Greetings!

I understand that the WWII is a very touchy subject for you, Russian friend. I’m sorry to offend your feelings. If you think that you know all you need to know about it and there is nothing that can make you change your beliefs, tell me so. I will not waist your and my time in useless arguments. Milan seems to agree with me however, and anyway, I have to reply to you out of common politeness.

>>Hey, Bulgarian, it seems you have just graduated from a Hitlerjugend's college?

No, actually I was in the Communist youth organization when I was a teenager. Like most of you, I guess. But I didn’t care much about it. When I grew up, I understood that mass ideologies are composed of two things in various proportions: simplifications and lies. The same holds for National Socialism. You can’t explain all the fine details and contradictions in the world to an ordinary workman or peasant, that’s why you simplify it to a few dogmas and repeat them over and over again until they become "truths". I refuse to be a blind follower. I always look for the hidden motivations of the leaders. Lenin, Hitler, Stalin ... do you think they believed all that they said to the masses? Come on, give them some credit of being smarter than "the average guy from the street"!

About Viktor Suvorov’s books,
>>This is absolutely incredible theory developed by Western intelligence agencies during the Cold War. Naturally, some low-ranked deserter was chosen as the "author" of these books. Serious historians would never support this delirium.

I don’t give a damn about what "serious historians" say. They are all Jews and Jewish lackeys. How can they become "serious historians" if they are not promoted by the establishment? "Serious historians" say that 6 million Jews were methodically exterminated with poisonous gas in the Nazi concentration camps. You believe that too? I prefer to read the historians who are independent of them. Viktor Suvorov is one of the many such people.

>>The fact is that here in Russia, Suvorov's books and ideas are being propagandized first of all by liberals and jews! This shows that this theory is primarily anti-Russian, not anti-communist.

I don’t know who propagandizes him in Russia but allow be to doubt your words. Have you read him at all? He shows as a fanatical anti-Communist and Slav Nationalist in every single book he writes. His books destroy the myth that "the Ivans" were stupid morons, not good soldiers at all, and of course not prepared for war in 1941. They were prepared very well but for a different type of war. His main critics are the "serious historians" who have a vested interest in the current version of history. Suvorov even argues with one of them in his books - the Jew Gabriel Gorodetsky. The same who invented the number 40% as the proportion of Red Army officers who were idiots! Since Communism was invented and implemented by Jews and imposed with bloodshed on the Russians, how can he be anti-Communist and anti-Russian at the same time?

>>The goal of this ideological operation was to disseminate an absurd idea that USSR was also responsible for the WWII, not only Germany, and that Stalin is the same as Hitler.

No, Stalin was more responsible. Hitler never wanted a world war, Stalin did. World war is the prelude to a World Communist Revolution as all Communists from Marx on preached.

>>However, Stalin:
1) did not have any plans for conquering other countries or "export of bolshevism" abroad;
2) did not confess any ideas about "superior and inferior" races;
3) made a lot of attempts to prevent the WWII.

1) Please, this is an offense to all the small nations in the Baltic, Central Europe, and the Balkans. If Stalin didn’t export Bolshevism here, where did it come from? America? There is a difference between what Stalin was publicly saying and what he was secretly preparing for Europe.
2) I agree completely. He was as much willing to kill Slavs as Germans, and even his own Georgians. He was a monster. Hitler at least discriminated.
3) Prevent the war? Give me an example, please. Stalin supported Hitler from the moment he took power (or even before) until last day before the war, 21 June 1941. He gave the Nazis an ample supply of war materials, trained Nazi tank crews and fighter pilots in Soviet schools, he actually helped Hitler’s war in Poland! I’m particularly interested how can his behavior in the autumn of 1939 be explained. He gave a green light to Hitler to attack Poland and assured him of his rear flank for attack on Western Europe. If Stalin wanted to prevent WWII, he should have supported Poland together with Britain and France. Germans were not prepared for a long war, they had supplies for a few months only! The Poles resisted as best as they could, it was more fierce war than is often believed. But what can they do when Stalin stabbed them in the back?

>>>Hundreds of thousands Russians, Byelorussians, and Ukrainians joined them to fight the Communists. Do you consider them traitors?
>No doubt. Traitors.

You know that’s an interesting topic for discussion. I, as a foreigner, cannot solve this problem for you, my fellow Russians. I’m not trying to tell you how to think or what to feel, far from it. However, I liked what I read in Solzhenitsin’s "Arhipelag Gulag" about it. After the war, there were waves of prisoners to the concentration camps, Balts, Poles, West Ukrainians, Hungarians, even a few Bulgarians. There were also a lot of Vlasov’s soldiers and other "collaborators with the enemy". Solzhenitsin saw them all, they shared the miserable camp life together. He asks: What made these common people turn against their brothers? What made son fight against his father on the opposite sides of the front? What made them ally with the invader? Well, he says, the Bolsheviks allied with the same invader in 1917, too. Their goal was to take the power in Russia. What was the goal of Vlasov’s soldiers, or the Ukrainian Liberation Army, or the Estonian "Forest Brothers"? It was to liberate their people from the Communists. The Communists were behaving as occupators in Russia, fighting with their own people! Before you call somebody a traitor (or a hero), think what is his motivation.

>>Ja, ja! These Russians killed themselves. Germans are angels.

Nein, mein freund. Germans were far form angels. I didn’t say that. What I said was that Stalin, Zhukov, and the rest of the gang didn’t care about their soldiers’ life. Soldiers were expended like bullets. They depopulated Russia of its men. After the war the ratio of women to men was significantly changed. Several times more Soviet soldiers died on the front than Germans. Why? Were they so bad, or poorly armed? What I said was that they were poorly led by their Communist generals. Attack at all costs. One step back and you are executed for desertion. Soldiers escaping from encirclement or from German capture were executed without trial. Am I inventing all this or is it true?

>>This is a curious thing, but there are a few lovers of Hitler among Russian nationalists. I believe they are German nationalists, not Russian.

Hitler saved Germany from ruin and made it a respected country. National Socialism was much admired in the world before the war. I don’t see anything wrong in a Slav being a National Socialist. Hitler freed the German people from Jewish oppression. What’s wrong with trying to do the same in Russia? This great country is in a similar situation as Germany after the Great Depression and what Hitler did then can be an example now.

>>Were Poles or Czechs Communists? Nevertheless, Hitler occupied their countries.

Yes, he did. And the Poles and Czechs had every right to resist it. To the Germans however, it was most of all an act of revenge and defiance of the Versailes Treaty. German populated territories were unjustly given to Czechoslovakia and Poland and had to be brought back to their Fatherland. In the first country, there were Germans, Poles, Slovaks, and Hungarians who resented the Czech rule and Hitler gave them what they wanted. The Czechs were incorporated as a colony, or protectorate, to be slowly assimilated in the reich. So were the Polish in the general government. There is no question our Slav brothers suffered there. That happens often when small nations are close to big empires. They suffered later from the Russians, too.

>>The theory of Lebensraum was developed by Hitler in his Mein Kampf as early as in 1924. The WWII was the practical implementation of this theory.

Yes, he wanted more territory and colonies for the German nation. How to get them? Attack the others and take their land, where else to go, Antarktida? Whom to attack then, Britain? No way, it’s the greatest empire in the world! America? Out of reach. France? This means war with Britain and America, too - out of question. Attack to the East was the only possible option for him. Hitler said that there the chance presents itself because the great Russian Empire was crippled by Bolshevism. Bolshevism that tries to spread in Germany and bring the same "wanders" of Communism to that nation. It’s either us or them, sooner or later we have to fight. That’s why Nazi propaganda was pointed against Russia and the Slav people. There has been hostility between Russia and Germany from the WWI and the "Slav menace" image was brought back again. Everyone knows that Slavs are also Aryans, so the line adopted was that they are not real Aryans because of too much mixture of Jewish and Asiatic blood. Look at their leaders, they said, mostly Jews. Lenin had part Jewish and Tartar blood in him. Stalin was not a Slav either. Those Slavs close to Germany will be assimilated, the rest enslaved. He was wrong and the German people paid dearly for it. Slavs didn’t prove his expectations and fought for their freedom. And the Germans managed to become strong again without extra territories or colonies, but that’s a different topic.

What Hitler was writing in Mein Kampf however, were plans for the more distant future. In 1941 he was not prepared for a war with Russia. You can’t have Blitz Krieg on such a vast territory. Roads that turn into mud pits in the autumn and spring, winter colds that make your vehicles and weapons freeze, army that is many times bigger than yours ... Strategically it was a suicide, with the Anglo-Saxons in his back. Why then he attacked? Stalin was surprised by the attack, too. Didn’t he know what was written in Mein Kampf in 1924? He knew that Hitler and his generals were not idiots and would not attack him. The only explanation that makes sense to me is Suvorov’s. A Russian attack on Romanian oil fields would be the end for Germany and the Red Army was concentrating on the Western border for the strike.

>>"Russian atrocities" cannot be compared to German ones.

What is there to compare? One million or 10 millions, an atrocity is an atrocity. Civilians should not be killed, deported, taken hostage, raped, pillaged, etc., that’s what the Geneva Convention says. I like such cases to be investigated and brought in public. It’s late to punish the perpetrators, for most of them are already dead, but at least we can punish them in our memory and history books. These books now deal only with the German atrocities and exaggerate them to absurdity. Like that Germans skinned their victims to make leather souvenirs or soup from human fat. Do you believe that? They were said to eat Belgian kids in WWI by the Western propaganda. It proved a lie, of course. German execution of Polish officers at Katin proved a lie, too. Although Communists brought "witnesses" to testify at the Nurnberg "trial" for it. That’s why such stories should be treated carefully, not accepted on good faith. History is written by the victors.

Let us speak the truth at least among ourselves, OK?

Regards,
Alex.