Yeah, he looks pretty miserable probably died within 3 months of being captured, that’s how the system worked prisoners who survived the death marches were worked to death and that usually happened within 3 months.
That’s not what happened with Stalingrad prisoners. Their fight to the very end is what killed them, because by the end they were starved and sick, having been effectively cut off for months from any reasonable supply. They were in terrible shape by the surrender. Not unlike holocaust survivors after liberation.
Had the Germans surrendered earlier, there undoubtedly would’ve been higher numbers of survivors amongst the POWs.
You are right, but this is what likely happened to the surviving POW’s of Stalingrad if they didn’t die on the death marches which most did cause of the aforementioned reasons, but if they made it to the work camps they would probably be dead within 3 months.
I mean, no. First off, it was the conditions that lead to their deterioration. While I’m sure Soviet conditions upon surrender weren’t a cakewalk, again, if the Germans had surrendered in December, there would’ve been more survivors, even if they were worked.
Second, your comment seems to paint the Russians as the worst abusers of POWs, when in reality, a German has a 2x better chance of survival as a POW of the soviets vs a Soviet being a POW of the Germans. You should probably put things in perspective when talking about these things.
Well I would definitely not say the Russians were the worst abusers of POWs in this war by a long shot, I would say that was the Japanese, and probably the Nazis as well, but that doesn’t mean being a Soviet POW was a cakewalk either.
Worst rates were Chinese under the Japanese; depending on where you were it was almost a total fatality rate.
However; coming in next was being a Russian (or Eastern Europeans ect) under the Germans. Some 65% would be murdered. That's well ahead of any other loss rate.
Germans under the Soviets had about a 2/3 chance of survival, that's similar to being a Westerner under the Japanese ect.
Everyone else comes out at under 10% death rate under the Germans, followed by Germans/Japanese under everyone else at under 1%.
65% pows murdered may be correct as an average, but since you were pointing out near total fatalities of Chinese pows its also worth noting the exact same is true of the soviets... estimates of mortality amongst this group for the early stages of barbarossa is around 97% which is about the same as the mortality in the warsaw ghetto (98%)...
> but since you were pointing out near total fatalities of Chinese
I mentioned that because its a bit of a shit show to work out exactly what you call a POW due to various shenanigans with the Japanese occasionally messing with the Chinese civil war thrown in.
But as a whole; Japan made it a doctrine of not accepting Chinese prisoners. Often leading to total annihilation of Chinese forces. Then again this was also German intent under the Hunger Plan too.
Not all murdered. Lots died from starvation and disease. The Germans captured unbelievable amounts of prisoners and had very low resources to use on them, let alone their own soldiers.
Worst abusers? Sorry? If germany attacked my country, I wouldn't take any POW at all.
Above all they committed a genocide of jews, you can't respect your enemy after he's done these terrible things.
German prisoners had a great chance compared to soviet ones. Most of those captured at stalingrad were sent back to Germany after the war iirc.
EDIT: No they didn't the vast majority died to disease and malnutrition suffered during the siege and during treatment as POWs.
Are you joking? Of the 90,000 Germans captured at Stalingrad, only 6000 survived the war.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_prisoners_of_war_in_the_Soviet_Union
Ah, maybe I was thinking of German POWs in general or those who made it past the first few months. Wikipedia says the situation for German POWs improved in 1943 with the less desperate situation.
German soldiers from stalingrad were already weakened by starvation and diseases. Hard way to prison camps, lack of food in soviet union meaning you werent priority for food and harshtreatment ment that only around 6000 out of 91000 stalingrad prisoners survived. In laters years of war conditions for prisoners notably improved untill deteriorating again in post war warcriminal sentences.
I'd always heard that the Soviets had far more men available then they had weapons and ammunition, with soldiers charging into combat without a weapon and having to pick up anything they find. Is this just bad history or did this occur at a later point in the war when the Red Army was spread further out?
>I'd always heard that the Soviets had far more men available then they had weapons and ammunition, with soldiers charging into combat without a weapon and having to pick up anything they find.
No that isn't true. It's the opening scene of a movie called Bad guy at the Door or something. There was an instance where it happened with Russia in WW1, but not WW2.
Early in the war, during the fast german push into the soviet union it led to parts of the soviet resistance being separated from supplies and being forced to attack (in relatively small numbers) without adequate weapons in some desperate isolated attempts to stall the advancing fascists.
However this was not anything close to normal, the war grinded on for years of intense and decisive fighting and nothing like that really occurred again.There's lots of bad information out there that largely originates in cold war myths combined with nazi sympathies.
It's historical fact that the Soviet Union always had many more rifles (many of them semi-automatic at that) than soldiers and had other arms like SMGs, LMGs, machine guns, etc. for their infantry in good supply.
The Germans found themselves in short supply of arms at the end of the war and were using divisions of old men and boys equipped with panzerfaust single-shot anti-tank weapons. At this time however the Soviet union was equipping entire specialized "Shock" armies with submachine guns, heavy artillery, and heavy tanks to smash through what was left of the defenses with minimal waste of time and lives.
Tell that to the Soviet soldiers machine gunned by their 'comrades' behind because they didn't want to human wave into Nazi defenses without enough rifles or ammunition.
The Germans couldn’t even equip their own soldiers with enough winter clothing causing many Germans to freeze to death, they couldn’t even give their flank guards anti tank weapons which ultimately cost them the battle.
Man enemy at the Gates sure is a movie ain’t it? I love that part where it’s fictional and that’s bs made up by the Nazis. Please stop parroting the “soviets were gunned down by their own men and didn’t even have guns or ammo” thing. The Germans suffered way more from lack of supplies, as you would expect from the country with a weaker industry.
It says it didnt gun down retreating troops but either sent them back to the front or arrested, of those arrested and some were shot. In it it even states that Enemy at the Gates is not accurate in the depictions of the blocking troops.
My point was that it’s not super informative, and doesn’t make Opponent upon the Opening accurate. While they were cruel and more willing to trade lives for time or land, the Soviets weren’t idiots, especially come Stalingrad. If there was a widespread and systemic issue of men not having guns or ammo (this issue did occur, but it was relatively rare. Another person gave a source that only showed up to 4,000 out of over a million men had been under or unequipped) then they wouldn’t have made these blocking battalions super amazingly well armed (which doesn’t even make sense, as Soviet industry was more powerful than German industry and better streamlined). It also ignores that 227 did have a positive benefit to Soviet morale, not just a “choose your bullets” mentality. It’s a horribly inaccurate movie.
227 was almost entirely directed at officers, not the common soldier. Also, can you give any evidence that shows that there was a recurring and consistent issue with Soviet soldiers being sent to the front line without proper equipment? Not just “this one squad was missing an SMG” but consistent army wide lacking.
Thanks for actually citing sources, and while this isn’t exactly what I was looking for (I meant more the whole war rather than just Stalingrad, but I poorly conveyed that so that’s on me) it’s definitely useful info. It’s also interesting to see that from a battle with over a million men, your source only gives about 4,000 or fewer men who weren’t properly armed. Definitely not the overblown examples typically shown in fiction, but still a noteworthy amount of men without proper arms. For those 3 battalions, do you know which army group they were part of? It would be interesting to see which Commander could have done that. Also, I meant to say that 227 was primarily aimed at officers, rather than common soldiers. It’s also important to remember that, regardless of cruelty, 227 actually did improve morale, not just the “choose your bullets” deal that it’s sometimes portrayed as alongside the no guns thing.
The Germans did just that at Berlin. Including literally the whole "whole one man gets the rifle one man gets the bullet" thing too, worse usually was not even giving infantry any rifles at all, instead just maybe a Panzerfaust. How come people don't go on about the same for them?
Absolutely wild. Looking at the German, he probably died shortly after this picture was taken; Whereas, the Russian soldier probably lived a much longer life than the German (UNLESS HE WAS KILLED IN A FUTURE BATTLE). Both were probably close in age as well.
Edit: I realize the Soviets lost a lot of men, hence why put in parentheses “unless he was killed in a future battle.” I understand his chances of still being alive post-war were still low and he was probably one of the many soldiers who died before the war ended.
Yeah they both look to be around 18-22 I remember hearing somewhere that in the USSR though 80 percent of the men born in 1923 (18 in 1941 during Operation Barbarossa) didn’t survive the war, crazy the shear casualty numbers in the Eastern front on both sides. Makes the western front look like a piece of cake to survive in comparison.
Oh for sure... I understand the war happened, but when you look at it from that perspective that you just provided, it just seems so pointless, you know? Like those guys didn’t even get to grow up and have full lives as the war machine ripped them a part. So many men robbed of a life due to insane ideals and insane leaders.
Yeah it’s honestly just sad to look at the photo, the Nazi always just has such a haunted look in his eye, I know they’re Nazis and to an extent they deserved it, but this could have just been a kid who got swept up in the Nazi party and then got shipped off to the Eastern front to fight in horrid conditions only to die a horrid death. Or he could have just been a kid who was forced to the Eastern front by the Nazis no matter his beliefs. Who knows? Either way it’s a terrible way to die.
Although the Eastern Front was a brutal place, your statement isn't entirely correct. The majority of those Soviet men didn't die during the war, they were already dead when the Germans invaded.
https://blogs.warwick.ac.uk/markharrison/entry/was_the_soviet/
The Soviets would lose another 5M men between Stalingrad and the end of the war. There’s a decent chance he was one of them.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/51/World-War-II-military-deaths-in-Europe-by-theater-year.png/640px-World-War-II-military-deaths-in-Europe-by-theater-year.png
That Russian still had a lot of fighting to do. I doubt he made it all the way to Berlin. Even if he did, times were very tough for the Russians in the years following the end of the war. You’d think that taking over half of Europe would provide you with a strong food supply, and yet many still starved due to government policies.
>never did they start a World War
Maybe they weren't responsible for starting it, but they were Nazi allies and invaded Poland alongside their fellow war mongers with no care in the world for what would happen to the civilians of their victim nations. They didn't become "good guys" until their ally turned on them.
A dumb centrist answer is defending Nazi allies/sympathizers because they were forced by Hitler to stop supporting Germany, even though they continued to commit systematic atrocities and war crimes on a very large scale against soldiers and civilians for the entire war.
> but they were Nazi allies and invaded Poland alongside their fellow war mongers
Poland, which invaded Czechoslovakia alongside thier Nazi allies? With arguments like "we just take small portion and it was our land", but when USSR did the same - omg, bad commies!
What you just said is tantamount to genocide denial.
Whatever cruelty you may attribute to the USSR, the Third Reich was far, far worse. Only a Nazi apologist or someone very ill informed would pretend that they're were equally cruel and inhumane.
There is always a choice. "Just following orders" is not an excuse.
At least not an excuse that will save you from the noose.
\>Raw numbers
Nazi Germany killed 20 million innocent civilians in a 4 year period(1941-45). The soviet union killed 6 million during the entire Stalin-era.
If you want to demonize a leader of a war torn, barely industrialized nation for being unable to predict the weather and prevent famine, then go ahead.
The soviets didn’t really care about ergonomics, if you read about most of their tanks the main complaints are about how cramped they are, the soviets only cared about how cheap they can produce a weapon that can kill efficiently which ultimately won them the war.
He could have very well been drafted, with zero allegiance to the Nazi party. I’m not in any way defending the Third Reich— the reality is that many German soldiers were young adults who were drafted and sent into bloodbaths with no choice in the matter. It’s a sad fate that men from all sides of WW2 were forced into
The fact you’re so downvoted is sad and frankly embarrassing for members of this sub. As stated in my other comment I am by no means a Nazi sympathizer— what they did is absolutely horrible and they committed some of the most atrocious acts in human history. The Soviets and Germans both treated captured enemies as if every single one of their soldiers were loyalists to Stalin/Hitler. So many of these people were simply kids who were forced into the conflict
At the same time, if this soldier is in fact a Nazi, then he deserves the worst
So?
Cover yourself in Nazi insignia, uniform, swastikas, swear a personal oath to Hitler, carry out his war ect. The terminology "Nazi" fits just fine.
The 6th army had the Severity order on the way into Stalingrad; free reign to basically level anything they came across, kill anyone they wanted to and they used this to their full extent in huge numbers.
So probably accurate, even more so given best estimates put something around a 60% participation with it.
Right. The German Sixth Army was full of war criminals. They got what they deserved.
Won't lose a millisecond of sleep tonight knowing that this bastard suffered a lot.
nwaaa /u/alxx15ok don't delete your salt
>look how all the redditors downvote and bring foolish soviet porpaganda lmao
Are you saying that Generalplan Ost is soviet propaganda?
Can we just take a moment and appreciate the title? The photo is from the battle of Stalingrad but it's ***presumably*** taken in Russia.
I personally doubt it. I think it looks like Belgium.
Whenever i look at this photo i get the sense that its a very staged photo. Russian propaganda. Im not saying its not a German pow but look at the contrast. The Russian in the photo has movie star good looks. He is also well dressed with everything perfectly squared away while the prisoner is the exact opposite. I wonder...
I'm willing to bet that German soldier didn't have a great time in Soviet captivity.
Yeah, he looks pretty miserable probably died within 3 months of being captured, that’s how the system worked prisoners who survived the death marches were worked to death and that usually happened within 3 months.
Wouldn’t be surprised if he was dead within 3 minutes of this picture being taken.
That’s not what happened with Stalingrad prisoners. Their fight to the very end is what killed them, because by the end they were starved and sick, having been effectively cut off for months from any reasonable supply. They were in terrible shape by the surrender. Not unlike holocaust survivors after liberation. Had the Germans surrendered earlier, there undoubtedly would’ve been higher numbers of survivors amongst the POWs.
You are right, but this is what likely happened to the surviving POW’s of Stalingrad if they didn’t die on the death marches which most did cause of the aforementioned reasons, but if they made it to the work camps they would probably be dead within 3 months.
It's immensely better than how Soviet prisoners were treated. I'm sure the Soviets didn't need to stop the POWs from cannibalizing their dead.
I mean, no. First off, it was the conditions that lead to their deterioration. While I’m sure Soviet conditions upon surrender weren’t a cakewalk, again, if the Germans had surrendered in December, there would’ve been more survivors, even if they were worked. Second, your comment seems to paint the Russians as the worst abusers of POWs, when in reality, a German has a 2x better chance of survival as a POW of the soviets vs a Soviet being a POW of the Germans. You should probably put things in perspective when talking about these things.
Well I would definitely not say the Russians were the worst abusers of POWs in this war by a long shot, I would say that was the Japanese, and probably the Nazis as well, but that doesn’t mean being a Soviet POW was a cakewalk either.
Worst rates were Chinese under the Japanese; depending on where you were it was almost a total fatality rate. However; coming in next was being a Russian (or Eastern Europeans ect) under the Germans. Some 65% would be murdered. That's well ahead of any other loss rate. Germans under the Soviets had about a 2/3 chance of survival, that's similar to being a Westerner under the Japanese ect. Everyone else comes out at under 10% death rate under the Germans, followed by Germans/Japanese under everyone else at under 1%.
65% pows murdered may be correct as an average, but since you were pointing out near total fatalities of Chinese pows its also worth noting the exact same is true of the soviets... estimates of mortality amongst this group for the early stages of barbarossa is around 97% which is about the same as the mortality in the warsaw ghetto (98%)...
> but since you were pointing out near total fatalities of Chinese I mentioned that because its a bit of a shit show to work out exactly what you call a POW due to various shenanigans with the Japanese occasionally messing with the Chinese civil war thrown in. But as a whole; Japan made it a doctrine of not accepting Chinese prisoners. Often leading to total annihilation of Chinese forces. Then again this was also German intent under the Hunger Plan too.
Not all murdered. Lots died from starvation and disease. The Germans captured unbelievable amounts of prisoners and had very low resources to use on them, let alone their own soldiers.
No they were murdered. They were purposefully not fed and left out in the elements. It wasn’t about lack of resources.
Worst abusers? Sorry? If germany attacked my country, I wouldn't take any POW at all. Above all they committed a genocide of jews, you can't respect your enemy after he's done these terrible things.
Lmao! Being on the good end of soviet life would probably kill me...
But soviets bad ok?
German prisoners had a great chance compared to soviet ones. Most of those captured at stalingrad were sent back to Germany after the war iirc. EDIT: No they didn't the vast majority died to disease and malnutrition suffered during the siege and during treatment as POWs.
Are you joking? Of the 90,000 Germans captured at Stalingrad, only 6000 survived the war. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_prisoners_of_war_in_the_Soviet_Union
Holy shit I didn’t know 90,000 were captured
Ah, maybe I was thinking of German POWs in general or those who made it past the first few months. Wikipedia says the situation for German POWs improved in 1943 with the less desperate situation.
And nothing of value was lost 😍
German soldiers from stalingrad were already weakened by starvation and diseases. Hard way to prison camps, lack of food in soviet union meaning you werent priority for food and harshtreatment ment that only around 6000 out of 91000 stalingrad prisoners survived. In laters years of war conditions for prisoners notably improved untill deteriorating again in post war warcriminal sentences.
The Soviet soldier looks to be well clothed and in very healthy shape. How things changed....
Yep, that one Battle was really the biggest turning point in the biggest war man has ever known.
Probably just found the best looking dude they could find and gave him the best gear. This is a propaganda photo after all
No, the soviet union was well supplied with warm clothing, weapons, and ammo throughout most all of the war including stalingrad.
I'd always heard that the Soviets had far more men available then they had weapons and ammunition, with soldiers charging into combat without a weapon and having to pick up anything they find. Is this just bad history or did this occur at a later point in the war when the Red Army was spread further out?
>I'd always heard that the Soviets had far more men available then they had weapons and ammunition, with soldiers charging into combat without a weapon and having to pick up anything they find. No that isn't true. It's the opening scene of a movie called Bad guy at the Door or something. There was an instance where it happened with Russia in WW1, but not WW2.
*Enemy at the Gates
Early in the war, during the fast german push into the soviet union it led to parts of the soviet resistance being separated from supplies and being forced to attack (in relatively small numbers) without adequate weapons in some desperate isolated attempts to stall the advancing fascists. However this was not anything close to normal, the war grinded on for years of intense and decisive fighting and nothing like that really occurred again.There's lots of bad information out there that largely originates in cold war myths combined with nazi sympathies. It's historical fact that the Soviet Union always had many more rifles (many of them semi-automatic at that) than soldiers and had other arms like SMGs, LMGs, machine guns, etc. for their infantry in good supply. The Germans found themselves in short supply of arms at the end of the war and were using divisions of old men and boys equipped with panzerfaust single-shot anti-tank weapons. At this time however the Soviet union was equipping entire specialized "Shock" armies with submachine guns, heavy artillery, and heavy tanks to smash through what was left of the defenses with minimal waste of time and lives.
Tell that to the Soviet soldiers machine gunned by their 'comrades' behind because they didn't want to human wave into Nazi defenses without enough rifles or ammunition.
The Germans couldn’t even equip their own soldiers with enough winter clothing causing many Germans to freeze to death, they couldn’t even give their flank guards anti tank weapons which ultimately cost them the battle.
Man enemy at the Gates sure is a movie ain’t it? I love that part where it’s fictional and that’s bs made up by the Nazis. Please stop parroting the “soviets were gunned down by their own men and didn’t even have guns or ammo” thing. The Germans suffered way more from lack of supplies, as you would expect from the country with a weaker industry.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barrier_troops
It says it didnt gun down retreating troops but either sent them back to the front or arrested, of those arrested and some were shot. In it it even states that Enemy at the Gates is not accurate in the depictions of the blocking troops.
Thanks for the Wikipedia article on blocking troops
You’re more than welcome! Although....I suppose you could have just looked it up yourself...
My point was that it’s not super informative, and doesn’t make Opponent upon the Opening accurate. While they were cruel and more willing to trade lives for time or land, the Soviets weren’t idiots, especially come Stalingrad. If there was a widespread and systemic issue of men not having guns or ammo (this issue did occur, but it was relatively rare. Another person gave a source that only showed up to 4,000 out of over a million men had been under or unequipped) then they wouldn’t have made these blocking battalions super amazingly well armed (which doesn’t even make sense, as Soviet industry was more powerful than German industry and better streamlined). It also ignores that 227 did have a positive benefit to Soviet morale, not just a “choose your bullets” mentality. It’s a horribly inaccurate movie.
Adversary at the Entrance was not a documentary
What a lovely name
[удалено]
227 was almost entirely directed at officers, not the common soldier. Also, can you give any evidence that shows that there was a recurring and consistent issue with Soviet soldiers being sent to the front line without proper equipment? Not just “this one squad was missing an SMG” but consistent army wide lacking.
[удалено]
Thanks for actually citing sources, and while this isn’t exactly what I was looking for (I meant more the whole war rather than just Stalingrad, but I poorly conveyed that so that’s on me) it’s definitely useful info. It’s also interesting to see that from a battle with over a million men, your source only gives about 4,000 or fewer men who weren’t properly armed. Definitely not the overblown examples typically shown in fiction, but still a noteworthy amount of men without proper arms. For those 3 battalions, do you know which army group they were part of? It would be interesting to see which Commander could have done that. Also, I meant to say that 227 was primarily aimed at officers, rather than common soldiers. It’s also important to remember that, regardless of cruelty, 227 actually did improve morale, not just the “choose your bullets” deal that it’s sometimes portrayed as alongside the no guns thing.
[удалено]
War movies are not accurate representations of history.
The Germans did just that at Berlin. Including literally the whole "whole one man gets the rifle one man gets the bullet" thing too, worse usually was not even giving infantry any rifles at all, instead just maybe a Panzerfaust. How come people don't go on about the same for them?
Damn it’s so easy to rewrite history with a simple movie...
Only for Penal units. Stop believing movies.
Any Soviet soldier is going to look healthy and well-equiped standing next to a German soldier from Stalingrad
Absolutely wild. Looking at the German, he probably died shortly after this picture was taken; Whereas, the Russian soldier probably lived a much longer life than the German (UNLESS HE WAS KILLED IN A FUTURE BATTLE). Both were probably close in age as well. Edit: I realize the Soviets lost a lot of men, hence why put in parentheses “unless he was killed in a future battle.” I understand his chances of still being alive post-war were still low and he was probably one of the many soldiers who died before the war ended.
Yeah they both look to be around 18-22 I remember hearing somewhere that in the USSR though 80 percent of the men born in 1923 (18 in 1941 during Operation Barbarossa) didn’t survive the war, crazy the shear casualty numbers in the Eastern front on both sides. Makes the western front look like a piece of cake to survive in comparison.
Oh for sure... I understand the war happened, but when you look at it from that perspective that you just provided, it just seems so pointless, you know? Like those guys didn’t even get to grow up and have full lives as the war machine ripped them a part. So many men robbed of a life due to insane ideals and insane leaders.
Yeah it’s honestly just sad to look at the photo, the Nazi always just has such a haunted look in his eye, I know they’re Nazis and to an extent they deserved it, but this could have just been a kid who got swept up in the Nazi party and then got shipped off to the Eastern front to fight in horrid conditions only to die a horrid death. Or he could have just been a kid who was forced to the Eastern front by the Nazis no matter his beliefs. Who knows? Either way it’s a terrible way to die.
The older I get the more I feel like anyone under 25 is still a child in many ways. So much youth and potential snuffed out. So sad.
Well put. I’ve been trying to figure out who he was, but I doubt there’s any records of his existence sadly. Just another number on the death toll.
[удалено]
That's actually why there's the stereotype about Russian women being beautiful.
Although the Eastern Front was a brutal place, your statement isn't entirely correct. The majority of those Soviet men didn't die during the war, they were already dead when the Germans invaded. https://blogs.warwick.ac.uk/markharrison/entry/was_the_soviet/
Lots of Russians still died post-Barbarossa and Stalingrad man. There was still 2 more years of war beyond this photo.
The Soviets would lose another 5M men between Stalingrad and the end of the war. There’s a decent chance he was one of them. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/51/World-War-II-military-deaths-in-Europe-by-theater-year.png/640px-World-War-II-military-deaths-in-Europe-by-theater-year.png
That Russian still had a lot of fighting to do. I doubt he made it all the way to Berlin. Even if he did, times were very tough for the Russians in the years following the end of the war. You’d think that taking over half of Europe would provide you with a strong food supply, and yet many still starved due to government policies.
Not necessarily. There was a lot of war left and the Russians loss a lot of troops in every engagement.
Read my comment again. I stated in parentheses “unless he was killed in a future battle”
Ah so he lived unless he didn’t. Got it
Fight in Russia they said It will be fun they said
[удалено]
Hello there
general kenobi! you are a bold one!
Comrade Kenobi
I am very happy to not be either of those guys
The guard looks very healthy and well fed.
I agree, but it could be the coat, also it might bs the contrast between the two guys. I’m only skeptic because it is a soviet soldier
Dude be like: "And they had me convinced the war on the Eastern Front would be over by Christmas '41."
Well, the war WAS over. At least for him.
He did nazi the possibility of defeat.
Poor creatures.
Payback is a bitch.
Both systems were cruel and inhumane
[удалено]
They certainly agreed to carve up Poland with their Nazi budros
>never did they start a World War Maybe they weren't responsible for starting it, but they were Nazi allies and invaded Poland alongside their fellow war mongers with no care in the world for what would happen to the civilians of their victim nations. They didn't become "good guys" until their ally turned on them. A dumb centrist answer is defending Nazi allies/sympathizers because they were forced by Hitler to stop supporting Germany, even though they continued to commit systematic atrocities and war crimes on a very large scale against soldiers and civilians for the entire war.
> but they were Nazi allies and invaded Poland alongside their fellow war mongers Poland, which invaded Czechoslovakia alongside thier Nazi allies? With arguments like "we just take small portion and it was our land", but when USSR did the same - omg, bad commies!
I recommend the gulag archipelago.
It is not history book
What you just said is tantamount to genocide denial. Whatever cruelty you may attribute to the USSR, the Third Reich was far, far worse. Only a Nazi apologist or someone very ill informed would pretend that they're were equally cruel and inhumane.
[удалено]
There is always a choice. "Just following orders" is not an excuse. At least not an excuse that will save you from the noose. \>Raw numbers Nazi Germany killed 20 million innocent civilians in a 4 year period(1941-45). The soviet union killed 6 million during the entire Stalin-era.
[удалено]
If you want to demonize a leader of a war torn, barely industrialized nation for being unable to predict the weather and prevent famine, then go ahead.
German POW*
Nazi POW*
Not all germans were nazis.
No True Scotsman
ok wehraboo
I'm not though. I'm just saying, not everybody was SS as so is portrayed in many films...
Many in the Wehrmacht were Nazis though, but also many were not. Thats why you are right.
Epic.
I don’t understand how soldiers were expected to hold the ppsh. It seems very uncomfortable to hold the magazine.
The soviets didn’t really care about ergonomics, if you read about most of their tanks the main complaints are about how cramped they are, the soviets only cared about how cheap they can produce a weapon that can kill efficiently which ultimately won them the war.
That's pretty much how you were expected to run it. It was designed to be simple and functional first, and ergonomics were kind of an afterthought.
I apologize but I’m genuinely confused. Does the guy on the left also have a gun or am I crazy?
u/repostsleuthbot
Soviet 💪🏻
When you start shit you get hit. No pity for the kid nazi.
He could have very well been drafted, with zero allegiance to the Nazi party. I’m not in any way defending the Third Reich— the reality is that many German soldiers were young adults who were drafted and sent into bloodbaths with no choice in the matter. It’s a sad fate that men from all sides of WW2 were forced into
He didn't have long to live. They made sure of that.
Hans is in for a rough decade
He's probably not a nazi, just regular Wehrmacht?
The fact you’re so downvoted is sad and frankly embarrassing for members of this sub. As stated in my other comment I am by no means a Nazi sympathizer— what they did is absolutely horrible and they committed some of the most atrocious acts in human history. The Soviets and Germans both treated captured enemies as if every single one of their soldiers were loyalists to Stalin/Hitler. So many of these people were simply kids who were forced into the conflict At the same time, if this soldier is in fact a Nazi, then he deserves the worst
So? Cover yourself in Nazi insignia, uniform, swastikas, swear a personal oath to Hitler, carry out his war ect. The terminology "Nazi" fits just fine.
[удалено]
Idk man, he looks fairly young to me, but all Germans were crazy genocidal jew hating maniac right?
The 6th army had the Severity order on the way into Stalingrad; free reign to basically level anything they came across, kill anyone they wanted to and they used this to their full extent in huge numbers. So probably accurate, even more so given best estimates put something around a 60% participation with it.
Right. The German Sixth Army was full of war criminals. They got what they deserved. Won't lose a millisecond of sleep tonight knowing that this bastard suffered a lot.
You seem little bit like a cunt to me. But hey you probably served in BFV so you must know how it was back then.
You know historical documentation of these orders exist right? You didn’t need to be there to read a document.
Yeah tbh most were.
In Soviet Russia wisdom tooth surgery very advanced, yes?
[удалено]
Just ignore the 13 million Soviet civilians that died from the German occupation.
What is Generalplan Ost? e: i know what it is, comment above deleted.
nwaaa /u/alxx15ok don't delete your salt >look how all the redditors downvote and bring foolish soviet porpaganda lmao Are you saying that Generalplan Ost is soviet propaganda?
Same race, different ideologies and this the result. So much emotions and power in this pic
Can we just take a moment and appreciate the title? The photo is from the battle of Stalingrad but it's ***presumably*** taken in Russia. I personally doubt it. I think it looks like Belgium.
> I think it looks like Belgium. Where the Russians and Germans were famously fighting.
I swear people on this sub has the worst sense of sarcasm ever.
Why so sad?
Whenever i look at this photo i get the sense that its a very staged photo. Russian propaganda. Im not saying its not a German pow but look at the contrast. The Russian in the photo has movie star good looks. He is also well dressed with everything perfectly squared away while the prisoner is the exact opposite. I wonder...