Last surviving Soviet WW2 Hero to storm the Reichstag dies

[KWG]

The last of the Second World War veterans to have taken part in the storming of the Reichstag in Berlin has died, aged 93.

Soviet-era hero Nikolay Belyaev was the last survivor of the feared 3rd Shock Army troops who spearheaded the taking of the German capital.

It was Belyaev's 756th regiment that tore down the Nazi swastika and raised the Soviet red flag over the parliament's broken roof on May 1, 1945.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z3u3lWHsWK



URRRAH POBEDA!!!

[Mehring]

Such a shame that by that time the Hammer and Sickle had become the emblem of Muscovite nationalism and counter-revolution.

[sillyflower]

Mehring.

Please can you give your politics a rest for once [>:]?

There are plenty of suitable places for your views, but not an apolitical forum and especially not a thread commemorating the life of an individual who's views on the subject are unknown.

Signed

A capitalist running-dog

[charlie0311]

Like really dude..

Thx KWG.

Uhrrah!!

[Whyalterhistory]

"hero" ?

[Mehring]

ORIGINAL: sillyflower

Mehring.

Please can you give your politics a rest for once [>:]?

There are plenty of suitable places for your views, but not an apolitical forum and especially not a thread commemorating the life of an individual who's views on the subject are unknown.

Signed

A capitalist running-dog

Firstly, apolitical is a fantasy, ridiculous on a site dealing with war which is, as Clausewits so astutely observed, "not merely a political act but a real political instrument, a continuation of political intercourse, a carrying out of the same by other means." The separation of form from content is the business those wishing to confuse themselves and others, among whom I do not include myself. Case in point, since soldiery in the cause of something reviled is regarded as, at best, tragic rather than heroic, or the description of such a soldier as a "hero" would demand some qualification, one must assume some amount of sympathy in the author for the cause. The article is therefore passively political.


Secondly, I am still free to express my views on history as much as anyone else here. While I have from time to time challenged your views and irksome "humour" I have never sought to silence you, however pathetic I might find your comments. It is not my business or right to do so, and vice versa.

Thirdly, the views of the individual are not at issue, he fought for a political entity which he may or may not have understood. I am merely noting the relationship of the individual to the political entity he fought for, and lamenting the transformation of that entity and its emblems, something which history has yet to fully understand, from something progressive to something reactionary. If you find it boring, you don't need to read on.

[RedBunny]

ORIGINAL: Whyalterhistory?

"hero" ?

Of course. What else would he be?

[sillyflower]

ORIGINAL: Mehring

ORIGINAL: sillyflower

Mehring.

Please can you give your politics a rest for once [>:]?

There are plenty of suitable places for your views, but not an apolitical forum and especially not a thread commemorating the life of an individual who's views on the subject are unknown.

Signed

A capitalist running-dog

Firstly, apolitical is a fantasy, ridiculous on a site dealing with war which is, as Clausewits so astutely observed, "not merely a political act but a real political instrument, a continuation of political intercourse, a carrying out of the same by other means." The separation of form from content is the business those wishing to confuse themselves and others, among whom I do not include myself. Case in point, since soldiery in the cause of something reviled is regarded as, at best, tragic rather than heroic, or the description of such a soldier as a "hero" would demand some qualification, one must assume some amount of sympathy in the author for the cause. The article is therefore passively political.


Secondly, I am still free to express my views on history as much as anyone else here. While I have from time to time challenged your views and irksome "humour" I have never sought to silence you, however pathetic I might find your comments. It is not my business or right to do so, and vice versa.

Thirdly, the views of the individual are not at issue, he fought for a political entity which he may or may not have understood. I am merely noting the relationship of the individual to the political entity he fought for, and lamenting the transformation of that entity and its emblems, something which history has yet to fully understand, from something progressive to something reactionary. If you find it boring, you don't need to read on.

Calm down, dear.

There is a world of difference difference between 'politics' and 'your politics' though perhaps I should have made it even clearer by writing 'your personal politics'. You have to be fairly paranoid to think that my polite request was an attempt to silence you.

I'm sure we can all benefit from seeing your sense of humour come out in the forum.

It occurs that I might be entirely wrong, because other forum readers find your political views more amusing than my jokes. If so, I owe you an unreserved apology for my posts on this thread

[Mehring]

Given you pass other peoples' innumerable political posts here without objection, it takes no great insight to see you object only to my politics in particular. Whether couched in affectedly aristocratic understatement or not, a request to stop posting is an attempt to silence, no paranoia is necessary to see the obvious. By what sophistry could it be otherwise?

Going by what you consider to be amusing, I don't think you'd appreciate my sense of humour at all.

[Mehring]

ORIGINAL: RedBunny

ORIGINAL: Whyalterhistory?

"hero" ?

Of course. What else would he be?

Just a pawn in a power struggle over which he had no control.

[LiquidSky]

No..he was a hero. If your looking for pawns just look at the USA and the sheeple that vote republican. But really, the argument is not that you have or have not the right/ability/rant to spout political nonsense, but the place and timing.

This is a post about a hero, who was a part of what even you may consider a monumental event in history...and his death of old age. You could reflect on the event and what his part in it was...and the life he was able to live afterwards.

Instead you spout something about well..whatever. Nothing to do with the post.

I applaud the hero...and his accomplishments. From Murmansk to Staraya Russa..Riga...Warsaw..on to Berlin. He said he only retreated one day.

He served with the 756th regiment of the 150th Rifle Division (3rd formation)

[Mehring]

You can applaud whatever you like, and deride my comments as nonsense, but to depoliticise war, in your head at least- is to make it meaningless, to separate form from content, to seek bliss from ignorance instead of the often painful truth.

This man's regiment was the one which raised the hammer and sickle over the Reichstag. Again, in denying the relevance of my comment, you separate the form of the event from its political content. If contrasting the meaning of his regiment raising the hammer and sickle over the Reichstag in 1945 with the same had it occurred 20 years or so earlier, is not reflecting on the event, I don't know what is.

It sounds to me like your conception of reflection is to revel in a sceptical fantasy in which deeper truth is not knowable. At any rate, I do not limit my reflections to immediacy but by establishing the connection of events with, and their relation to, the whole, attempt to draw out their meaning; to penetrate appearances to the root contradictions that motivate. Consequently, while you are only able to deride republican voters as "sheeple" I will hazard a guess that you vote for the opposite side of the same coin. So should I mock you and your illusions of superiority or are we not all at different levels of consciousness, all with the ability to learn and make new generalisations from new experience?

[sillyflower]

ORIGINAL: Mehring

Going by what you consider to be amusing, I don't think you'd appreciate my sense of humour at all.

You are too modest about your sense of humour. Your last few posts on this thread have made me laugh anyway

[Whyalterhistory]

Maybe one of the brutes that raped over 2 million german girls. Yeah some "hero".

[Mehring]

ORIGINAL: Whyalterhistory?

Maybe one of the brutes that raped over 2 million german girls. Yeah some "hero".

What gets me about Hitler as a character is, how camp? All that self importance and he should have been a game show host or done the national lottery winners show. Missed vocation. His admirers can't see it of course, so unaware they can't see for looking and the ideology says queer bashing's all right. Conflicted, eh?

So, never take things at face value. Back to "hero." What is a hero? What is heroic?

[Joel Billings]

This thread has been locked. Please take the political discussions to another forum. Thank you.