The Fall Of Berlin, 1945

[Comrade J]

I am doing research on the Soviet takeover of Berlin for college, and I will be researching for a year and then given the task of writing about it under exam conditions for 4 hours. I have yet to think of a question (in this module, you think of your own question, such as "*Insert Quote* - Assess this view" or "to what degree was ___ responsible for ___?" or something along those lines that is debatable in an essay.)

If anyone knows of any interesting websites or books about this topic (though I do have 3 books already) I would greatly appreciate it, and if anyone can think of a good question on this topic, I would also appreciate that, thanks.

[Si Pinto]

It really depends on what 'angle' you approach the research, if you want the Soviet view then "History of the Great Patriotic War" would be be a good base, if you can get over the obvious 'bias' towards Stalin's regime.

"Stalin's Lieutenants" by William J Spahr is enlightning as well, although not specifically about the battle for Berlin, it gives a good account of Gen Zhukov's and Gen Timoshenko's relationship with Stalin and his subordinates at the time.

For a German perspective then "Inside Hitlers Bunker" by Joachim Fest is the best I've read, this has recently been made into a film called 'Downfall' which is also worth a watch.

For a general overview then maybe 'the Second World War' by Martin Gilbert.

Anyway..there's a few names for you. ;)

[Kurt Crover]

The only book I own on this is "Berlin 1945" by Antony Beevor, but like Si Pinto said, you get the bias of anti-Stalin ramblings..

[ComradeOm]

Originally posted by Kurt [email protected] 15 2006, 02:47 PM
The only book I own on this is "Berlin 1945" by Antony Beevor, but like Si Pinto said, you get the bias of anti-Stalin ramblings..
I found Berlin to be an excellent, and largely impartial, account of the months leading up to the capture of the city and the assault itself. I highly recommend it for this topic.

[Comrade-Z]

I recommend The Last Battle by Cornelius Ryan.

And if you need some background on the city of Berlin from a cultural and political standpoint before the war, then see this (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=48675&hl=Berlin) thread.

[Raubleaux]

Beevor's book is a dreadful piece of Nazi war propaganda! He portrays the Red Army as a bunch of savages who raped and plundered their way across Europe. All of Beevor's books are nothing more than anti-communist propaganda. For example, see Mario Sousa's review of Beevor's awful book about Stalingrad (http://www.mariosousa.se/ReviewBeevorStalingrad050729.html).

As far as I know, the best book by far on Russia in World War II is Alexander Werth's Russia at War. It is free of most of the anti-communist bias that clouds most studies.

For a more objective reading of the history of the Soviet Union in Germany (contrary to Beevor's propaganda) see Norman Naimark's The Russians in Germany.

Naimark is just as much an anti-communist as Beevor, but he is far more objective and relies more on evidence, whereas Beevor prefers rumor and Nazi propaganda.

David Glantz and Roger Reese have also written a great deal about the Red Army, and their work is superb, although I don't believe they have written a great deal about Berlin.

You also might want to check out John Erickson's massive history of the war -- I believe the volume you'd want to check out is called The Road to Berlin. I've never read Erickson but his work is supposedly a classic.

[ComradeOm]

Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2006, 04:35 PM
Beevor's book is a dreadful piece of Nazi war propaganda! He portrays the Red Army as a bunch of savages who raped and plundered their way across Europe.
And what book on the Fall of Berlin could not mention the mass rape of German women? Furthermore the lack of low level discipline is an issue that still plagues the Russian army.

[Si Pinto]

Originally posted by [email protected] 16 2006, 03:11 PM
And what book on the Fall of Berlin could not mention the mass rape of German women? Furthermore the lack of low level discipline is an issue that still plagues the Russian army.
Agreed,

There is simply no point pretending (however deeply you feel the Soviet cause) that it didn't happen.

I think in situations like this you simply have to read as much as you can on the subject and come to your own conclusions, whilst trying to block out the pro/anti 'bull' coming from both sides.

If you go into it with an open mind you'll be ok.

[Raubleaux]

It is not the fact that he mentions it -- it is the way in which he presents it, and the way he exaggerates and lies about it. Naimark's book has an extremely lengthy study of the question of rape that is infinitely better than Beevor's propaganda.

For instance, if I'm not mistaken Beevor claims that 2 million rapes were committed by Red Army soldiers, which is a completely bogus figure with no evidence to support it. Essentially, the figure is arrived at by assuming that every woman in Europe who got an abortion after World War II was raped by a Red Army soldier.

[ComradeOm]

I find Beevor’s work as a whole to be meticulously researched and supported by facts and accounts. He makes note of the possible causes for the endemic rape and the measures taken by the Red Army to control their soldiers. The total number of rapes (1.9 million) is the oft quoted figure from Dr Gerhard Reichling which I’ve no real reason to doubt.

What is Naimark’s figure for the number of rapes? Anyone who denies that it was rampant is simply swallowing propaganda of a different sort.

[Si Pinto]

Joachim Fest gives the figure for the Berlin area alone as 600,000. Although he states that this figure is probably too low as many women wouldn't have reported it.

The documentary, "The Nazi's 'a warning from history'" gives accounts of women repeatedly raped on a day to day basis by which ever Soviet unit happened to be passing through the area.

Not a pretty thought.

[Raubleaux]

I find Beevor’s work as a whole to be meticulously researched and supported by facts and accounts.

It isn't. Beevor isn't even a real academic historian. He writes pop history.


The total number of rapes (1.9 million) is the oft quoted figure from Dr Gerhard Reichling which I’ve no real reason to doubt.

The figure is completely ridiculous, for the reasons I said.


What is Naimark’s figure for the number of rapes? Anyone who denies that it was rampant is simply swallowing propaganda of a different sort.

He doesn't have a figure, nor does anyone else. It is quite simply impossible to know with any certainty how many rapes occurred. At one point Naimark guesses that the number could be "in the tens of thousands or the hundreds of thousands."

[Raubleaux]

Joachim Fest gives the figure for the Berlin area alone as 600,000. Although he states that this figure is probably too low as many women wouldn't have reported it.

That figure is absolutely insane. Most of the rapes happened in East Prussia, Silesia, and the Sudetenland. If that many happened in Berlin alone, then the figure for the overall number of rapes would be like four or five million.

[Comrade J]

Thanks for the feedback people, greatly appreciated.

I did in fact borrow 'Berlin 1945' by Antony Beevor from the library, but I haven't read it yet, but I shall read it and bear in mind his conclusions may be biased and anti-communist, but I have heard it is highly recommended. I aim to read from as many sources as possible, including Nazi and Soviet Generals and soldiers, in order to gain a wider knowledge of the battle, including the propaganda and thoughts of people at the time, so my essay will be as good as it can be.

Does anyone know of any other good films concerning the Soviet attack on Berlin?

Also, can anybody think of a possible question I can write about in the essay? Still haven't thought of anything, and it would be good to have a question in mind prior to reading the book, so I can take notes on useful things that are relevant to my question.

[Raubleaux]

Keep in mind who makes things "highly reccommended" though, Comrade J. My copy of The Fall of Berlin 1945 has high paise on the back from the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, and right-wing historian Richard Overy.

When it comes to the history of the Soviet Union, the only thing a historian has to do in order to gain high praise for his work is to do as much anti-communist bashing as possible, and the evidence be damned. I almost get the sense that there is a contest between certain historians to see who can invent the highest death toll and come up with the most colorful adjectives to describe how evil the communists were.

You really should check out Norman Naimark's work. Like I said, he is very much an anti-communist as well, and there are a lot of things in his book I strongly disagree with. But he bases his work mostly on good evidence.

Another source that I reluctantly point you to is Catherine Merridale's newly published social history of the Eastern Front, called Ivan's War (Ivan was the name for the common Soviet soldier, like G.I. Joe or Johnny Reb). Merridale is a raving anti-communist who often makes really absurd claims, but her book has the benefit of being new, and thus she has had access to the most recent scholarship, as well as some really unique sources.

Historians like Merridale and Beevor are not completely useless -- in fact, you can learn a lot from reading them. However you have to keep a very critical eye on their political judgments, and very carefully comb through their footnotes and see if their indictments of communism actually have the evidence to back them up (which they almost never do).


Does anyone know of any other good films concerning the Soviet attack on Berlin?

You should check out the old 25 episode documentary that A&E did on the Eastern Front, called The Unknown War. It is narrated by Burt Lancaster, and is absolutely amazing. For one, it is free of anti-Soviet bias. Two, it has a shocking amount of video of the Eastern Front. It's the kind of documentary that is nothing but wall-to-wall historical footage; no interviews with current historians giving their views in retrospect, etc. Just old footage of what was happening at the time. I had no idea that the events in the East had been so thoroughly documented on film.

I have the whole 25 part series on DVD, thanks to a comrade in New Jeresy who made a copy for me for pretty cheap (like 20 bucks). I can ask him to make one for you, if you are interested.


Also, can anybody think of a possible question I can write about in the essay?

As this thread demonstrates, probably the question of rape is the most controversial aspect of the subject you are studying. It would be an interesting topic to make the aim of your research, but it would also be a pretty difficult one, given how politically charged the issue is. It's very hard to separate fact from fiction.

[Si Pinto]

Originally posted by [email protected] 16 2006, 10:51 PM
That figure is absolutely insane. Most of the rapes happened in East Prussia, Silesia, and the Sudetenland. If that many happened in Berlin alone, then the figure for the overall number of rapes would be like four or five million.
It's not an insane figure if a lot of women aren't reporting the rape!

The same goes for suicides at the time, the figures for suicide amongst the German population during the soviet advance for Berlin is simply not possible to know exactly (but is known to be very high) because they simply weren't recorded as suicide, because often the bodies were not discovered for weeks, in which case proving that the cause was suicide becomes almost impossible.

We will never know the exact figure of rapes, so we can only go on the accounts we read and come up with our own conclusions, the point of the post was to show that 'no matter' what political colour you are, denying the red army atrocities is as wrong as denying the holocaust.

[Raubleaux]

It's not an insane figure if a lot of women aren't reporting the rape!

I have never seen any evidence that German women were shy about reporting rape. In fact, the police records at the time show that they were very open when it came to reporting rape and other crimes; the problem was that the police force and the Red Army leadership had trouble doing anything about it.

One group who was not at all shy about playing up "Red Army atrocities" was the Nazis, who are the preferred source of information for anti-communists like yourself. The fact that you would even suggest a moral equivalence between what the Red Army did and the Holocaust is an insult to the millions of Jews, Russians, and other minorities who were killed. Nothing the Soviet Union ever did even comes remotely near to the Holocaust.


The same goes for suicides at the time, the figures for suicide amongst the German population during the soviet advance for Berlin is simply not possible to know exactly (but is known to be very high)

Thanks in no small part to racist Nazi propaganda, which had convinced the Germans that the Red Army was full of "animals" and "savages" of "Asiatic, Mongol descent." The reaction of many Germans upon seeing a Red Army soldier was one of horror -- they believed that suicide would be preferable to the cruel fate that the evil commies would mete out to them.

Here is one account from the diary of Swiss journalist Max Schnetzer. Three Russians forced their way into a cellar occupied by half a dozen men and three women:


After half an hour a new troop arrived. It's the Mongols, and now the women let out a scream. The simple look of these yellow mugs brought shudders of fear. They shivered and shook out of unrestrained fright. "My God," whispered one, "what terrible faces!" The mother of the doctor glranced at the soldiers and murmured: "Can it be that something like that exists? They must really have come from far away." She looks now at her daughter who apparently cold-bloodedly looks at the stranger, though she shakes inside and thinks: "No dear God, not that--please, only not that!" . . . The Mongols can easily see that the others had already been here . . . One grabs the doctor by her elbow, shoves her chin up and looks at her [showing his] yellow, pointed teeth. The old pensioner turns bright red out of anger at the reprehensible scene, and his wife, who fears he may jump up in anger, holds him around the arm and whispers emphatically: "Leave it, leave it, what would that help?" The Mongol forces the doctor into a corner and she feels limp. "Now it's come." But then a thought comes to her . . . "He smells like an animal, thi sfellow, sharp and also a little rancid."

Shortly after that, a young Red Army officer with a machine gun entered the cellar and drove the soldiers away. No rape occured. But the reaction of racist horror on the part of the Germans undoubtedly contributed to the escalation of hostilities in situations like this.

And speaking of the officer who protected the Germans, there are countless cases like this. For every case of a Red Army officer engaging in rape or looting, there are other cases of Red Army soldiers engaging in great acts of kindness and generosity, particularly towards children.

The units responsible for the worst abuses were penal regiments. Remember, the Soviet Union was so desperate for soldiers during World War II that they ended up recruiting soldiers out of the prisons. As a result, many of the rank and file Red Army soldiers were common criminals, and behaved as such despite the best efforts of the officers and political leaders.

Also, many of the atrocities chalked up to the Red Army were actually caused by Nazis! After the fall of Berlin there were many Nazi groups that went around raping and looting. Often times they would wear furr hats and shout a few words in Russian (or broken German) so that their activities would be blamed on the Red Army. Typically they were former members of the Hitler Youth (known as Werewolves).

[Si Pinto]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2006, 06:42 PM
One group who was not at all shy about playing up "Red Army atrocities" was the Nazis, who are the preferred source of information for anti-communists like yourself. The fact that you would even suggest a moral equivalence between what the Red Army did and the Holocaust is an insult to the millions of Jews, Russians, and other minorities who were killed. Nothing the Soviet Union ever did even comes remotely near to the Holocaust.
Firstly, I don't have to justify my beliefs to you, what I am or am not is none of your damn business, to put it bluntly, and if you can't hold a discussion without 'petty' name calling than kindly stop posting replies to my posts.

Secondly, when you say stupid things like 'moral equivalence' you are pissing about with words, there is no such phrase as 'moral equivalence', there is simply 'morals' or 'no morals'.

An atrocity is in the eye of the beholder, not in the eye of someone who obviously has chosen to ignore everything but the official Soviet History.

You can choose to believe whatever you want, but if you are just simply going to write off everything that wasn't written 'in the name of the Soviet Union', than you have no basis to enter any discussion.

For gods sake, Finland, Romania, Poland, Ukraine, Berlin, are obviously nothing but a tissue of lies in your eyes.

If your idea of communism is to bury your head in the sand and simply disbelieve everything not written by a member of the comintern, than I am indeed an anti-communist, at least of your stand point, and proud of it.

Don't question my beliefs until you can justify the 'one dimensional' views you hold.

[Raubleaux]

Secondly, when you say stupid things like 'moral equivalence' you are pissing about with words, there is no such phrase as 'moral equivalence', there is simply 'morals' or 'no morals'.

You insinuated that the "crimes" of the Red Army were morally equivalent with the Holocaust! That would be like me comparing you having your entire family tortured and murdered with me having a cramp in my leg. I think you'd be pretty angry if I did that.


An atrocity is in the eye of the beholder, not in the eye of someone who obviously has chosen to ignore everything but the official Soviet History.

The only person here who is ignoring real history is you! I'm assuming that since you are on this board, that you are some kind of leftist. You know that bourgeois historians and the mainstream media are a bunch of liars. Yet you choose to believe everything they say about communism.

It is really amazing how much the religion of anti-communism has infected the left -- you're probably great at debunking the lies of journalists and historians when it comes to most issues, but when it comes to the Soviet Union or any other communist country, you eat up their propaganda like candy.


If your idea of communism is to bury your head in the sand and simply disbelieve everything not written by a member of the comintern, than I am indeed an anti-communist, at least of your stand point, and proud of it.

What the hell are you talking about!? Please show me a single source I cited in this thread that was written by a member of the Comintern. In fact, every source I have cited except for that article by Mario Sousa is written by anti-communists.

Roger Reese, David Glantz, Norman Naimark -- they are all extremely anti-communist . However, they are good scholars who actually rely on evidence, instead of the bullshit that you prefer.

Of course, even if I did cite someone from the Comintern, that would not make it invalid. Why the hell should it? Are Comintern members somehow less trustworthy than right-wing pop historians like Antony Beevor?

This is how the religion of anti-communism works: everything a communist says is automatically a lie. If only you so-called "leftists" were equally vigilant in your critique of the bourgeoisie!

[Maksym]

Rebleaux is spot on with his/her analysis of Beevor’s work and other issues brought up during the discussion. Beevor’s conclusions are given legitimacy by supposedly relying on Russian archival data, even though nobody using the same data agrees with the conclusions drawn. The conclusions and themes drawn by Beevor and the Nazis are one and the same. The eastern mongoloids are bloodthirsty barbarians, armed with Judeo-Bolshevism, coming to sack Germany. I’m always left with the impression western historians are deliberately blurring the lawful prosecution, and punishment, of the Nazi war criminals with the unordinary crime against civilians. The fact is 4000 Soviet troops were executed for crimes against civilians, for the simple reason, the Red Army came as liberators.


We will never know the exact figure of rapes, so we can only go on the accounts we read and come up with our own conclusions, the point of the post was to show that 'no matter' what political colour you are, denying the red army atrocities is as wrong as denying the holocaust.

I will give you one chance to retract your statement above.

[Si Pinto]

[QUOTE]You insinuated that the "crimes" of the Red Army were morally equivalent with the Holocaust![QUOTE]

erm...no I didn't.

I'll try and simplify seeing as you can't read without misquoting.

Holocaust = evil

Red Army atrocities = evil (obviously they won't appear evil to you as you deny them)

There is no equivalence here they are simply evil, and denying one or the other is ... evil too.

[QUOTE]What the hell are you talking about!? Please show me a single source I cited in this thread that was written by a member of the Comintern.[QUOTE]

erm....I was being sarcastic, ironic, sorry if it goes 'over your head' :rolleyes:

[QUOTE]You know that bourgeois historians and the mainstream media are a bunch of liars. Yet you choose to believe everything they say about communism.[QUOTE]

So what exactly defines a 'bourgeois historian' in your eyes, or is everyone who doesn't state that they are a communist, a 'bourgeois liar', is that what you are saying?

Everyone who doesn't agree with you is an 'anti-communist' is that what you are saying?

Is everyone who speaks negatively of the Soviet Union under Stalin a 'bourgeois liar' and an 'anti-communist' in your eyes.

Interestingly, that would make Trotsky a 'bourgeois liar' and an 'anti-communist' using your own process of thought.

What you are preaching is not communism it's a dictatorship under vaguely communist rules (much like the Stalin regime, actually).

Try reading (and understanding) the works of Marx and Engels, not just 'drooling' over the cover (sarcasm, irony again).

You seem to be afraid of facing the truth of a situation, if it goes against your own outlook. I can only guess it is because your scared of what you might find, and the effect it would have on your beliefs.

[Si Pinto]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2006, 11:45 PM
I will give you one chance to retract your statement above.
Of course I bloody won't.

I see that 'freedom of speech' is not your 'thang'.

[ComradeOm]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2006, 11:45 PM
The conclusions and themes drawn by Beevor and the Nazis are one and the same. The eastern mongoloids are bloodthirsty barbarians, armed with Judeo-Bolshevism, coming to sack Germany.
I must have missed that section of the book. Why don't you point it out to me?

[Raubleaux]

Originally posted by ComradeOm+Jun 18 2006, 12:29 PM--> (ComradeOm @ Jun 18 2006, 12:29 PM)
[email protected] 17 2006, 11:45 PM
The conclusions and themes drawn by Beevor and the Nazis are one and the same. The eastern mongoloids are bloodthirsty barbarians, armed with Judeo-Bolshevism, coming to sack Germany.
I must have missed that section of the book. Why don't you point it out to me?[/b]
I'm pretty sure he/she was referring to the Nazi propaganda, ComradeOm.

[Raubleaux]

Originally posted by Si Pinto
erm...no I didn't.

I'll try and simplify seeing as you can't read without misquoting.

Holocaust = evil

Red Army atrocities = evil (obviously they won't appear evil to you as you deny them)

There is no equivalence here they are simply evil, and denying one or the other is ... evil too.

Okay, so you think all manifestations of "evil" (I feel like I'm talking to a Christian) are equal? There is no such thing as scale in your moral universe? "Evilness" is some ethereal property that actions either have or don't have?


erm....I was being sarcastic, ironic, sorry if it goes 'over your head' :rolleyes:

I was making the point that virtually every source I have cited in this thread was an anti-communist -- about as far from the Comintern as you can get. I'm sorry if that went over your head. I was making the point that your sarcasm was completely off-base.


So what exactly defines a 'bourgeois historian' in your eyes, or is everyone who doesn't state that they are a communist, a 'bourgeois liar', is that what you are saying?

Are you paying attention at all? Virtually every source that I have cited as a good and reliable source of information are anti-communist, bourgeois historians. And you accuse me of not believing anything unless it is written by a communist! Learn to read.


Is everyone who speaks negatively of the Soviet Union under Stalin a 'bourgeois liar' and an 'anti-communist' in your eyes.

No, because that would include myself. There are plenty of things about the Stalin era that I am critical of. However, most of the claims made by anti-communists, like I keep saying, are lies. Look at the god damn evidence.


Interestingly, that would make Trotsky a 'bourgeois liar' and an 'anti-communist' using your own process of thought.

Of course it would -- Trotsky is one of the greatest enemies of socialism who ever existed.


Try reading (and understanding) the works of Marx and Engels, not just 'drooling' over the cover (sarcasm, irony again).

My views are what they are because of my understanding of Marx and Engels. You are making Marx spin in his grave with your anti-communist nonsense.

[ComradeOm]

Originally posted by [email protected]un 18 2006, 07:17 PM
I'm pretty sure he/she was referring to the Nazi propaganda, ComradeOm.
And I'm waiting to see where Beevor "draws the same conclusions"

[Maksym]

Of course I bloody won't.

I see that 'freedom of speech' is not your 'thang'.

Very well, everyone can see the fool you truly are. Not only are the “atrocities” of the Red Army inconclusively proven, they are substantiated by Karl Potrek’s shocking accounts of Nemmersdorf. The tales of the Red Army as a gang of rapists is nothing new, it was conceived by Joseph Goebbels and gleefully parroted by Anthony Beevor to an ignorant audience.


I must have missed that section of the book. Why don't you point it out to me?

You missed the part of Soviets raping innocent civilians and the leadership holding a tolerant attitude? The labelling of the Red Army as undisciplined, sub-humans and rapists are two perceptions held by the Reich Propaganda Office and Anthony Beevor. Anyway, the “research” by Mr. Beevor has been a real boost to the neo-nazi movement. Anyone who looks up the book on Google or articles relating to the book can find them circulating on all sorts of message boards and spammed by the far right.

The American public has been kept in the dark about Eastern Front for 50 years. Just read any review on Amazon or any other book distributor to understand how propaganda can poison the ignorant mind. The heroic Soviet army that defeated the legions of German capital and fought a courageous peoples war for all workers is being reduced to a wild gang of rapists and drunkards.

[ComradeOm]

Originally posted by [email protected] 18 2006, 09:49 PM
You missed the part of Soviets raping innocent civilians and the leadership holding a tolerant attitude? The labelling of the Red Army as undisciplined, sub-humans and rapists are two perceptions held by the Reich Propaganda Office and Anthony Beevor.
Are you claiming that these well documented mass rapes did not occur? Or that a lack of low-level discipline was not a characteristic of the Soviet Army?

You see I’ve actually read the book and I missed out on those large sections where Beevor seemingly launches into anti-Soviet tirades. His role as a historian, and one I feel he has done well in, to document historical reality. Beevor presents the facts of the rapes, numerous individual accounts and the reaction and responses of the Soviet leadership.


The American public has been kept in the dark about Eastern Front for 50 years. Just read any review on Amazon or any other book distributor to understand how propaganda can poison the ignorant mind. The heroic Soviet army that defeated the legions of German capital and fought a courageous peoples war for all workers is being reduced to a wild gang of rapists and drunkards.
Again an advantage of reading the book is knowing that Beevor praises the courage and skill of the average Russian veteran and notes that most of the crimes were committed by second echelon units.

I’d advise you to either go back to school or pull your head out of Stalin’s dead ass. Since when was history a field of black and white absolutes? Of course no doubt you prefer the Russian accounts of the Great Patriotic War where the Soviet soldiers were shining knights who could do know wrong :rolleyes:

[Si Pinto]

(Firstly, a note to the moderators, please don't edit or delete this post. I'm not being nasty or vindictive. I'm simply trying to prove a point to people who unfortunately seem to need 'a weatherman to tell them when it's pissing down' - thanks.)

Ok, you're clearly not going to believe anything 'written' against the the red army, because you don't want to. So we'll try a different tact. An uncomfortable one for me to have to relate to, and one which required me staying up half the night to go through paperwork I'd sooner never have to read again.

"It's 11am in the large village where you live with your mother and baby sister, you yourself are 11 years old.

Suddenly the front door to your house is kicked in, and in enter 3 men in uniform, these are quickly followed by 3 more and finally an officer and his senior NCO.

They proceed to ransack your house, taking anything that takes their fancy. Your mother, who since the soldiers first arrival, has been standing between you, your sister and the soldiers, is grabbed by the officer and thrown into a corner and brutally raped, the NCO takes his turn, as do most of the squad, not all of them, two of them, who have been 'looking away' and looking generally disgusted, do not choose to rape your mother.

The squad of soldiers leave, laughing, singing. This ordeal has lasted over an hour, your mother hasn't moved since the soldiers left, she is lying in the corner of the room, sobbing.

The noise of soldiers and vehicles outside subsides, and you decide to run across the street to your friends house, your friend is 13.

You find that the door has been kicked in, you call your friend's name, but without reply, you enter the house and instantly see that it is in the same state as your own, drawers and cupboards open and items strewn across the floor.

You decide to go upstairs and upon entering your friend's room, you are greeted with the sight of your friend, stripped from the waist down, and lying in a pool of blood on her bed, it is then that you notice that your friend's throat has been cut. You enter the parent's bedroom, where you see your friend's mother, she is lying face down on the bed, naked. She has been shot through the back of the head, to the left of the bed her husband is lying on his side in a rather strange position, contorted. It is then that you notice his hands are tied behind his back, you also see that he has been shot through the temple.

You run back across the street to your own house.

Over the course of the next seven days, several such 'squads' arrive in your village, your mother is raped continually during this period, on at least one occasion, the soldiers also attempt to rape you, but your mothers begging pleas have an effect, with the result that you are left alone, but your mother is raped again.

In later life you'll estimate that your mother was raped about 40 times, but you'll never know the exact figure.

Over the next 3 years, until your mothers death, she hardly speaks at all, she seems to be 'an empty shell', just going throught the motions of daily life, on 3 occasions your mother attempts to kill herself, once with you and your sister with her.

-----------

So, Raubleaux, Maksym, is this an atrocity? Is this evil enough for you?

This is not a quote from a 'bourgeoise historian', or an 'anti-communist, with a grudge' or a 'Christian' (your attempt to use this term as some sort of derogatory 'stick' with which to beat people who you don't agree with is frankly 'disgusting', but is about the level I would expect from you).

It is an eye witness account (one of many) that I myself recorded, from the small town of Demmin, in eastern Germany.

As I say, it is only a small town (large village) whichever you prefer, but there were over 600 registered suicides between April 30 1945 and April 1946.

The research we carried out showed that about 4/5ths of the adult female population of Demmin was raped, most of them repeatedly, over the course of a two week period.

So call me what you like, 'anti-communist', 'bourgeoise liar', 'christian', frankly I don't give a toss, I've seen the truth and I don't need your permission or acceptance to validate it.

As for the holocaust, I've been lucky enough to spend time in the company of several Jewish and Polish survivors of that time, and listen to their horrific ordeals, when YOU'VE seen a strong, proud, 61 year old Polish man breakdown in tears as he relates to you the murder of his family, then you can lecture me on the rights and wrongs of the situation, the 'Moral Equivalence' to use your own ridiculous terminology.

The survivors of the holocaust don't need the 'pig-headed' views of stubborn, petty minded individuals like yourselves to defend them, or strengthen their case, you can take my word for that. They are as sickened and repugnant as I am of your continued denial of red army atrocities.

Please don't be offended if I stop replying to your posts, it's just that you are clearly not going to listen to the truth, because you have chosen not to, and I get tired of repeating myself and of having to 'quote' material that I'd sooner not have to read again.

Christian?

No, just a human being, with a heart, a brain, and a conscience.

As opposed to ignorant, self-righteous automatons like yourselves.