It is true that Nazi Germany did feel a great deal of animosity towards some Slavs, though not all. The allegations of a universal Nazi hatred for Slavs is actually a noxious piece of misinformation spread by our common enemies. In fact, several Slavic countries sided with Nazi Germany, namely Bulgaria, Croatia, Slovakia, as well as many Ukrainians who wanted to escape the Soviet/Jewish yoke. In addition, there were many Germans of Slavic ancestry in the Reich (as there still are) and they were not discriminated by the Nazi regime. On the contrary, there were men with Polish and Czech last names in the German General Staff and in the ranks of the Nazi Party. The reason for the animus was that both Czechs and Poles insisted on ruling over regions, the Sudetenland and Danzig Corridor respectively, that were inhabited almost exclusively by Germans. Those Germans had lived in those regions for centuries and they had never been part of Czechoslovakia or Poland before. They rightfully wanted to be part of the German Reich and not of a multi-ethnic state in which they were a disliked minority. Wilson's '14 Points' had proclaimed the right of self-determination to all peoples, but these Germans were unfairly denied that right because of the territorial ambitions of Poland and Czechoslovakia. The Germans were justified to resent this double standard and their desire to take revenge was only natural. As to atrocities, unfortunately they were committed by German troops, but also by every combatant nation in that apocalyptic war, in many cases on a greater scale than by the Germans.

And, of course, as Hitler explains in "Mein Kampf" German enmity toward Russians had an even more obvious cause: communism. The Russians had let themselves be duped by Jewish agitators into adopting Marxist grotesquerie as their state ideology and their efforts to export that plague was endangering all of European civilization. Germany's efforts to extirpate that cancer were nothing short of heroic and deserve the admiration of every Aryan man and woman, even of Russians who by now have realized they were in the wrong in World War II. Germany only failed in their crusade against communism because the Western democracies, whose ideology is closely related to Marxism, helped them by instigating war against Germany. Moreover, there is a credible theory that Germany was actually forced to attack the Soviet Union because Stalin was planning a massive invasion of Western Europe. A Soviet general has written a book about it. The link below is to a hair-raising article reviewing the book in the National Alliance site.

http://www.natvan.com/national-vanguard/115/icebreak.html

If that theory is true, not was only Hitler justified in invading the Soviet Union, both in military and in moral terms, but he and the soldiers of the Wehrmacht should be considered heroes to all Whites everywhere in the world, since a Stalinist Europe would have meant the end of civilization and communist oppression for all generations to come.

In light of the facts above, it must be concluded that Germany's disputes with several, though not all, of the Slavic peoples had geopolitical, and not racial, origins.

Believe me, I do not favor Germans over Slavs. If their historical roles had been reversed, I would heartily support Slavs rather than Germans, but in this case Germany was right and most of the Slavic nations were wrong.


Italicus

"This time the world."
--George Lincoln Rockwell

>It is true that Nazi Germany
>did feel a great deal of
>animosity towards some Slavs,
>though not all.

Germans applied typical tactic of divide and conquer. Yugoslavia is the best example. Few days before invasion, "Poglavnik" Ante Pavelic declares independent Croatia and Serbia as major obstacle to German domination of the Balkans is carved up by Romania, Hungary, Bulgaria, Italy, Albania and so called Independent State of Croatia- leaving only Belgrade under very limited autonomy. Those Slavs toward which Germans did not feel animosity were Slavs which were needed as allies for strategic reasons. (playing Croats against Serbs, Slovaks against Czechs, Ukrainians against Russians etc. ) They would have met the same destiny as Slavs toward which Nazis did feel animosity if Hitler had won the war.

While you are at it, you might as well mention the fact that Germans had issues with Western and Northern Slavs, not Southern. Mainly because there were territory disputes with Poles and Czechs, not Croats and Serbs.

>allegations of a universal
>Nazi hatred for Slavs is
>actually a noxious piece of
>misinformation spread by our
>common enemies.

This is wishfull thinking.
There is ton of evidence to refute above argument. Labour camps, various quotes of Hitler and other German leaders during World War Two, much higher number of murdered civilians in the East then in the West, different policies in the East and in the West...all these indicate Nazi view of Slavs.

>several Slavic countries sided
>with Nazi Germany, namely
>Bulgaria, Croatia, Slovakia,
>as well as many Ukrainians who
>wanted to escape the
>Soviet/Jewish yoke.

How were Soviets a threat in any of mentioned countries except Ukraine?
Communists were no threat in Yugoslavia, Bulgaria or Chezoslovakia.

>addition, there were many
>Germans of Slavic ancestry in
>the Reich (as there still are)
>and they were not
>discriminated by the Nazi
>regime. On the contrary, there
>were men with Polish and Czech
>last names in the German
>General Staff and in the ranks
>of the Nazi Party.

That is right. Germanised Slavs.

>for the animus was that both
>Czechs and Poles insisted on
>ruling over regions, the
>Sudetenland and Danzig
>Corridor respectively, that
>were inhabited almost
>exclusively by Germans. Those
>Germans had lived in those
>regions for centuries and they
>had never been part of
>Czechoslovakia or Poland
>before.

Right and wrong. Friction was caused by territorial dispute, however Danzig was originally Polish as is most of territory in question. During the Polish Golden age in
17th-18th century, all of disputed territory was Polish.

>to atrocities, unfortunately
>they were committed by German
>troops, but also by every
>combatant nation in that
>apocalyptic war, in many cases
>on a greater scale than by the
>Germans.

That is true.

>And, of course, as Hitler
>explains in "Mein Kampf"
>German enmity toward Russians
>had an even more obvious
>cause: communism. The Russians
>had let themselves be duped by
>Jewish agitators into adopting
>Marxist grotesquerie as their
>state ideology and their
>efforts to export that plague
>was endangering all of
>European civilization.
>Germany's efforts to extirpate
>that cancer were nothing short
>of heroic and deserve the
>admiration of every Aryan man
>and woman, even of Russians
>who by now have realized they
>were in the wrong in World War
>II. Germany only failed in
>their crusade against
>communism because the Western
>democracies, whose ideology is
>closely related to Marxism,
>helped them by instigating war
>against Germany.

I don't know where to start. Geman murdered seven million Russian civilians, and Russians should be glad? Russians did not win because of Western democracies. D-Day was on June 6th, 1944...by then Russians have already won the war. Any Russian praising Hitler is no better then Russian praising Stalin in my view.

Regards,

Vojin

On 04/24/2000 10:56:00 PM, Serb Skinhead wrote:

>Germans applied typical tactic
>of divide and conquer.
>Yugoslavia is the best
>example. Few days before
>invasion, "Poglavnik" Ante
>Pavelic declares independent
>Croatia and Serbia as major
>obstacle to German domination
>of the Balkans is carved up by
>Romania, Hungary, Bulgaria,
>Italy, Albania and so called
>Independent State of Croatia-
>leaving only Belgrade under
>very limited autonomy.

The Germans did not need to apply some sinister plan of 'dividing and conquering.' As the events of the 1990s showed, the constituent nations of Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia were all too eager to secede from those artificial states.

>Those Slavs toward which Germans did
>not feel animosity were Slavs
>which were needed as allies
>for strategic reasons.
>(playing Croats against Serbs,
>Slovaks against Czechs,
>Ukrainians against Russians
>etc. )

Yes, indeed! Hitler regarded friendly Slavs as allies and hostile Slavs as enemies. Pretty similar to the German attitude to everybody else.

>They would have met the
>same destiny as Slavs toward
>which Nazis did feel animosity
>if Hitler had won the war.

And what destiny would this have been? A theory of Slavic genocide is speculative at best, especially if by it you mean the complete extermination of all Slavic peoples.

>While you are at it, you might
>as well mention the fact that
>Germans had issues with
>Western and Northern Slavs,
>not Southern. Mainly because
>there were territory disputes
>with Poles and Czechs, not
>Croats and Serbs.

Yes, once again! Germans had reason to dislike some Slavs, though not others.

>This is wishfull thinking.
>There is ton of evidence to
>refute above argument. Labour
>camps, various quotes of
>Hitler and other German
>leaders during World War Two,
>much higher number of murdered
>civilians in the East then in
>the West, different policies
>in the East and in the
>West...all these indicate Nazi
>view of Slavs.

Many workers from all enemy nations, such as France, Belgium, Greece, the Netherlands, Denmark and Norway were required to perform industrial labor for the German war effort, both in their own countries and in Germany itself. Note that Germany considered the people of the last three countries to be close relations because of their Germanic heritage, but they too were made to toil in German factories. Also, it should be considered that a much higher degree of partisan activity in Eastern than Western Europe can help explain the harsher behavior of the Wehrmacht in the East.
>
>How were Soviets a threat in
>any of mentioned countries
>except Ukraine?
>Communists were no threat in
>Yugoslavia, Bulgaria or
>Chezoslovakia.

Well, apparently you did not follow the link I provided. At any rate, the Soviet Union surely was proven a threat to all of Eastern Europe after the war.

>>addition, there were many
>>Germans of Slavic ancestry in
>>the Reich (as there still are)
>>and they were not
>>discriminated by the Nazi
>>regime. On the contrary, there
>>were men with Polish and Czech
>>last names in the German
>>General Staff and in the ranks
>>of the Nazi Party.
>
>That is right. Germanised
>Slavs.

Yes, Germanized Slavs. What's wrong with that? There are (or at least there were) considerable numbers of Polonized, Russified and Frenchified Germans. The interchange of people among neighboring European nations has always been a fact of life. Besides, if the German dislike for Poles and Czechs had a racial basis, those Germans of Slavic ancestry would have been discriminated even if they were thoroughly Germanized, as Germanized Jews were.

>>for the animus was that both
>>Czechs and Poles insisted on
>>ruling over regions, the
>>Sudetenland and Danzig
>>Corridor respectively, that
>>were inhabited almost
>>exclusively by Germans. Those
>>Germans had lived in those
>>regions for centuries and they
>>had never been part of
>>Czechoslovakia or Poland
>>before.
>
>Right and wrong. Friction was
>caused by territorial dispute,
>however Danzig was originally
>Polish as is most of territory
>in question. During the Polish
>Golden age in
>17th-18th century, all of
>disputed territory was Polish.

And Belgrade was Turkish for a time. Supporting a Polish claim on Danzig despite the fact that the people of the city were almost universally opposed to being part of Poland makes about as much sense as supporting the return of the Serbian capital to Turkish rule.

>>to atrocities, unfortunately
>>they were committed by German
>>troops, but also by every
>>combatant nation in that
>>apocalyptic war, in many cases
>>on a greater scale than by the
>>Germans.
>
>That is true.

You said it.

>>And, of course, as Hitler
>>explains in "Mein Kampf"
>>German enmity toward Russians
>>had an even more obvious
>>cause: communism. The Russians
>>had let themselves be duped by
>>Jewish agitators into adopting
>>Marxist grotesquerie as their
>>state ideology and their
>>efforts to export that plague
>>was endangering all of
>>European civilization.
>>Germany's efforts to extirpate
>>that cancer were nothing short
>>of heroic and deserve the
>>admiration of every Aryan man
>>and woman, even of Russians
>>who by now have realized they
>>were in the wrong in World War
>>II. Germany only failed in
>>their crusade against
>>communism because the Western
>>democracies, whose ideology is
>>closely related to Marxism,
>>helped them by instigating war
>>against Germany.
>
>I don't know where to start.
>Geman murdered seven million
>Russian civilians, and
>Russians should be glad?

Twenty million Russian and Ukrainian civilians died in the 1930s, before the war, as a result of the cruelty and incompetence of the Soviet/Jewish government. I hate to say it but the seven million dead during WWII was actually an improvement over Lazar Kaganovich's Kosher hordes. In addition, I am not sure how much blame the Germans should shoulder for the deaths during the war, as opposed to continued Bolshevik tyranny being responsible. After all, it was Soviet policy to punish any real or perceived collaboration, however trivial, with death, as the Red Army overran previously occupied territories. And I trust that I need not recall Katyn Forest. Remember: history is written by the victors.

>Russians did not win because
>of Western democracies. D-Day
>was on June 6th, 1944...by
>then Russians have already won
>the war.

Yes, but if the Western Allies had not been keeping Germany very busy in the West since 1939, it is quite likely that the Soviet Union would have fallen under the initial assault of Operation Barbarossa or soon thereafter. Also, without the Western Allies providing the Russians with great numbers of valuable equipment and supplies, I must wonder how effective the Red Army would have been.

>Any Russian praising
>Hitler is no better then
>Russian praising Stalin in my
>view.

I am not necessarily suggesting that Russians praise Hitler, but they should acknowledge that he was not solely responsible for WWII. Most of all, however, they should seek inspiration in the great movement that he led as a solution to the problems that ail their country today.


Italicus

"This time the world."
--George Lincoln Rockwell

>The Germans did not need to apply some
>sinister plan of 'dividing and
>conquering.' As the events of the 1990s
>showed, the constituent nations of
>Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia were all
>too eager to secede from those
>artificial states.

Sentiment in late '30s and early '40s cannot be compared to the national feelings of '90s.
50 years of communism has changed everything.
The plan of divide and conquer wasn't difficult to implement because of minor rivalries between various Slavic nations, however it was used by Germans, it is a fact.


>And what destiny would this have been? A
>theory of Slavic genocide is speculative
>at best, especially if by it you mean
>the complete extermination of all Slavic
>peoples.

I do not mean extermination. Did I ever suggest it? It would have been unpleasent no doubt.

>Yes, once again! Germans had reason to
>dislike some Slavs, though not others.

Yes, those with which they had territorial disputed very disliked more then other. I agree with you there.

>Many workers from all enemy nations,
>such as France, Belgium, Greece, the
>Netherlands, Denmark and Norway were
>required to perform industrial labor for
>the German war effort, both in their own
>countries and in Germany itself. Note
>that Germany considered the people of
>the last three countries to be close
>relations because of their Germanic
>heritage, but they too were made to toil
>in German factories. Also, it should be
>considered that a much higher degree of
>partisan activity in Eastern than
>Western Europe can help explain the
>harsher behavior of the Wehrmacht in the
>East.

Yes, from western occupied countries some people had to endure labour work. Comperativley however, it was far more frequent in East. Poland which had no visible partisan activities until the end of war suffered most from labour camps.

>Well, apparently you did not follow the
>link I provided. At any rate, the Soviet
>Union surely was proven a threat to all
>of Eastern Europe after the war.

After the war. Not before the war. Soviet Union followed isolationist policy until World War Two. Stalin replaced Lenin's idea of "global revolution" to strengthening revolution at home ie. five year plans. There is a good reason why Soviets required security in Eastern Europe, and blame for Soviet domination of Eastern Europe is shared with United States.

>Yes, Germanized Slavs. What's wrong with
>that?

Nothing, just varifieng what you were saying.

>And Belgrade was Turkish for a time.
>Supporting a Polish claim on Danzig
>despite the fact that the people of the
>city were almost universally opposed to
>being part of Poland makes about as much
>sense as supporting the return of the
>Serbian capital to Turkish rule.

That is a horrible analogy. Belgrade was Turkish for a while, but it was Austrian and Magyar too. I don't know why you chose Belgrade, but of all Serbian cities that city was under Turkish rule the least. Belgrade was built by Celts...however, modern Belgrade was built by Czar Dusan, and Serbs were always a majority in it. Danzig was built by Poles, and originally was Polish, only taken by force.

>Twenty million Russian and Ukrainian
>civilians died in the 1930s, before the
>war, as a result of the cruelty and
>incompetence of the Soviet/Jewish
>government. I hate to say it but the
>seven million dead during WWII was
>actually an improvement over Lazar
>Kaganovich's Kosher hordes. In addition,
>I am not sure how much blame the Germans
>should shoulder for the deaths during
>the war, as opposed to continued
>Bolshevik tyranny being responsible.
>After all, it was Soviet policy to
>punish any real or perceived
>collaboration, however trivial, with
>death, as the Red Army overran
>previously occupied territories. And I
>trust that I need not recall Katyn
>Forest. Remember: history is written by
>the victors.

Yes, Stalin is a worse murderer then Hitler.
Stalin is epiphemy of evil in my opinion, not Hitler. I even to an extent respect Hitler, however only because of his orders
7 million instead of 20 million were murdered, he should be admired by Russians?

>Yes, but if the Western Allies had not
>been keeping Germany very busy in the
>West since 1939, it is quite likely that
>the Soviet Union would have fallen under
>the initial assault of Operation
>Barbarossa or soon thereafter. Also,
>without the Western Allies providing the
>Russians with great numbers of valuable
>equipment and supplies, I must wonder
>how effective the Red Army would have
>been.

Western supplies to Soviets were a joke. Stalin and Roosvelt at Yalta debated weather all of Western support accumulated to 5 or 12% of all military resources Soviets used in first two years of the war. We don't know for sure what would have happened if there were no units tied down in Western Europe and North Africa...but vast majority of German resources were dedicated to Eastern Front.


Regards,

Vojin

On 04/24/2000 10:56:00 PM, Serb Skinhead wrote:

>Germans applied typical tactic
>of divide and conquer.

Germany united in its defensive war for the protection of the Occident against peripheral, imperialist and colonial powers with everyone who was ready to stand up for Europe's rights.

>playing Croats against Serbs,
>Slovaks against Czechs,
>Ukrainians against Russians
>etc. ) They would have met the
>same destiny as Slavs toward
>which Nazis did feel animosity
>if Hitler had won the war.

That's probably why there were Croatian and even Bosnian-Muslim SS formations and why the Dinaric sub-race (which can also be found within the German population) was held in such high regard.

>While you are at it, you might
>as well mention the fact that
>Germans had issues with
>Western and Northern Slavs,
>not Southern. Mainly because
>there were territory disputes
>with Poles and Czechs, not
>Croats and Serbs.

That's true. The Croats for example didn't steal German territory, nor did they support the historically incorrect side.

>This is wishfull thinking.
>There is ton of evidence to
>refute above argument. Labour
>camps, various quotes of
>Hitler and other German
>leaders during World War Two,

1. The labor camps were necessary to guarantee the survival of Germany. It's obvious that with million of German men on the fronts, someone has to keep the industries and agriculture going.

What's bad about this?

2. And the positive quotes we withhold because they don't fit into the propaganda schemes?

>much higher number of murdered
>civilians in the East then in
>the West, different policies
>in the East and in the
>West...all these indicate Nazi
>view of Slavs.

True, but

a. the East (including the Ukraine and half of Poland) was ruled by Communist criminals, who succeeded to murder millions of people (amongst them primarily Slavs but also Germans and other ethnicities) already before
any war started.

b. Germany's policy towards the east was a direct reaction to the circumstances in the East and the methods used there. One cannot treat criminals and terrorists with silk gloves.

The same applies to yahoos dreaming of a "Socialism in one state" reaching from the Pacific to the Atlantic.

c. Many more civilians died in the East, because of a. and b. and because in general from all sides engaged in the warfare in the East more resources were used.

>Right and wrong. Friction was
>caused by territorial dispute,
>however Danzig was originally
>Polish as is most of territory
>in question. During the Polish
>Golden age in
>17th-18th century, all of
>disputed territory was Polish.

So?

During the 17th century a significant part of today's U.S. was still Indian. European states expanded and shrunk, look at Lithuania.

In that way I can claim half of Europe for Germany, because it either was German at some stage, or ruled by a German family or because German tribes previously settled there (and that includes the disputed territories).

Danzig was 90 % German before the population was driven out (and partly massacred) by Polish and Russian criminals.

The same applies to the other German territory stolen by Poland/Russia in 1945; and (with minor percentages) to the German territory stolen by Poland with the help of French, British and American imperialists in 1919.

>>to atrocities, unfortunately
>>they were committed by German
>>troops, but also by every
>>combatant nation in that
>>apocalyptic war, in many cases
>>on a greater scale than by the
>>Germans.
>
>That is true.

Yes, that's true.

>I don't know where to start.
>Geman murdered seven million
>Russian civilians, and
>Russians should be glad?

The Pole couldn't give me any sources for the 7 million war propaganda, but perhaps you can?

True is that Communist criminals (Jews, Slavs and Mr. Stalin) murdered about 7 million innocent Germans (a. during the expulsion of the 15,000,000 Germans from Germany; b. German soldiers in camps in Russia; c. a good part of the German population in Russia; d. Germans in Soviet camps on German soil).

You will have noticed that I didn't count any civilians dying in war massacres or who died directly or indirectly because of the warfare; nor did I count the crimes of other Slavic nations (such as the ones of the Poles or Serbs) and the crimes committed by the other major Allies (GB, F, USA).

>Russians did not win because
>of Western democracies. D-Day
>was on June 6th, 1944...by
>then Russians have already won
>the war. Any Russian praising
>Hitler is no better then
>Russian praising Stalin in my
>view.

Germany would have crushed Russia if Russia didn't have a. direct support from the West (in the forms of military material and finances) and b. - what is more important - wouldn't have been forced to keep half of Europe occupied in order to prevent the invasion of Europe; don't forget the air- and sea-war, and the other expeditions with whose causes you are familiar...

>Regards,
>
>Vojin

Regards,

Njord



«Svo skyldu goð gjalda, gram reki bönd af löndum, reið séu rögn og Óðinn, rán míns fjár hánum. Fólkmýgi lát flýja, Freyr og Njörðr, af jörðum. Leiðist lofða stríði landás, þann er vé grandar.»

Email: njorth@online.no
ICQ: 15,488,095 · Status: · Add to Contact List · Get ICQ

http://patriot.just.nu/ - Sanningens Arkiv
http://www.propatria.org/ - ProPatria - For Fedrelandet
http://www.sigrdrifa.com/ - The Premier Voice of the Woman
http://www.nationaljournal.org/ - The Fighting Community Against anti-German Politics
http://www.snpa.cjb.net/ - Society for Nordish Physical Anthropology

It seems you definetely hold the German side in your reasonings. Sorry.

I think that Serb Skinhead already showed you the truth, so I will be short.

>And, of course, as Hitler
>explains in "Mein Kampf"
>German enmity toward Russians
>had an even more obvious
>cause: communism.

Read the MK again. In MK, Hitler clearly explains that territories of Central and Eastern Europe are the only place for future German "Lebensraum". This is classical German "Drang nach Osten".

>The Russians
>had let themselves be duped by
>Jewish agitators into adopting
>Marxist grotesquerie as their
>state ideology and their
>efforts to export that plague
>was endangering all of
>European civilization.

Stalin rejected bolshevik ideas of "world revolution" and "export of revolution" in 30s.

>Germany's efforts to extirpate
>that cancer were nothing short
>of heroic and deserve the
>admiration of every Aryan man
>and woman, even of Russians
>who by now have realized they
>were in the wrong in World War
>II.

Really? What percent of Russians think this way, according to your records?

>Germany only failed in
>their crusade against
>communism because the Western
>democracies, whose ideology is
>closely related to Marxism,
>helped them by instigating war
>against Germany.

Russians, not the West won the battle. The West joined the war in 1944, when all hard work was already done by Russians.

>Moreover,
>there is a credible theory
>that Germany was actually
>forced to attack the Soviet
>Union because Stalin was
>planning a massive invasion of
>Western Europe.

This is absolutely incredible theory developed by Western intelligence agencies during the Cold War.

>A Soviet
>general has written a book
>about it.

The book was written by a deserter who deserted to the West in 1978. He was not a general, he was a captain (!) of General Intelligence Administration of the Soviet Army.

>The link below is to
>a hair-raising article
>reviewing the book in the
>National Alliance site.
>
>http://www.natvan.com/national
>-vanguard/115/icebreak.html

Your hair may return to its usual position. At ease! ;-)

>If that theory is true, not
>was only Hitler justified in
>invading the Soviet Union,
>both in military and in moral
>terms, but he and the soldiers
>of the Wehrmacht should be
>considered heroes to all
>Whites everywhere in the
>world, since a Stalinist
>Europe would have meant the
>end of civilization and
>communist oppression for all
>generations to come.

Too much pathos, my friend...

Brat Karamazov, Russia

I want to point out again - there are a lot a of skeletons in our past and we better live them where they are. There is no point to discuss who started WWII and who was right or wrong. The only people who benefit from such discussion are Jews and alike. They managed to made us fight in 2 WWs and now they use the same issue to devide nationally-orientated people. Rather, we have to look for common enemies and measures to take against them HERE and NOW. Frankly, I don't care who the hell started WWI. Rother, I am interested how to stop Jewish and liberal expansion NOW and WHO can be our allies in this fight.
rms1 (Russian)

Well it was only a matter of time before I found this...

1st- Communism was started by a German, and imported by Germans. Jews merely flocked to the idea and profitte off it. The USSR was NOT a threat in Europe before the war because not only did Stalin reject interventionalist policies, but the Red Army had taken a beating from the Polish army in the 20's which made them rethink the idea of expanding.

2nd- Gdansk has been Polish much longer than it was German so use the right name thank you.

3rd- 20 million Russians perished at the hands of the Germans. The 7 million are civilians while the remaining 13 million were servicemen. I also believe that the 13 million were Soviet citizens so the amount of Russians duped into following the Nazis may not be counted in that figure.

4th- Even today, the West still has an elitist additude to Slavic countries. What does it tell you when they simply say to the Serbs that Kosovo belongs to the Albanians and then tells Russia they cannot interfere?

5th- As I said in another forum, life is not so simple for the Slavic race. We have no common enemies because there are none. We must seek to reach understanding and brotherhood among as many Slavic peoples as possible and then we will be able to fight attackers on a united front.

Wojciech

Danzig is nothing more than a band thank you.

On 4/24/00 12:26:00 AM, Italicus wrote:
>It is true that Nazi Germany
>did feel a great deal of
>animosity towards some Slavs,
>though not all. The
>allegations of a universal
>Nazi hatred for Slavs is
>actually a noxious piece of
>misinformation spread by our
>common enemies.

What do you mean, "our common enemies"?

In fact,
>several Slavic countries sided
>with Nazi Germany, namely
>Bulgaria, Croatia, Slovakia,
>as well as many Ukrainians who
>wanted to escape the
>Soviet/Jewish yoke.

Bulgaria had little choice. Slovakia was the left-over bits of Czechoslovakia, destroyed by the Nazis. Croatia was a province of pre-war Yugoslavia, not a country but a Nazi creation. And the Ukrainians who initially welcomed the Nazis soon learned their mistake.

In
>addition, there were many
>Germans of Slavic ancestry in
>the Reich (as there still are)
>and they were not
>discriminated by the Nazi
>regime. On the contrary, there
>were men with Polish and Czech
>last names in the German
>General Staff and in the ranks
>of the Nazi Party.

There were many with Jewish surnames too. I take it this indicates the Nazis had no quarrel with the Jews.

The reason
>for the animus was that both
>Czechs and Poles insisted on
>ruling over regions, the
>Sudetenland and Danzig
>Corridor respectively, that
>were inhabited almost
>exclusively by Germans.

They also insisted on ruling over regions inhabited exclusively by Slavs, but land which Hitler coveted for Lebensraum. Heard of the Drang nach Osten?

Those
>Germans had lived in those
>regions for centuries and they
>had never been part of
>Czechoslovakia or Poland
>before.

I think an appeal to history would fall on deaf ears. The name "Prussia" is Slavic, as are Pomerania and Silesia. Those areas were inhabited by Slavs up until the beginning of the 20th century; by Wends and Sorbs, who - as any good German will tell you - are not Germans, but Slavs.

Wilson's
>'14 Points' had proclaimed the
>right of self-determination to
>all peoples, but these Germans
>were unfairly denied that
>right because of the
>territorial ambitions of
>Poland and Czechoslovakia.

Ah yes, the Munich agreement was signed to curb the terrtitorial ambitions of Poland and Czechoslovakia, who were all set to march on Berlin, then sieze the Ruhr.

The
>Germans were justified to
>resent this double standard
>and their desire to take
>revenge was only natural. As
>to atrocities, unfortunately
>they were committed by German
>troops, but also by every
>combatant nation in that
>apocalyptic war, in many cases
>on a greater scale than by the
>Germans.

Well, you yourself point out that that's only natural. Seems the Germans had it coming to them - your argument, not mine.

>
>And, of course, as Hitler
>explains in "Mein Kampf"
>German enmity toward Russians
>had an even more obvious
>cause: communism. The Russians
>had let themselves be duped by
>Jewish agitators into adopting
>Marxist grotesquerie as their
>state ideology and their
>efforts to export that plague
>was endangering all of
>European civilization.

Let's lay this ghost. Many Jews were enthusiastic Bolsheviks. But far more Russians were. The Russian peasants had themselves to blame for Communism. But by your argument, it's okay for some future US government to eliminate the Whites here, because we'd let ourselves be duped by the Jewish media.... In fact, if being duped were an argument for genocide, the world would be entirely free of humans.

>Germany's efforts to extirpate
>that cancer were nothing short
>of heroic and deserve the
>admiration of every Aryan man
>and woman, even of Russians
>who by now have realized they
>were in the wrong in World War
>II.

Show me a Russian who agrees with this absurd statement, and I'll show you a real dupe.

Germany only failed in
>their crusade against
>communism because the Western
>democracies, whose ideology is
>closely related to Marxism,
>helped them by instigating war
>against Germany.

Please explain the close (but to me completely invisible) relationship between the various forms of Western democracy, and Marxism.

Moreover,
>there is a credible theory
>that Germany was actually
>forced to attack the Soviet
>Union because Stalin was
>planning a massive invasion of
>Western Europe.

There may be such an hypothesis - it certainly doesn't deserve to be called a theory. It's perhaps credible, but not to anyone with an IQ above room temperature.

>If that theory is true, not
>was only Hitler justified in
>invading the Soviet Union,
>both in military and in moral
>terms, but he and the soldiers
>of the Wehrmacht should be
>considered heroes to all
>Whites everywhere in the
>world, since a Stalinist
>Europe would have meant the
>end of civilization and
>communist oppression for all
>generations to come.
>

It would be extremely difficult to persuade the kin of those Soviet citizens murdered by the Nazis that Hitler was a hero. Try it some time: visit Moscow and tell them they should worship Hitler. Tell them in Italian, though, because you've little chance of being understood, and so may live to tell the tale.

And speaking in military terms, what sort of clown would invade Russia? If Hitler had made just this one mistake, he would have lost the war. But of course, he made sure he would by making many other mistakes too. The worst mistake, of course, was writing his book before he'd conquered the world, unlike the true greats such as Caesar.

>In light of the facts above,

There are no facts above, so this is a dim light indeed.

>it must be concluded that
>Germany's disputes with
>several, though not all, of
>the Slavic peoples had
>geopolitical, and not racial,
>origins.
>

We argue that because everyone hates the Jews, the fault is in the Jews. Can we therefore conclude that if everyone fights with the Germans, the fault must lie with the Germans?

>Believe me, I do not favor
>Germans over Slavs.

Nobody who reads your even-handed and factual treatise would think otherwise for even a moment.

If their
>historical roles had been
>reversed, I would heartily
>support Slavs rather than
>Germans, but in this case
>Germany was right and most of
>the Slavic nations were wrong.
>

Wrong about what?

>
>Italicus
>
>"This time the world."
>--George Lincoln Rockwell
>--Caligula
>--Genghis Khan
>--Lenin
>--Jesus
>--Muhammad
>---...

Heraklides

On 4/27/00 8:40:00 PM, wildnfree wrote:
>On 4/24/00 12:26:00 AM, Italicus wrote:

>
>What do you mean, "our common enemies"?

I think he means those wily Jews!


>In fact,
>>several Slavic countries sided
>>with Nazi Germany, namely
>>Bulgaria, Croatia, Slovakia,
>>as well as many Ukrainians who
>>wanted to escape the
>>Soviet/Jewish yoke.


>Bulgaria had little choice. Slovakia was
>the left-over bits of Czechoslovakia,
>destroyed by the Nazis. Croatia was a
>province of pre-war Yugoslavia, not a
>country but a Nazi creation. And the
>Ukrainians who initially welcomed the
>Nazis soon learned their mistake.

You forgot to point out that countries like Slovakia, Bulgaria, and Croatia were not under Soviet rule before or during the war.
Otherwise an excellent point.


>The reason
>>for the animus was that both
>>Czechs and Poles insisted on
>>ruling over regions, the
>>Sudetenland and Danzig
>>Corridor respectively, that
>>were inhabited almost
>>exclusively by Germans.
>
>They also insisted on ruling over
>regions inhabited exclusively by Slavs,
>but land which Hitler coveted for
>Lebensraum. Heard of the Drang nach
>Osten?
>
>Those
>>Germans had lived in those
>>regions for centuries and they
>>had never been part of
>>Czechoslovakia or Poland
>>before.
>
>I think an appeal to history would fall
>on deaf ears. The name "Prussia" is
>Slavic, as are Pomerania and Silesia.
>Those areas were inhabited by Slavs up
>until the beginning of the 20th century;
>by Wends and Sorbs, who - as any good
>German will tell you - are not Germans,
>but Slavs.

Exactly. Areas like Prussia had been inhabited for far longer periods of time by Slavs. The only way Germany was able to take this area is by invading the Polish empire at the same time as the Russians and the Austrians.


>Wilson's
>>'14 Points' had proclaimed the
>>right of self-determination to
>>all peoples, but these Germans
>>were unfairly denied that
>>right because of the
>>territorial ambitions of
>>Poland and Czechoslovakia.
>
>Ah yes, the Munich agreement was signed
>to curb the terrtitorial ambitions of
>Poland and Czechoslovakia, who were all
>set to march on Berlin, then sieze the
>Ruhr.

After that, we Polish were going to take over the United States. We invaded Chicago but were unable to break out of this small pocket that we still occupy today.

> The
>>Germans were justified to
>>resent this double standard
>>and their desire to take
>>revenge was only natural. As
>>to atrocities, unfortunately
>>they were committed by German
>>troops, but also by every
>>combatant nation in that
>>apocalyptic war, in many cases
>>on a greater scale than by the
>>Germans.
>
>Well, you yourself point out that that's
>only natural. Seems the Germans had it
>coming to them - your argument, not
>mine.

How did the Polish, the Czechs, or most Slavs deserve any revenge from the Germans? Even the Russians only fought the Germans because the GERMANS invaded Russia!


>>And, of course, as Hitler
>>explains in "Mein Kampf"
>>German enmity toward Russians
>>had an even more obvious
>>cause: communism. The Russians
>>had let themselves be duped by
>>Jewish agitators into adopting
>>Marxist grotesquerie as their
>>state ideology and their
>>efforts to export that plague
>>was endangering all of
>>European civilization.
>
>Let's lay this ghost. Many Jews were
>enthusiastic Bolsheviks. But far more
>Russians were. The Russian peasants had
>themselves to blame for Communism. But
>by your argument, it's okay for some
>future US government to eliminate the
>Whites here, because we'd let ourselves
>be duped by the Jewish media.... In
>fact, if being duped were an argument
>for genocide, the world would be
>entirely free of humans.

Jews are generally a majority so like any minority they must stick together. Many of them followed the Bosheviks and later gained high positions of leadership but were not behind the Revolution. Communism is a GERMAN idea.


>>Germany's efforts to extirpate
>>that cancer were nothing short
>>of heroic and deserve the
>>admiration of every Aryan man
>>and woman, even of Russians
>>who by now have realized they
>>were in the wrong in World War
>>II.
>
>Show me a Russian who agrees with this
>absurd statement, and I'll show you a
>real dupe.

I think that some of the Russians that fought for the Germans are still heroes because they truly believed that they were fighting for Russian independence. In the end, they had no allies. They could not go back to the Soviets and the Germans had betrayed them. As for the Russians killed by the Nationalist Russians, the blame for these deaths should fall on the Germans and Stalin. Mostly on the Germans though.

>Germany only failed in
>>their crusade against
>>communism because the Western
>>democracies, whose ideology is
>>closely related to Marxism,
>>helped them by instigating war
>>against Germany.
>
>Please explain the close (but to me
>completely invisible) relationship
>between the various forms of Western
>democracy, and Marxism.
>
>Moreover,
>>there is a credible theory
>>that Germany was actually
>>forced to attack the Soviet
>>Union because Stalin was
>>planning a massive invasion of
>>Western Europe.
>
>There may be such an hypothesis - it
>certainly doesn't deserve to be called a
>theory. It's perhaps credible, but not
>to anyone with an IQ above room
>temperature.

THERE IS NO POSSIBLITY OF THIS! USSR failed to invade western Europe because they were stopped by the Polish.
Also, in the years before Barbarossa, the Soviets were very inactive. Even as Germans formations were building up on the border, Stalin made no preparation to fight invasion. This is proven by the confusion that ensued on the Russian side during the start of the campaign. Remember that the invasion force was the biggest of WW2. I think Stalin would've noticed it except he trusted Hitler.

>>If that theory is true, not
>>was only Hitler justified in
>>invading the Soviet Union,
>>both in military and in moral
>>terms, but he and the soldiers
>>of the Wehrmacht should be
>>considered heroes to all
>>Whites everywhere in the
>>world, since a Stalinist
>>Europe would have meant the
>>end of civilization and
>>communist oppression for all
>>generations to come.
>>
>
>It would be extremely difficult to
>persuade the kin of those Soviet
>citizens murdered by the Nazis that
>Hitler was a hero. Try it some time:
>visit Moscow and tell them they should
>worship Hitler. Tell them in Italian,
>though, because you've little chance of
>being understood, and so may live to
>tell the tale.
>
>And speaking in military terms, what
>sort of clown would invade Russia? If
>Hitler had made just this one mistake,
>he would have lost the war. But of
>course, he made sure he would by making
>many other mistakes too. The worst
>mistake, of course, was writing his book
>before he'd conquered the world, unlike
>the true greats such as Caesar.

There have been several clowns that invaded Russia. The true German despises the Slav because without us they would easily be the biggest power in Europe. To destroy Russia is to destroy the symbol of Slavic power. This is what Hitler was after.


>>In light of the facts above,
>
>There are no facts above, so this is a
>dim light indeed.
>
>>it must be concluded that
>>Germany's disputes with
>>several, though not all, of
>>the Slavic peoples had
>>geopolitical, and not racial,
>>origins.
>>
>
>We argue that because everyone hates the
>Jews, the fault is in the Jews. Can we
>therefore conclude that if everyone
>fights with the Germans, the fault must
>lie with the Germans?
>
>>Believe me, I do not favor
>>Germans over Slavs.
>
>Nobody who reads your even-handed and
>factual treatise would think otherwise
>for even a moment.
>
>If their
>>historical roles had been
>>reversed, I would heartily
>>support Slavs rather than
>>Germans, but in this case
>>Germany was right and most of
>>the Slavic nations were wrong.
>>
>
>Wrong about what?
>
Those historical roles stated are untrue so they are invalid.

Wojciech,

Well, the germanic races are definatelly superior to the inferior slavic races, so I'd like to ask the Serbian to stop pasting the original message on over and over again!

Anyway, Soviet Russia was hell!
I'd like to ask you Vojin where this idea of Danzig as a polish city comes from, Danzig was a city of the Prussians for tens of decades, the Prussians were the the predecessors of the old Germany which was destroyed 55 years ago.
Even in the 1200s the area surrounding Danzig belonged to Pommern, a area built by people who were of nordic(germanic) origin.

So Danzig is truly an are of Germanic origin not of Slavic.

Heil unser Führer, heil Hitler dir!

Nordri

Pommern is the German form of Pomerania. What could this possibly mean in German? Nothing.

But in Slavonic, it means "Along the sea" - "Po Morze", as a Pole would put it. Now, why did this Germanic people give their country a Slavonic name?

And as for Danzig being Prussian - indeed it was. What does the name "Prussia" mean in German? Nothing. But in Slavonic, it means "Alongside Russia". The Prussians were Slavs.

But that is beside the point. Germany brought about the downfall of Russia by sending Lenin there as a poisoned bullet. Lenin's successor brought about the downfall of Germany. That much is history.

In future, we Slavs and Germans must hang together, or we shall assuredly hang separately. (Apologies, Ben, for stealing a little of your thunder. But you get to keep the lightning.)

By the way, Nordri, on which side was Iceland in WWII? I bet all the Hitlerites in Iceland had to swim to join their Fuehrer, or remain in Iceland as outlaws.

Heraklides

Heraklides,

I have read that Prussians was Slavs. Sorry, but that is bullshit! Prussians was Balts, like Lithuanians and Latvians (two still alive Baltic nations). Your explanation of Prussia on Russian is wrong. Prus or Prusak on Russian means cockroach. Russians called them so because hated them . Prussians made many trouble. Then German crusaders occupied their territory and assimilated, but kept name of Prussian.

Legionaar

On 05/08/2000 10:03:00 PM, wildnfree wrote:

>The Prussians were Slavs.

In application of your theory all Mississippians are Indians then and we can ignore all the additional evidence proving the contrary?

>In future, we Slavs and
>Germans must hang together, or
>we shall assuredly hang
>separately.

I can hang "together" with all Slavs, even with the Czechs and Poles.

The latter one's would have to apologize for their crimes and to give back the robbed territory, though.

In that case we'll be very reasonable when the question of additional financial recompensation will be discussed.

>By the way, Nordri, on which
>side was Iceland in WWII? I
>bet all the Hitlerites in
>Iceland had to swim to join
>their Fuehrer, or remain in
>Iceland as outlaws.

On which side was America in WW2?

>Heraklides

Regards,

Njord


«Svo skyldu goð gjalda, gram reki bönd af löndum, reið séu rögn og Óðinn, rán míns fjár hánum. Fólkmýgi lát flýja, Freyr og Njörðr, af jörðum. Leiðist lofða stríði landás, þann er vé grandar.»

Email: njorth@online.no
ICQ: 15,488,095 · Status: · Add to Contact List · Get ICQ

http://patriot.just.nu/ - Sanningens Arkiv
http://www.propatria.org/ - ProPatria - For Fedrelandet
http://www.sigrdrifa.com/ - The Premier Voice of the Woman
http://www.nationaljournal.org/ - The Fighting Community Against anti-German Politics
http://www.snpa.cjb.net/ - Society for Nordish Physical Anthropology

On 05/08/2000 12:53:00 PM, Nordri wrote:
>Well, the germanic races are
>definatelly superior to the
>inferior slavic races, so I'd
>like to ask the Serbian to
>stop pasting the original
>message on over and over
>again!

On what basis do you make this assertion? The Slavic peoples are largely Indo-European (like the Germans). In the Slavic countries one may find people who look more "Aryan" than many Germans. The Russians have contributed far more to Western civilization than the peoples of Scandinavia. Where is the Scandinavian Tchaikovsky, Gorki, Tolstoy, or Dostoyevsky?

Why haven't the Scandinavian countries matched the cultural success of the northern Italians (a Mediterranean/Nordic mix)? Why haven't the Scandinavians produced a Cervantes, Picasso, or a Velazquez? (Okay, so there's Munch).

Why do people prefer to visit Paris, Milan, and Barcelona over northern European cities?

-Visigoth

Topic:	Germans and Slavs in WWII: A Neutral Perspective (16 of 17), Read 3 times
Conf:	Stormfront Europe
From:	Njord
Date:	Wednesday, May 10, 2000 02:08 PM

On 04/28/2000 12:34:00 PM, Wojtek wrote:
>THERE IS NO POSSIBLITY OF THIS! USSR
>failed to invade western Europe because
>they were stopped by the Polish.

By the Poles with their septic tanks? =)

Regards,

Njord


«Svo skyldu goð gjalda, gram reki bönd af löndum, reið séu rögn og Óðinn, rán míns fjár hánum. Fólkmýgi lát flýja, Freyr og Njörðr, af jörðum. Leiðist lofða stríði landás, þann er vé grandar.»

Email: njorth@online.no
ICQ: 15,488,095 · Status: · Add to Contact List · Get ICQ

http://patriot.just.nu/ - Sanningens Arkiv
http://www.propatria.org/ - ProPatria - For Fedrelandet
http://www.sigrdrifa.com/ - The Premier Voice of the Woman
http://www.nationaljournal.org/ - The Fighting Community Against anti-German Politics
http://www.snpa.cjb.net/ - Society for Nordish Physical Anthropology

It has been said in this thread that communism came from Germany, and therefore was German.

The founder of Marxism was _Karl Marx_, who was Jewish. Communism was Jewish from its inception! From the 19th century and into the 20th century the movement was filled with Jewish ranks (even in modern times one may find plenty kike Marxists).

Let's not forget that it was a movement designed *specifically* for the benefit of Jews, and not for Aryans. The Jews are the masters of deceit.

One must keep in mind that Marxism has evolved into the degenerate ideology of Political Correctness. The Jews have been the greatest cultural proponents of this ideology (and I say this with no exaggeration).

Stephen Jay Gould, Leon Kamin, Franz Boas, and Betty Freidan, were/are Jews! And the list goes on and on. Anyone interested should check out (http://jewwatch.com).

-Visigoth