"War means fightin' and fightin' means killin."
Posted on 02/15/2007 5:43:06 PM PST by Zionist Conspirator
Icebreaker review from Amazon.com
The History Book of the 20th Century, November 19, 2005
Reviewer: Arkadiy Dubovoy (Virginia) - See all my reviews
"It is safe to assume that if you have not read Viktor Suvorov's Icebreaker (or, at least, are not familiar with his ideas), you don't understand the last 85 years of the world history.
Viktor Suvorov was trained as a military intelligence officer at the time when soviet military intelligence was the best in the world (probably still is). In the late seventies Suvorov defected to England, where he wrote several books about soviet army and intelligence. By all accounts (friends and enemies alike), Viktor Suvorov possesses encyclopedic knowledge about military theory and history, particularly the history of World War II. His knowledge and analytical ability are astounding.
Published first in the eighties, Icebreaker was the first in Suvorov's series of historical books. By the year 2000, it was translated into 27 languages and published more than 100 times. Icebreaker is a book about communist preparation and execution (however poorly, but not for the lack of trying) of the biggest crime in the history of mankind, World War II. Because of that, in addition to its historical value of showing communist conspiracy as a true cause of WWII, Icebreaker is probably the best, most convincing anti-communist book ever written. Suvorov neither uncovers any secrets, nor does he simply catalogue the crimes. He analyzes communists' own words and innumerable well-known facts to show communism as the darkest, most evil episode in the human history.
Before you start reading this book, however, keep in mind several important things.
First, this relatively small book is an overview of many very complex political, historical, and military events. The most important of the ideas had been expanded by the author in his later books (see below). The sheer number of dogmas and controversies Suvorov takes head on is mind-boggling, and this is why the author must occasionally abbreviate his arguments. As a result, the book may seem cursory to unprepared readers.
Second, Icebreaker was written in Russian and intended for Eastern European readership. In order to be immediately understood, the book does assume certain cultural background, i.e., familiarity with the history and cannibalistic rituals of communist regimes. I am not implying that western readers will not understand the book, to the contrary, I think that an interested western reader will benefit enormously from reading this book.
Third, Icebreaker, when it became available, was an instant tremendous success in the former USSR and all Eastern Block countries. In Eastern Europe Icebreaker became de facto 20th century European history textbook and the basis of common popular understanding of the events leading to WWII and its immediate aftermath. It would be foolish to disregard the opinion of people who actually lived through the events . . . ."
Good luck trying to get a copy - they go for several hundred dollars. FYI
So then you do believe that we started WWII not the
Germans.
The Germans were simply defending their homeland from our viscious attacks on their civilialns.
That the real threat was the Russians and even though they had not attacked anyone and had no army on the march that we should have gone to war with them instead of Germany.
You need to get out more often.
Maybe get a little fresh air once or twice a week.
But at the very least stop with the nonsense you are posting about us, the west, the free countries being the problem.
You got that right. Its ridiculous the way we dont tout our successes in the war on terror.First thing on my list is the anti American news media constantly counting the causalties every day with relish. 5th column types to be sure.
I spent last week with a guy from Dresden, and he never brought the bombing up.
He was here buying $$millions of American manufactured products.
Thanks for the answer. I've read that David Irving is a Dresden Liar and Holocaust Denier.
I found this commentary on Irving's book by following footnote #13 of the Wikipedia article you first mentioned on this thread.
Irving’s account of the bombing of Dresden manipulates and invents material, misinterprets documents, and gives weight to unreliable documents. He also gives undue weight to eyewitness testimony when it suits him, and falsifies statistics in order to put the behaviour of the Allies and particularly Churchill, in a negative lightThere are some very useful footnotes on the Wikipedia page that you originally cited.
Here's more information, from footnote 29, of your Wikipedia article
...The Daily Telegraph issued a memo to all its correspondents. "It is incorrect," it said, "to describe David Irving as a historian....
You've got that right. Destroying enemy morale is a key part of waging effective war. The Islamists know this and it's become their key advantage against the west.
Never heard that one but it certainly is more appropriate coming from a man who was on the right side.
There were key war materiel plants scattered in and around Dresden. The Kurt Vonnegut revisionists always omit this fact when disparaging the reasons for destroying the city.
As to killing women and children, have you ever read the Book of Joshua? I can imagine you would see in Communism the same "Jewish barbarism" your hero Voltaire (and probably Revilo P. Oliver as well) found in the Bible and Talmud.
Go back to Original Dissent or Liberty Forum or whatever "Jewish bankers rule the world" forum you came from.
The man was an American and, imo, that's that.
You're not one of those FReepers who are still picking a 140 year old scab are you?
Actually, Suvorov points out that Stalin helped Hitler due to Stalin's assessment that Hitler would plunge Europe into another war - Hitler's code name was Icebreaker. Per Suvorov, Hitler's big mistake in WWII was the invasion of Poland which established a common border with the Soviet Union - necessary for Stalin's plan to conquer Europe to succeed. You won't see or hear about this version of history since many in Hollywood liked communism and "Uncle Joe" Stalin.
To recap - tactical bombing was ok - terror attacks on civilians is not IMO. The Communists' plan triggered WWII - the person responsible for Hitler and the millions of deaths was the Communist Party and Stalin. If your neighbor buys a vicious dog and releases it your neighborhood where it attacks people - who is ultimately responsible - the dog (Hitler) or the planner (Stalin)?
No.
You will notice that I have quoted the Air Marshal in the Foreword and Prime Minister Winston Churchill - direct sources on the historical record. I also excerpted F. J. P. Veale's book on "Advance to Barbarism" who cited Air Secretary Spaight. Demonizing Irving to discredit the quotes will not change the quotes.
In Irving's defense, Irving was the first to detect the Hitler forgeries that "establishment" historians had accepted as "genuine" - so much for Irving not being a historian. If you don't want to believe Churchill or Spaight on terror bombing - or Saunders on Dresden being a great tragedy, that's your option.
Joe Goebbels asked the German people if they wanted "Total War" and they said 'Ja.'
Be careful what you ask for, you just might get it.
You are full of it. One word : Guernica.
I wonder if the struture of the city, the location of its main buildings, etc. and the weather had much to do with the inferno? I dont know much about the specific geography of the city, but is it possible that some natural features of the topography would have caused a fire bombing to escalate because of wind direction and the concentration of fuel for the fire?
Anyone out there with a sense of this?
Dresden was a good lesson on why supporting and propping up madmen and evil ideologies is bad for your health.
How come no one ever mentions the Nazi bombings of Warsaw or Rotterdam?
Of course it was a tragedy. All war is a tragedy.
I can't put much stock in what Irving says, since he continued to lie about the number of deaths at Dresden and denies the holocaust.
It's very apparent that Irving's got an agenda. Even the footnotes to the article you posted show that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.