Posted on 06/07/2014 2:00:03 PM PDT by Perdogg
Russia's deputy prime minister called on Saturday for the name Stalingrad to be restored to the city that was the site of a key World War II battle against the Nazis.
"I never doubted the need to give back great Stalingrad its name. Not for the sake of Stalin, but for the sake of the Stalingraders," Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin wrote on Twitter.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Yep. But there isn’t a way to honestly and historically accurately discuss the horrors of the siege and the spirit needed to endure them while calling the place Happygrad.
Should we rename Dachau?
I was asserting yours.
One doesn't need to have the modern day city named Stalingrad to remember accurately the horror of the siege.
And of course it was Stalin himself who besieged the people of Ukraine AND Russia.
Do you also take the position that the folks in Ukraine should proudly display swastikas because there was a brief moment in history when the Nazis were seen as liberators in Ukraine from the tyranny of Stalin???
"I agree. Only communists and fascists try to bury history."
I had said:
"I agree. It is a hallmark of communism and fascism to try to bury history."?
Using the absolute "only" was an overstatement...
Asserting my first amendment rights in and of itself is fine and dandy.
But you were asserting my first amendment rights with an undeserved rhetorical question.
No thanks.
Point taken.
Suit yourself. Feel free to fill out a butthurt report.
LOL. What?
Gimme a minute!
One doesn't need to have the modern day city named Stalingrad to remember accurately the horror of the siege
That could work even better. Explaining Stalingrad to a young'un would naturally cause a more alert or open to learning young'un to ask why we don't call the place Stalingrad these days?
THAT'S the point to discuss Stalin.
You seem cross and hurt.
Do you know what Stalin did to the heroes of Leningrad, he had them killed, because communications were cut off from Moscow during the siege, they acted independently of Stalin, Stalin couldn’t have that.
Nah, I’m rather enjoying the conversation.
And if I understand your last post correctly, then we agree?
Yes, damn you!
If Hitlerstadt’s defenders had against all odds pushed back the full might of the Red Army, Hitler had died naturally in the 50s after making the Third Reich a superpower, and Germany had collapsed in the 1990s just as the USSR did, I don’t think that changes the appeal one bit.
Hitler’s still a murderous dictator. So is Stalin. Even Stalin’s successor almost immediately changed the name back to Volgograd, so it’s not like it was called that from the 30s until the collapse.
Didn’t the Beatles sing a song with that in it??
Khrushchev was not “in charge of Stalingrad’s defense. Khrushchev was the South East Front Deputy for political matters (commissar in the old Red Army). With the changes in the Soviet Army implemented in Aug 1942, Khrushchev did not exercise military command authority, he did not countersign Commanders orders, nor could he countermand them. The South East front Commander was General Andrei Yeremenko. With in the South East Front was the city of Stalingrad. General Vasily Chuikov commanded the 62nd Army in Stalingrad.
something like that
“Back in the USSR” was the song I think
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.