THE BIAS OF WESTERN HISTORIANS
It is said that history is a very subjective subject. This happens because the inherent bias of the historian concerned. Few historians are brutally honest. It needs personal courage and personal integrity to be a great historian.
I am no historian but when I come across piece of history which seems biased, I do need to speak up and join the debate.
I refer particualrly to an article on
BBC History titled
The Soviet-German War 1941 - 1945 By Professor Richard OveryI shall quote from the article and then have my say [in italics] "After the outbreak of war in 1939 came the added fear of Soviet expansion in Eastern Europe, while Germany was fighting the British Empire and France in the west. All of these factors contributed to the decision taken by Hitler in July 1940, after the German defeat of France, to plan for an all-out assault on the Soviet Union."More than any fear of Britain and France or the threat from the Soviet Union, the decision by Hitler to attack Russia was because of his mad devotion to the glory of Germany; needing more lands from the wild barbaric east. CONTD.....
Problem with rains and slush
BIASED WESTERN HISTORIANS [Contd.]
"The attack came as a complete surprise to the leader of the Soviet Union, Joseph Stalin. Despite repeated intelligence warnings, which included the precise day and hour of Germany's incipient assault, Stalin remained convinced that Hitler would not risk an eastern war as long as the British Empire remained undefeated. It has been argued that Stalin in fact planned a pre-emptive attack on Germany for the early summer of 1941, and was then thrown off-balance by the German invasion."The part about Stalin planning to attack Germany is hard to swallow. Stalin was in fact slightly afraid of the German military might. That is why he agreed to the Non-Aggression Pact with Germany, the Ribbentrop-Molotov Treaty. That is why the Soviet Union continued giving raw materials to Germany, till Barbarossa happened. Russia was weak then. The purges by Stalin had left the army in disarray. Stalin knew that well and hence he wanted to avoid trouble from Germany.
A sobering sight. Soldiers frozen to death. The Germans were now beginning to understand the great harm the harsh Russian winter was doing. It was one of the major factor for the defeat in Russia.BIASED WESTERN HISTORIANS [CONTD.}
"The war in the east was fought with a particular ferocity. The so-called 'barbarisation of warfare' has a number of explanations. Conditions were harsh for both sides, and losses were high. German forces entered the USSR with instructions from Hitler's headquarters to use the most brutal methods to keep control, and to murder Communist commissars and Jews in the service of the Soviet state."The regular German Army was a professional army. If it had obeyed Hitler's orders and gone on a killing spree of Russian peasants, partisans and Jews, it would hardly have had time and the energy to fight the war. These brutal killings were done by the SS. The so called extermination squads which followed the Wehrmacht as it moved into Russia. "Soviet resistance made possible a successful Allied invasion of France, and ensured the final Allied victory over Germany."It can hardly be called mere 'resistance'! If it hadn't been for the Russians, Hitler would have made mincemeat of British forces in Africa and landed on British shores in no time. Hitler attacked Russia first because it had more land and resources than Britain. It is as simple as that. More dead
Trying to beat off the cold.
Some altercation between the POW and the German soldiers
RELATED....
German soldiers in Russia: WW2: As photographed by themselves: Part 1German soldiers in Russia: WW2: As photographed by themselves: Part 2German soldiers in Russia: WW2: As photographed by themselves: Part 4German soldiers in Russia: WW2: As photographed by themselves: Part 5German soldiers in Russia: WW2: As photographed by themselves: Part 6
Kayıtlar
