First off I'm from the USA and I've been reading a lot of books on World ware 2. Coming from the US and getting only that and an English point of view for years it was painted out that we all beat the Nazis equally. Reading up it's painfully obvious that the Soviet Union really are the ones. I'm glad we helped, but in no way was it like the USA and UK put in a 50% fight there. I'm not knocking what we did contribute, just acknowledging that my country is so anti Soviet that we wouldn't even admit that the war was basically won by Russia. Just wanted to say thanks, fuck the Nazis and fuck lying to your people about history because we didn't like Stalin.
>>3113 >Just wanted to say thanks Thx, but it's more like to our grandfathers, lol. >World War II You know, different countries have different view on it. For England it will be "Battle for Atlantic + Egypt war", for China it will be "Resistance to the Japanese war", for US it's more like "Battle for Pacific + Landing operations in Europe war", for Russia it's "East front war". And no one country actually don't care about other theatres of war. As a result "hurr durr Only through our participation the world was saved!" from all countries.
Politics is hypocritical and deceitful thing, not only in the US, deal with it. Soviet union's propaganda suppressed and distorted as many facts as the American one did. Maybe Americans were more intimidated with 'The Evil Empire', nukes and Red invasion thing though, and the Soviets were told that life of an ordinary man in the USA is poor, dangerous and slavish. Cold war is not a joke. It's a good thing that we have access to any book now.
Lol at the picture, in reality it was and is the same in both counties, poor and dangerous. Except for an upper class based on inheritance, luck, and ties to the government. As far as books are concerned I don't see any translations of Russian authors on WWII, it's all US and UK authors here, so unfortunately no, we here only get the Russian view if we study the Russian language and order books off the internet. In fact there aren't even any translations of books written about Stalin's place in modern Russian history, what Russians think about the whole situation except for sound bites on TV. It's still very important to paint out Russian soldiers in the end of WWII as rapists, and totally ignore while doing so the fact that the Nazis killed more Russian civilians than they killed soldiers in the war, so what's worse? We get told that Putin is proof of an oligarchy in Russian politics, ignoring that for the last 30+ years we've had either a Bush or a Clinton in power. Farther back if you include Bush Sr. heading the CIA. Basically the cold war is still going on in our media. Anyway, it's enough to where I'm interested in studying Russian as one of the languages to master besides English. WWII is going to always interest me, so learning German and Russian is important.
>>3118 >poor and dangerous. Except for an upper class based on inheritance, luck, and ties to the government. In the Soviet Union thought that your government is 50% of the capitalists who robbing the American people. And 50% of politicians-imperialists who was bought by the capitalists. >Stalin's place in modern Russian history We have a joke "Russia - a country with an unpredictable past". This is 100% true. Liberals are hate him, for them he is "Dumb bloody tyrant". Communists are like him, for them he is "Great lider who make industrialization in the country, created Russian science and established a political system capable of mobilizing the country to fight the enemy" >cold war is still going on in our media It is. I think this is because society want it. And media giving it to them.
>>>cold war is still going on in our media It is. I think this is because society want it. And media giving it to them. The other way to look at it is that the people who are most successful with a given system own the media, so they have an interest in keeping up a fight against any possible other system. Their views are what makes the news.
>>3120 >The other way to look at it is that the people who are most successful with a given system own the media, so they have an interest in keeping up a fight against any possible other system. Their views are what makes the news. Both factors. Peoples loves sensations. And in general they don't like spend long time to understand the complex situations. "XXX country is evil empire!" - And your ratings fly up. Generally if the society sees in something "focus of evil" this is beneficial for politicians. As a resut forming a positive feedback. Society needs more sensations (and they know almost nothing about other countries), politicians need a "main enemy of the state". But the policy is stop it someday, otherwise the process can get out of control. Media also can not write 100% lie. They still need some real events, which can be interpreted two ways and that society is not well understood. NATO invade in Yugoslavia -> Bloody US capitalists Russia invade in Georgia -> Bloody Russian imperialists
I'm never for war, but I understood in both situations why it went the way it did. Funny how many people over here were fully behind NATO because they saw Serbia as being the aggressor there, but they never bothered to read up on the Georgian conflict, because that's convenient for their limited world view. Most didn't even know that the contested areas had never wanted to be part Georgia, so they thought unrealistically that Russia was being the aggressor there. Of course in both cases, the "good" side according to my standards also had hidden agendas and wasn't fully pure etc. That's why war is total joke, with the exception of WWII, Hitler needed to be destroyed, no doubt at all.
>>3122 >Funny how many people over here were fully behind NATO because they saw Serbia as being the aggressor there, but they never bothered to read up on the Georgian conflict, because that's convenient for their limited world view. Most didn't even know that the contested areas had never wanted to be part Georgia, so they thought unrealistically that Russia was being the aggressor there. Same shit here with Yugoslavia, people don't know nothing about their civilian war. Just "In Yugoslavia, there were some disagreements and NATO have used this to destroy the country" Because US wants to dominate the world. >had hidden agendas and wasn't fully pure etc. It is. btw http://waralbum.ru/ Do you have something like this on english? This is a directory of photos with explanations stories of photo.
