Operatsia Groza - Igor Bunich (Russian)
Stalin's Missed Chance - Mikhail Ivanovich Meltyukhov (Russian)

Also,

Who Started World War II ? by Viktor Suvorov (full version)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SbBnRZoTHFs

And,
zandovise
7 months ago

This perspective is upheld in the book "The Terror Machine" by Gregory Klimov, who defected from the Soviet Union in 1947. He was at the top in the Red Army hierarchy and explained how Stalin was indeed planning to invade Germany. Also in the book "Stuka Pilot" by Hans Ulrich Udel who noted on the day of the German invasion the vast quantities of Soviet aircraft, tanks and supplies amassed on the border between the two in preparation over running the German lines.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQkppjOE7z4

avatar
Werd
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 967
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 2:23 am

Re: Operation Barbarossa Was A Preventive Attack

Postby Werd » 2 years 4 months ago (Wed Dec 31, 2014 12:31 am)

What follows are selected extracts.

Stalin Intended to Strike Hitler First
January 27, 2007
http://www.savethemales.ca/001895.html

Most people think the Nazis betrayed a trusted ally June 22, 1941 when they launched "Operation Barbarossa." In fact, Stalin began planning to attack Hitler almost as soon as the ink dried on their non-aggression pact August 23, 1939.

The Nazi's "Operation Barbarossa" anticipated the Soviets by only "a few weeks" says Heinz Magenheimer, one of Austria's most respected military historians.

"The Wehrmacht thrust right into the center of an overpowering offensive deployment with armored and motorized troops massed on the borders." ("Hitler's War: Germany's Key Strategic Decisions 1940-1945, 1997, p.63)

Stalin told military academy graduates May 5, 1941: "And now after we have become strong... we must shift from the defensive to the attack." He had nine million men, 38,000 tanks and 22,200 aircraft and expected to be in control of Berlin and most of Europe by 1942.

At some point, Hitler realized Stalin intended to stab him in the back while he was occupied with England. Churchill and Stalin, both Freemasons, had a secret pact. Just read (Soviet ambassador to London) Ivan Maisky's "Memoirs" to see how chummy the British and Russians were even while the latter were in bed with Hitler.

(Evidence of a secret Churchill-Stalin pact was found on board a British plane that crashed in Finland en route to Russia. The Oct. 2005 Finnish report is no longer available on the Liberty Forum site where I saw it. )
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

Stalin's price for continued collaboration amounted to blackmail. At a Nov. 1940 Berlin Conference, Molotov demanded large parts of the Balkans, the Turkish straits, Bulgaria and Western Poland. (47)

Magenheimer suggests that Hitler's final decision to attack Russia was prompted by Russian support of an anti-Nazi military coup in Yugoslavia in March 1941. Clearly Stalin was fishing in Hitler's pond.

Magenheimer says that "Operation Barbarossa" was "decisively influenced" by this aggressive Soviet posture. Stalin's demands "were not only unacceptable to Germany" but reinforced "the impression that Moscow posed a long-term threat." Germany gave up on attempts to bring the USSR into a "continental bloc" against Great Britain.


In 1939, Stalin started to build a "Polish Red Army of Liberation" from the ranks of Polish POWS. They were to liberate Poland from the Nazis and provide the nucleus of a Communist regime. He overestimated the power of brainwashing. The Catholic Poles refused to cooperate and that's why roughly 15,000 officers were shot at Katyn Forest and elsewhere in April-June 1940.

The question remains: If Stalin was prepared to attack Europe, why did he passively endure Hitler's devastating invasion? He had plenty of warning yet didn't launch a preemptive attack as his generals advised. He threatened to shoot anyone who took precautionary measures claiming Hitler would see them as provocations. He insisted Hitler was bluffing and wouldn't start a two-front war.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________

In 1990, Viktor Suvorov revealed Stalin's plans in his book "Icebreaker" but he was considered a maverick. Using post-Glasnost archival material and research, Magenheimer later confirmed that Suvorov was indeed right.

We don't hear that Stalin intended to displace Nazis hegemony with his own because "Uncle Joe" was our ally, and Communism was a dialectical model for the New World Order.

History is a form of brainwashing. The programming calls for Hitler to be a homocidal maniac intent on eradicating all Jews and taking over the world. Thus Hitler's stigma can be transferred to anyone who opposes Zionist control: nationalists, racialists, religious, Palestinians, Taliban-- all "Islamo Fascists." Thus we are primed for the next new world order war.

avatar
Werd
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 967
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 2:23 am

Re: Operation Barbarossa Was A Preventive Attack

Postby Werd » 2 years 4 months ago (Wed Dec 31, 2014 12:35 am)

What follows is one brief extract.

Stalin’s 1937 Counter-Revolution Against Trotskyism
September 20, 2011
Dan Michaels
http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/20 ... more-10502

ARMY PURGE

Proceeding then to Stalin's purge of the Red Army leadership and the NKVD, Burovsky finds much to be applauded. Although Generals Zhukov and Rokossovsky believed that Stalin's purge had broken the spine of the Red Army and was responsible for the losses in the first years of World War II, Burovsky leans more to the views expressed by Viktor Suvorov in his book The Purge,[5] namely that the purge or cleansing actually improved the Red Army by removing toxic and incompetent elements.

Moreover, Trotsky, as first head of the Army and Navy, had appointed many of the top military leaders. Obviously, Stalin considered them tainted and their loyalty to him questionable.[6]

Stalin purged the organs of State security (Cheka, NKVD), notoriously Jewish strongholds, with a particularly heavy and rough brush. According to Burovsky, about 20,000 members of these organs were purged, including almost all the leaders of the Dzerzhinski era: A. Kh. Artuzov, G. I. Boky, M. Ya. Latsis, M. S. Kedrov, V. N. Mantsev, G. S. Moroz, I. P. Pavlunovsky, Ya. Kh. Peters, M. A. Trilisser, I. S. Unshlikht, and V. V. Fomin. Of this Burovsky comments: "It would be difficult to imagine a more repulsive, criminal, and dangerous group of people." (Diky, p. 240) Nikolai Yezhov, known to insiders as the "bloody dwarf" because he was only five feet tall, was commissar general of state security in charge of both the NKVD and the GRU. He was arrested in January 1939 and shot in April 1940.



[5] Suvorov uses the Russian word ischishchenie instead of the usual chistka for “purge.” The former has more the meaning of “cleansing” or the removal of toxic, dangerous elements; the later has more the meaning of total housecleaning. Robert Conquest preferred to use the expression The Great Terror rather than The Great Purge. Like so many of his contemporaries at Oxford, Conquest himself joined the Communist Party in “glorious 1937.”

[6] Dan Michaels. Stalin’s 1937 Purge of the Red Army. The Barnes Review, No. 3, 2000, pp. 49-55.


RE:
zandovise
7 months ago

This perspective is upheld in the book "The Terror Machine" by Gregory Klimov, who defected from the Soviet Union in 1947. He was at the top in the Red Army hierarchy and explained how Stalin was indeed planning to invade Germany. Also in the book "Stuka Pilot" by Hans Ulrich Udel who noted on the day of the German invasion the vast quantities of Soviet aircraft, tanks and supplies amassed on the border between the two in preparation over running the German lines.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQkppjOE7z4


THE TERROR MACHINE
by Gregory Klimov
The inside story of the Soviet Administration in Germany
http://g-klimov.info/klimov-pp-e/index.html

avatar
Mortimer
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 259
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 2:27 am

Re: Operation Barbarossa Was A Preventive Attack

Postby Mortimer » 2 years 4 months ago (Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:57 pm)

The Operation Barbarossa was a dastardly sneak attack propaganda needs to be kept in place because it shows that Stalin deserved to be helped by the Western Allies. The UK, USA etc just can't bring themselves to admit that it was a ghastly mistake to support the Soviet Union and let them take over half of Europe including Poland which was the reason for going to war in the first place. The entire democratic world led by Churchill http://www.heretical.com/miscellx/churchil.html and Roosevelt http://www.jrbooksonline.com/fdr-scandal-page/fdr.html which foamed at the mouth about Hitler being a dictator entered into an alliance with the dictator Stalin. They didn't do it begrudgingly either they did it with great enthusiasm and criticised anyone who pointed out the hypocrisy.
Hitler's peace offer of May 1941 would have allowed the British Empire to withdraw from the war without any territorial loss or occupation.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... sians.html
Hitler also offered to withdraw all German troops from France, Holland, Belgium, Denmark, Norway, Greece and Yugoslavia in return for peace with the British Empire. This offer was refused by Churchill. He sold out democracy by allying with Stalin's USSR, a totalitarian dictatorship.
5 years after the end of the war this same Stalin which Churchill and Roosevelt went all out to help was supplying arms, ammunition, military advisors etc to communist China and North Korea which were used to kill and wound British and American servicemen during the Korean War -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_Uni ... Korean_War

avatar
Werd
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 967
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 2:23 am

Re: Operation Barbarossa Was A Preventive Attack

Postby Werd » 2 years 4 months ago (Fri Jan 02, 2015 11:12 pm)

Viktor Suvorov's lies
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pEbfQxHKMeE
Published on 26 Jul 2014
Andrei Fursov - Russian historian, sociologist, writer, organizer of science.


Victor Suvorov, or more precisely, Vladimir Rezun, is a traitor. He is lying. The Soviet Union wasn't preparing for an offensive war beacuse of one very simple reason. If they Soviet Union attacked Germany it would have had to deal with not only the Third Reich but also England, France and the United States. From 1937 there were talks about this in the United States. If the Soviet Union attacks Germany, the United States would support Germany. In April of 1941 the United States Congress passed a resolution mentioning that if Germany attacks the Soviet Union the USA would help the Soviet Union. And if the Soviet Union attacks Germany they would help Germany. Therefore Joseph Stalin did everything to show Franklin D. Roosevelt, and not Adolf Hitler, that the Soviet Union doesn't have aggressive plans. Stalin correctly saw that Roosevelt was the only ally. This is exactly what was in the TASS statement of June 14. Our anti Stalinists are abusing this statement and saying that Stalin was a fool who was bowing to Hitler. The TASS appeal of June 14 wasn't for Hitler, but Roosevelt. And so, an aggressive war against Germany would have meant with with the entire West and not only Germany. The Soviet Union didn't have the military potential to wage war against the entire West. So don't belive liars and traitors like Rezun. The ears of MI-6 are protruding from his books.


Return to “WWII Europe / Atlantic Theater Revisionist Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest