Another view on the beginning of the World War 2

Ezboard · #1

Teddy K
Unregistered User
(8/15/00 7:34:05 pm)
Reply Another view on the beginning of the World War 2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
members.tripod.com/~ViktoRus/index1.html

Haegg
Registered User
(8/18/00 7:50:22 am)
Reply Re: Another view on the beginning of the World War 2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The man known under the name Victor Suvorov has no scientific credability. It is not just my oppinion but the historians judge over his books.

George Huelse
Unregistered User
(8/18/00 3:39:24 pm)
Reply ?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Isn't that the fellow who wrote "Inside the Soviet Army" back in the 80s?

Haegg
Registered User
(8/18/00 4:07:32 pm)
Reply Re: ?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think so. I have a book from the late 80's by him called "Spetsnaz".

Thomas Sinha
Registered User
(8/18/00 6:20:31 pm)
Reply Suvorov
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Haegg,

I read "Inside the Soviet Army" and I liked it. But I don't know any of his other books. Why is Viktor Suvorov considered not credible?

Tom

Reigo
Unregistered User
(8/20/00 12:59:03 am)
Reply Haegg has just heard it somewhere
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because Haegg don´t have his/her quite own opinion it seems that he hasn´t read Suvorovs "The Icebreaker","The M-day" or"The last republic".
Some "respected historian" said that Suvorov is not credible and that is enough for Haegg.
Although Suvorov is not perfect,its still super.

Regards,
Reigo

Glenn Steinberg
Unregistered User
(8/20/00 12:53:23 pm)
Reply Re: Haegg has just heard it somewhere
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reigo,

Have you read every book that claims Bormann is still alive and living in luxury on a South Pacific island as an agent of the CIA?

Have you read every issue of The National Enquirer, especially all those issues that claim to report true stories of 500-lb. alien babies born to potato farmers' wives in Idaho?

Sometimes a person doesn't have to read something to know that it's not worth reading. Usually, in such cases, the person depends upon the advice of experts and common sense.

So, if the experts don't have much respect for Suvorov, there's probably a good reason for it, and he's probably not worth reading.

To be honest, I've never read anything by Suvorov. But if he says what his admirers in forums like this one say he says, his poor reputation is well-deserved. One of Suvorov's arguments is supposed to be that Stalin was just about to invade Germany when Barbarossa began. According to Suvorov's own apologists, Suvorov bases this claim on a briefing that Zhukov gave to a group of Soviet commanders about an alleged invasion plan.

Of course the *truth* is that Stalin wasn't so stupid as to provoke a strong enemy such as Germany, and Zhukov did have a briefing with Soviet commanders as claimed by Suvorov, but at the briefing, he outlined a plan for a *counter-attack* in the event of a German invasion (the kind of plan General Staff officers the world over are *supposed* to have ready in case of any eventuality). The plan was so far from Stalin's immediate intentions that, when the Germans actually invaded, Zhukov's plan wasn't even considered as an option.

When amateurs and ideologues dabble in history, they come up with all kinds of wonderful conspiracy theories that are a bunch of paranoid (or ideological) bunk and are certainly not worth reading. Experts may not be right 100% of the time, but they're usually right 99.9% of the time, especially when it comes to the *facts* of historical events. You might be able to question their *interpretations* of some facts, but only a fool or someone with a hidden agenda questions (or manipulates) the experts' facts the way Suvorov apparently does (according to his own groupies' testimony).

Marcus Wendel
ezOP
(8/20/00 1:24:53 pm)
Reply Suvorov
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have not read anything by Suvorov so can someone please tell me about his theories (apart from the one about the planned invasion), thanks.

Are all his books on the same topic?

/Marcus

Reigo
Unregistered User
(8/20/00 4:16:15 pm)
Reply Ha-ha-ha
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Your response is a nice peace of demagogy.

You said:"Have you read every book that claims Bormann is still alive and living in luxury on a South Pacific island as an agent of the CIA?

Have you read every issue of The National Enquirer, especially all those issues that claim to report true stories of 500-lb. alien babies born to potato farmers' wives in Idaho?"

Sorry but this is a demagocical BS

You said:"Sometimes a person doesn't have to read something to know that it's not worth reading. Usually, in such cases, the person depends upon the advice of experts and common sense."

Wow, great! Continue thiskind of approach to history!
You are an really odd history fan or maybe even a historian in my opinion.

You said:"So, if the experts don't have much respect for Suvorov, there's probably a good reason for it, and he's probably not worth reading.

Sorry but I think that most of english-speaking people has great difficulties to read Suvorov.You know he has been translated into english,but somehow only in very small quantities and immediately was out of print then.
Interesting approach to history there in the West.
If Suvorov is so ridiculous why don´t we print him and all people can read Suvorov and then fex Glantz´s "Stumbling Colossus" and then let them judge by themselves.

You said:"You might be able to question their *interpretations* of some facts, but only a fool or someone with a hidden agenda questions (or manipulates) the experts' facts the way Suvorov apparently does (according to his own groupies' testimony)."

Experts facts manipulated by Suvorov? Hmmm!!So an expert revealed a fact and then this Suvorov started to manipulate and question them.Ha-ha-ha!Also how did those "groupies" testify?Like this:"I am a groupie of fool." ???
You know Suvorov questions intepretations.

Interesting articles:

http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/raack.htm

http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/raack2.htm

Glenn Steinberg
Unregistered User
(8/20/00 6:02:46 pm)
Reply Re: Ha-ha-ha
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reigo wrote:

"You are an really odd history fan or maybe even a historian in my opinion."

I am not a professional historian, but I *am* a professional academic. I know how professional academic research and publishing works. People study for years and years and years before they get a Ph.D. and enter the realm of professional scholarship. So, they have lots of research experience with archives and other sources long before they become a professional.

As a professional, they have more time than any amateur to examine all the available evidence to determine what did or did not happen in the past. It's their *job* to do research and to come up with new books and articles with new theories and information about the past. Because of the need to publish in order to keep their jobs, they have to find new things to say all the time, or publishers (and their peers) won't even look at their work.

If Suvorov's theories had the slightest basis in reality, do you think that young historians would pass up the chance to jump on his bandwagon and publish books and articles about his new information? Why don't they? I can tell you. Because you can't just publish anything. You have to have some meager evidence to pass muster in the professional realm.

Professional historians are in a field that is rife with conflict and disagreement. I've never known a History Department at any college or university that didn't have serious rifts among the members of the department over ideological and theoretical issues. Imagine how much disagreement and conflict there is, then, in the profession as a whole (if each individual institution in the profession is itself full of conflict and disagreement).

So, when professional historians *agree* unanimously that something is beneath contempt (as they've agreed about Suvorov's work), you can bet that there's absolutely nothing to it -- that it's on a par with books that claim Bormann is alive in the South Pacific or with tabloids that claim 500-lb. alien babies are being born in Idaho.

The URLs you posted are a laugh. They're the typical conspiracy theory stuff about how liberal American academics are trying to keep the truth from being revealed. I've got news for you. You probably couldn't get two historians to agree that the sky is blue. How on earth would someone manage to get the entire profession to agree to blackball Suvorov and keep the truth of his findings secret? Can you imagine Daniel Jonah Goldhagen and Ruth Bettina Birn agreeing about much of anything? They agree, against all the odds, to ignore amateurish, unsubstantiated, sensationalist work like Suvorov's.

If you have no respect for professional historians and their expert opinions (especially if you fantasize about some grand conspiracy among professional historians), I have serious doubts about what kind of "really odd history fan or maybe even a historian" you are.

By the way, I won't waste my time with further replies in this thread.

Reigo
Unregistered User
(8/20/00 6:34:23 pm)
Reply So what did you prove?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The URL s which I posted had sources listed at the end of it. Suvorov has sources listed in the end of his books.
Your this posts point was exactly the same as your last posts one and I got it already last time.
I have read Stumbling colossus and Suvorovs books and the mainstream version about this topic changed into a ridiculous one in my opinion.
And if you don´t waste your time in this thread anymore -that´s OK.Because you made your point on the first time already.It´s no need to repeat your demagogy for the third time.

Goggi
Registered User
Posts: 18
(9/23/00 11:27:38 pm)
Reply Another view on the beginning of WW 2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everybody who doubts some of Suvorov's writings, can crosscheck some facts in the excellent book "Special Tasks" by Pavel and Anatoli Sudoplatov, published by Little, Brown & Company, Boston-New York. The ISBN is 0 - 316 - 77352 - 2. The subtitle is "The Memoirs of an unwanted Witness - A Soviet Spymaster ". According to KGB archives, Pavel Sudoplatov directed the secretive Administration for Special Tasks. This department was responisible for kidnapping, assassinations, sabotage, and guerilla warfare during World War II and after; it carried also out atomic espionage against the USA, Great Britain and Canada. Sudoplatov served the KGB for over 50 years, at one point controlling more than 20,000 guerillas, moles and spies. He was also organizing the murder of Trotzky. It's a fascinating, bone chilling book: Everybody should read it!
Goggi