Nazi collaborator monuments in Estonia
The Sinimäed Hills memorial, erected in 1999, has become the site of annual gatherings to honor the SS
Posted on 05/13/2024 8:49:46 AM PDT by MeganC
Nazi collaborator monuments in Estonia
The Sinimäed Hills memorial, erected in 1999, has become the site of annual gatherings to honor the SS
Stupid posts saying commies didn’t do anything wrong and if they killed someone or sent them to GULAG it must be because they were a Nazi and thus deserved it is a meme of stupid commie kids.
Soviets started to send people to GULAG from the Baltics while Soviets and Nazis were still allied.
For example this - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/June_deportation
I imagine you were different once when you signed up to this site and it is sad to see that your hatred and demoralization have led you to become a silly commie cheerleader.
Outrage as SS men hold anniversary celebration in Estonia
The EU newcomer Estonia was accused of amorality and gross historical insensitivity yesterday after it allowed veterans of the Nazi Waffen-SS to parade through its capital Tallinn.
The EU newcomer Estonia was accused of amorality and gross historical insensitivity yesterday after it allowed veterans of the Nazi Waffen-SS to parade through its capital Tallinn.
The event saw veterans of the 20th Estonian SS division attend a church service, lay flowers at a war memorial and attend a celebratory concert.
The planned unveiling of a memorial to Estonian SS troops was cancelled at the last minute, however, and is not now expected to take place until the autumn.
Jewish groups pointed out that Estonian volunteers in the SS were responsible for the almost complete annihilation of the country's Jewish population during the Second World War.
Why are you suddenly so fond of commie propaganda.
From your earlier post:
The right side of the image you posted is an Independence Day celebration organized by one of the 2 and half conservative parties in Estonia. This particular one is a Trump-style conservative party. Shrill libs like to call them Nazis.
The left side is an Estonian man Harald Nugiseks. When he was 19 the Soviet Union (still allied with the Nazis) invaded Estonia. They burned down his village and murdered a lot of his friends and relatives including his cousin and aunt’s husband in a brutal and torturous way.
He had gotten away and hid in a forest and since he was at the age where the Red Army conscripted from stayed hidden.
When the Nazis invaded later and drove the commies out he signed up with the Germans to kill commies. Killing commies is a noble goal and given what had happened in the past a very understandable desire.
Why have you turned into a commie cheerleader and where do you even get these propaganda images and texts?
So, if NATO is such a paper Tiger, why does Russia fear it? (to paraphrase what proponents of Russia say about Russia)Both are silly non-arguments.
My #30 to MeganC to which you nominally make believe you are responding had nothing to do with Russia fearing NATO.
I first cited the Estonia defense budget of 3% GDP as amounting to just over $1B.
The rest of my post was quoting Articles 5 and 6, and quoting NATO about member responsibilities under Articles 5 and 6.
If you believe Articles 5 & 6 and the NATO statement about Articles 5 & 6 make NATO a paper tiger, take it up with NATO. I only linked and quoted what NATO itself said.
The thread article claims,
Some voices from Ukraine are sending alarming signals: The Baltic States could be next on Putin's list, they say. However, article 5 of the NATO treaty guarantees to come to the aid of any member if it is attacked; one for all, all for one.
NATO has invoked Article 5 once in its history, directly after 9/11. The NATO reality, as stated by NATO, insists:
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_110496.htm
Collective Defence and Article 5
NATO
Last updated 04 Jul 2023 11:47
[Excerpt]
A cornerstone of the AllianceArticle 5
In 1949, the primary aim of the North Atlantic Treaty – NATO’s founding treaty – was to create a pact of mutual assistance to counter the risk that the Soviet Union would seek to extend its control of Eastern Europe to other parts of the continent.
Every participating country agreed that this form of solidarity was at the heart of the Treaty, effectively making Article 5 on collective defence a key component of the Alliance.
Article 5 provides that if a NATO Ally is the victim of an armed attack, each and every other member of the Alliance will consider this act of violence as an armed attack against all members and will take the actions it deems necessary to assist the Ally attacked.
Article 5
“The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.
Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security.”
This article is complemented by Article 6, which stipulates:
Article 61
“For the purpose of Article 5, an armed attack on one or more of the Parties is deemed to include an armed attack:
- on the territory of any of the Parties in Europe or North America, on the Algerian Departments of France2, on the territory of Turkey or on the Islands under the jurisdiction of any of the Parties in the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer;
- on the forces, vessels, or aircraft of any of the Parties, when in or over these territories or any other area in Europe in which occupation forces of any of the Parties were stationed on the date when the Treaty entered into force or the Mediterranean Sea or the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer.”
The principle of providing assistance
With the invocation of Article 5, Allies can provide any form of assistance they deem necessary to respond to a situation. This is an individual obligation on each Ally and each Ally is responsible for determining what it deems necessary in the particular circumstances.
This assistance is taken forward in concert with other Allies. It is not necessarily military and depends on the material resources of each country. It is therefore left to the judgment of each individual member country to determine how it will contribute. Each country will consult with the other members, bearing in mind that the ultimate aim is to “to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area”.
At the drafting of Article 5 in the late 1940s, there was consensus on the principle of mutual assistance, but fundamental disagreement on the modalities of implementing this commitment. The European participants wanted to ensure that the United States would automatically come to their assistance should one of the signatories come under attack; the United States did not want to make such a pledge and obtained that this be reflected in the wording of Article 5.
Do you disagree with NATO explaining NATO Article 5?
What is your point?
What is your point?
To enlighten the world about what NATO itself says about Article 5.
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_110496.htm
The principle of providing assistanceWith the invocation of Article 5, Allies can provide any form of assistance they deem necessary to respond to a situation. This is an individual obligation on each Ally and each Ally is responsible for determining what it deems necessary in the particular circumstances.
This assistance is taken forward in concert with other Allies. It is not necessarily military and depends on the material resources of each country. It is therefore left to the judgment of each individual member country to determine how it will contribute. Each country will consult with the other members, bearing in mind that the ultimate aim is to “to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area”.
At the drafting of Article 5 in the late 1940s, there was consensus on the principle of mutual assistance, but fundamental disagreement on the modalities of implementing this commitment. The European participants wanted to ensure that the United States would automatically come to their assistance should one of the signatories come under attack; the United States did not want to make such a pledge and obtained that this be reflected in the wording of Article 5.
What is your point?
LOL, no kidding.
Is it "commie propaganda" to state that Estonian volunteers in the SS were responsible for the almost complete annihilation of the country's Jewish population during the Second World War?
What kind of clown world do you inhabit?
Yeah, those "shrill libs" over at the Simon Wiesenthal Center, what were they thinking? 🧐
August 25, 2004
WIESENTHAL CENTER PROTESTS ERECTION OF MONUMENT COMMEMORATING ESTONIAN SS-DIVISION WHICH FOUGHT WITH NAZIS IN WORLD WAR II
The Simon Wiesenthal Center today issued an official protest against the erection in the Estonian town of Lihula of a monument commemorating the members of the 20th Estonian SS Division, which fought for Nazi Germany during World War II.
In a statement issued today in Jerusalem by the Centers chief Nazi-hunter Dr. Efraim Zuroff, the Wiesenthal Center condemned the erection of the monument which glorifies those who were willing to sacrifice their lives to help achieve the victory of Nazi Germany and the Third Reich in World War II.
Zuroff added that the inscription on the monument which attempts to portray the members of the units as fighters for Estonian independence in 1940-1944 is a misguided attempt to rewrite history and to turn Nazi collaborators into Estonian heroes. This is hardly surprising in a country which has hereto failed to prosecute a single Estonian Nazi war criminal and in which a public opinion poll revealed that 93% of the public oppose the establishment of a memorial day for the victims of the Holocaust, said Zuroff.
Contrary to the fictional account you presented...Nugiseks joined a Nazi security battalion straight out of the Commercial Institute at Pairu. His commanding officer, General Georg von Küchler was later convicted of war crimes by the Americans for murdering 240 mentally disabled people in the Russian town of Makaryevo shortly after Nugiseks joined the "security" battalion.
Why am I not surprised you'd try to sanitize the history of your Nazi hero.
Shrill libs are calling the Trump-like political party EKRE Nazis.
Efraim Zuroff is a commie propagandist interested mainly in whitewashing commie crimes. He lies a lot and plays degrees of separation games blaming people who did nothing wrong for the crimes of others.
He was a boy who wanted to kill commies and that’s what he did. He was a common soldier and had nothing to do with any Generals. Why would he?
You are also playing this game and just lie. There was nothing “fictional” about the account I gave.
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.