As the war in Ukraine enters its third summer, Russia is on the offensive.

Minority Mind thinks YouCrayne is winning.
Same guy who was first in line to take Clot Shots.
Ruzzia will win war of attrition.
Zeeper Freepers are delusional.

Indeed, not denigrating what the Soviet Union did to fight Germany

Their loses were extreme( same tactics as today), but even though Putin is an “expert” on history, people need to understand the unique take on ww2 the Russians have

1st no mention of starting war allied with Germany in taking Poland
2nd. Little to no recognition of massive aid that was given to Soviet Union to fight Germany. Without that aid it is likely Soviet losses would have been even more extreme
3rd little to no recognition of the loses allied flyboys suffered in bombing and tactical air campaign to degrade Germany industry and POL capabilities.
4th basically Soviet Union won ww2 er ah great patriotic war single handily
5th poland had it coming for not agreeing to germanys most “reasonable “ demands(sound familiar)

I guess you are on the inside with the muscovites to make such a claim

Having to buy golf cart’s from China, arty(I seem to remember early on how many here said Russia would never run out of art, tanks, apvs….) and missiles from Iran and NK, yup seems they are winning war of attrition

The issue was why did the US have the Soviet Union as an ally? The answer is obvious.

Most history books in US schools don’t give the Soviets the credit they are due for the role they played in winning WWII. The enormity of their sacrifice in terms of human losses are beyond the comprehension of most in the West. It has shaped the Russian psyche to this very day. In the half dozen or so times I have visited Russia starting in the early seventies thru the nineties, I was struck by how affected the people were by the war regardless of age. It was like it happened yesterday.

Again not denigrating or diminishing the sacrifice that the Russian people suffered. There would not have been a victory over nazi germany without them.

May not have been a ww2 or certainly not played out as it was without Soviets early cooperation with Hitler either

With that said, I am a history buff, have been since early childhood.

Not sure I totally agree with your position on Soviet contributions being taught in the west. I learned of the battles, the massive loses that they had, but I stand by my point that in Russia the contributions the Allie’s made toward victory are massively downplayed.

Little regard is given to the incredible aid, and I might add at great cost by many including sailors lost, that was sent that supported the Soviet war effort.
Nor is it taught that the Soviets let the Germans train on their territory prior to the war and that Soviets were in essence allied with Germany during the invasion of Poland
Putins statements to tucker about how basically Poland was at fault for not submitting to hitlers demands shows an interesting take.

The similarities to then and now jump out to me.

Ukraine is to blame for Russia invading them…..

As to locked into Russian psyche, the loses they suffered I am sure are still felt today, however the Soviets and now Russians also make sure their version is kept in the forefront of Russian minds.it is something they use quite effectively to keep the people rallying around mother Russia…

An interesting aside, for as much as the Russians have this in their minds. The Poles, Ukrainians, Lithuanians, Latvians, Estonians, Finns… also have memories of events, and many don’t jive with Russian narratives

May not have been a ww2 or certainly not played out as it was without Soviets early cooperation with Hitler either.

There may not have been a WWII and the rise of Hitler if the Allies had not been so draconian in their treatment of Germany after WWI.

Not sure I totally agree with your position on Soviet contributions being taught in the west. I learned of the battles, the massive loses that they had, but I stand by my point that in Russia the contributions the Allie’s made toward victory are massively downplayed.

How many Americans have ever heard of the Battle of Kursk? Or the 900 day siege of Leningrad? History is not a strong point in our educational system. 40% of students can't even meet basic levels on US history. My brother taught history in high school for over 40 years.

It should be no surprise that the Soviets/Russians emphasize their contributions to the defeat of the Nazis. After all, they lost 27 million people, both civilian and military, during the 'Great Patriotic" War. The total population of the Soviet Union in 1941 was 195 million people. Losing 14% of your population is a traumatic event that literally affects almost everyone in the country for generations. The US was spared death and destruction on such a scale.

Conversely, US history books center on D-Day, the landings in Salerno and Anzio, the war in North Africa, the defeat of Imperial Japan, etc. The contributions of the Soviets are "massively downplayed." This is not to denigrate our sacrifices and contributions in opening a two front war. My father and four of his brothers served including one who fought on Tarawa as a Marine and another who participated in the landings in Salerno and Anzio.

My wife was born during WWII in Germany and her father died on the Eastern Front before she was born. Growing up in post-war Germany involved great hardship and uncertainty. According to her, the schools taught very little about WWII and its causes. There was just guilt and shame. Winston Churchill's famous quote, "History is written by the victors," is true.

Little regard is given to the incredible aid, and I might add at great cost by many including sailors lost, that was sent that supported the Soviet war effort.

I grew up watching the series "Victory at Sea." It influenced my decision to join the US Navy and serve 8 years as a naval officer. Here is an episode, that covers our efforts to support the Soviets through Murmansk. The US was truly the Arsenal of Democracy. By the end of the war we were tuning out one Liberty ship a day. Without the logistical support supplied by America, there would have been no victory. Logistics wins wars.

Nor is it taught that the Soviets let the Germans train on their territory prior to the war and that Soviets were in essence allied with Germany during the invasion of Poland

The Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact, officially the Treaty of Non-Aggression between Germany and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, was signed on August 23, 1939 just a little over a week before the German invasion of Poland on September 1. The Soviets invaded Poland on September 17. Stalin and Hitler were going to divide up the spoils in Eastern Europe.

In March 1940, parts of the Karelia and Salla regions in Finland were annexed by the Soviet Union following the Winter War. The Soviet annexation of Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and parts of Romania (Bessarabia, Northern Bukovina and the Hertsa region) followed. The Soviets used concern for ethnic Ukrainians and Belarusians as a pretext for their invasion of Poland. Stalin's invasion of Bukovina in 1940 violated the pact, since it went beyond the Soviet sphere of influence that had been agreed with the Axis.

The pact was terminated on 22 June 1941, when Germany launched Operation Barbarossa and invaded the Soviet Union, in pursuit of the ideological goal of Lebensraum. The Anglo-Soviet Agreement succeeded it. After the war, Ribbentrop was convicted of war crimes at the Nuremberg trials and executed.

Putins statements to tucker about how basically Poland was at fault for not submitting to hitlers demands shows an interesting take.

I spent two years in Warsaw (1981-3) during the days of Solidarnosc" and martial law. The Poles despise the Soviets. The subject of the massacre in the Katyn Forest was brought up frequently. I watched the interview, but I don't recall what Putin said about Poland. History clearly shows that Stalin had territorial designs on Poland along with Hitler.

The similarities to then and now jump out to me. Ukraine is to blame for Russia invading them…..

The war has been ongoing since 2014 when the US/EU supported a coup against the duly elected government of Ukraine. The coup spawned the separatist movement in the Donbas and the first Russian invasion(unopposed) that resulted in the annexation of Crimea. NATO expansion is what precipitated this war, which could and should have been avoided. We crossed a red line led by Biden, Blinken, Nuland, and Sullivan who started this mess and are now back in charge. Here is a good chronology on how this war began and the events that led to its escalation.

The Real History of the War in Ukraine--A Chronology of Events and Case for Diplomacy

As to locked into Russian psyche, the loses they suffered I am sure are still felt today, however the Soviets and now Russians also make sure their version is kept in the forefront of Russian minds.it is something they use quite effectively to keep the people rallying around mother Russia…

The Biden Administration aided by the MSM and Social Media are controlling the narrative about events in Ukraine. The American people are manipulated in much the same way we were on Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, the Russia Hoax, and Covid.

U.S. Government Helps Pro-Ukraine Media Spread Propaganda And Silence American Critics Media outlets organized with substantial funding and direction from the U.S. government have supported censorship, disseminated disinfo, and sought to silence American critics of the war.

An interesting aside, for as much as the Russians have this in their minds. The Poles, Ukrainians, Lithuanians, Latvians, Estonians, Finns… also have memories of events, and many don’t jive with Russian narratives

Nothing surprising about that.

“Those who control the present, control the past and those who control the past control the future.” ― George Orwell, 1984

I appreciate your perspective, but the narrative of red lines seems to be applied only to one side. And arranged coups also apply to both sides, just look at present day Africa and other areas around the world for Russias activities

Btw putin did state in interview with tucker that poland started ww2 by not agreeing to hitlers demands.

That statement alone is all I needed to hear.

We will disagree on much, but the huge sacrifice that the people of the Soviet Union suffered is not one of them

I appreciate your perspective, but the narrative of red lines seems to be applied only to one side.

Au contraire. Google the Cuban missile crisis. NATO has drawn red lines vis a vis aggression against member states, i.e., Article 5. Economic sanctions are red lines.

And arranged coups also apply to both sides, just look at present day Africa and other areas around the world for Russia's activities

The US has pursued an aggressive interventionist foreign policy. We can oppose tyranny, but our blood and treasure must be used judiciously. We didn't send troops or arms to Hungary in 1956 or Prague in 1968 or Warsaw in 1982. What did 18 years in Afghanistan or 8 years in Vietnam achieve? How many wars have Russia and China engaged in? Very few compared to us. Endless wars weaken us.

U.S. Foreign Policy Increasingly Relies on Military Interventions--When confronted with hot spots around the world, the U.S. has been moving away from diplomatic approaches and toward showing force more often, says new book

According to the project’s data, the U.S. has been involved in 393 military interventions in other nations since 1776. More than 200 of those have been since 1945, and 114 in the post-Cold War era (after 1989).

Just since the year 2000, the project documents 72 interventions. And in one region of the world, the Middle East and North Africa, the U.S. has been involved in 77 military interventions, mostly since the 1940s.

Over-reliance on force rather than diplomacy, intelligence gathering, economic statecraft, and the powers of persuasion can also harm the U.S. reputation abroad, causing it to be seen as a threat and to lose its influence, Toft says. “The book is basically a battle cry for strengthening the Department of State.”

“Americans think that the United States should be engaged. I’m not calling for an isolationist position,” she says. “I’m calling for more restraint, particularly when it comes to the use of force.”

Btw putin did state in interview with tucker that poland started ww2 by not agreeing to hitlers demands. That statement alone is all I needed to hear.

I was able to find the transcript of the Putin interview. I found your characterization of what was said wanting and lacking in context. Here are some pertinent excerpts:

Under the rule of Catherine the Great, Russia reclaimed all of its historical lands, including in the south and west. This all lasted until the Revolution. Before World War I, Austrian General Staff relied on the ideas of Ukrainianization and started actively promoting the ideas of Ukraine and the Ukrainianization. Their motive was obvious. Just before World War I they wanted to weaken the potential enemy and secure themselves favourable conditions in the border area. So the idea which had emerged in Poland that people residing in that territory were allegedly not really Russians, but rather belonged to a special ethnic group, Ukrainians, started being propagated by the Austrian General Staff.

As far back as the 19th century, theorists calling for Ukrainian independence appeared. All those, however, claimed that Ukraine should have a very good relationship with Russia. They insisted on that. After the 1917 Revolution, the Bolsheviks sought to restore the statehood, and the Civil War began, including the hostilities with Poland. In 1921, peace with Poland was proclaimed, and under that treaty, the right bank of the Dnieper River once again was given back to Poland.

In 1939, after Poland cooperated with Hitler — it did collaborate with Hitler, you know —Hitler offered Poland peace and a treaty of friendship and alliance - we have all the relevant documents in the archives, demanding in return that Poland give back to Germany the so-called Danzig Corridor, which connected the bulk of Germany with East Prussia and Konigsberg. After World War I this territory was transferred to Poland, and instead of Danzig, a city of Gdansk emerged. Hitler asked them to give it amicably, but they refused. Still they collaborated with Hitler and engaged together in the partitioning of Czechoslovakia.

Tucker Carlson: May I ask… You are making the case that Ukraine, certain parts of Ukraine, Eastern Ukraine, in fact, has been Russia for hundreds of years, why wouldn’t you just take it when you became President 24 years ago? Your have nuclear weapons, they don’t. It’s actually your land. Why did you wait so long?

Vladimir Putin: I’ll tell you. I’m coming to that. This briefing is coming to an end. It might be boring, but it explains many things.

Tucker Carlson: It’s not boring.

Vladimir Putin: Good. Good. I am so gratified that you appreciate that. Thank you.

So before World War II, Poland collaborated with Hitler and although it did not yield to Hitler’s demands, it still participated in the partitioning of Czechoslovakia together with Hitler. As the Poles had not given the Danzig Corridor to Germany, and went too far, pushing Hitler to start World War II by attacking them. Why was it Poland against whom the war started on 1 September 1939? Poland turned out to be uncompromising, and Hitler had nothing to do but start implementing his plans with Poland.

By the way, the USSR — I have read some archive documents — behaved very honestly. It asked Poland’s permission to transit its troops through the Polish territory to help Czechoslovakia. But the then Polish foreign minister said that if the Soviet planes flew over Poland, they would be downed over the territory of Poland. But that doesn’t matter. What matters is that the war began, and Poland fell prey to the policies it had pursued against Czechoslovakia, as under the well-known Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, part of that territory, including western Ukraine, was to be given to Russia. Thus Russia, which was then named the USSR, regained its historical lands.

After the victory in, what we call the Great Patriotic War - World War II, all those territories were ultimately enshrined as belonging to Russia, to the USSR. As for Poland, it received, apparently in compensation, western, originally German, territories - the eastern part of Germany, part of the lands, these are the western regions of Poland today. Of course, Poland regained access to the Baltic sea, and Danzig, which was once again given its Polish name. So this was how this situation developed.

Without going into great detail, Ukraine, like many countries in Europe, has had many borders and different inhabitants. Currently, it has been an independent country for less than 35 years. Its territory contains lands that were formerly under different countries less than 100 years ago. WWI and WWII affected these boundaries. And to this very day, there are still separatist movements in Europe.

The occupation of part of Cieszyn Silesia by Poland in 1938

The allegation of participation in the partition of Czechoslovakia in the fall of 1938 is one of the permanent elements of the historical narrative directed against Poland. The decision on partition of the territory of the First Republic was made on September 29 during a conference in Munich with the participation of France, Germany, Great Britain and Italy. The democratic Western powers took a passive stance, agreeing to implement Hitler's demands. The final course of the new borders was to be decided by a special commission composed of representatives of the parties contracting in the capital of Bavaria and the ČSR. The conference participants also issued an additional statement to the concluded agreement, which concerned the Polish and Hungarian minorities in Czechoslovakia. In the absence of a compromise on these issues, it was announced that the Munich Four would meet again after three months.

Polish diplomacy presented its position on the decisions taken after they were made public, stressing that it did not recognize them as binding and was consistently based on the principle of "nothing about us without us". In Warsaw, it was feared that the powers would come to an understanding with Germany at the expense of the Polish Republic, as in the case of the ČSR, making it the object of a diplomatic game. In the political situation prevailing in Europe at that time, there was a real threat of applying "Munich methods" in relation to Gdańsk, Polish Pomerania or Silesia.

For this reason, on September 30, 1938, Poland issued an ultimatum to Prague, expecting the constituencies of Cieszyn and Fryštát to be included within the borders of the Republic of Poland within ten days, conducting a plebiscite in the remaining territories of the Republic inhabited by Poles, and the release of all political prisoners of Polish origin. On October 1, the demands were accepted and the ČSR authorities emphasized their goodwill in efforts to resolve the conflict