PDA

View Full Version : Estonian prime minister went nuts


forre
14-07-2006, 15:37
Estonian prime minister: Estonians who fought on the side of Germany committed feat of arms

Struggle of Estonian citizens, who fought on the side of Germany in World War II, was a feat of arms, believes Estonian Prime Minister Andrus Ansip. As DELFI reports, he made the statement on July 8 at a meeting of “fighters for Estonia’s freedom” in the town of Voru. “Your fight was a feat of arms that should be highly appreciated now and in future. Although independence of the Estonian Republic was not restored then, tour fight highly contributed to the fact that the Estonian nation maintained its aspiration for freedom for the whole period of the Soviet occupation. You keep saying in your circle: we lost that battle, but on the whole we won that war. You won, so did the whole nation. The Estonian sovereignty is restored on the basis of succession. Here lies your historic contribution to the Estonian nation. I cannot agree with those, who think your fight senseless. How can one consider senseless the fact that people were doing their duty before the nation and the state?” the prime minister announced.

Source: Regnum (http://www.regnum.ru/english/671145.html)

freddie
14-07-2006, 17:27
Fighting for the Nazi regime is "doing one's duty"? Hmmm... we had a bunch of those people here - they were called "domobranci" (loosely translated into "defenders of their home/country"). They fought for the German side and they'll say today they did it to protect the nation's existence, but the communist party wasn't all that sympathetic to their cause - a whole bunch of them were murdered sans trial, while others immigrated to Argentina, USA and Canada. I'm sure there were cases of collaborations with the Germans all over Europe and through history's eyes it's often seen as an act of criminality.

Personaly I'll admit many of these people were lead into believing they were actually doing the only thing to preserve the existance of their homelands, but that doesn't change the fact they were deluded - fighting for one of history's greatest evil alliances requires a great deal of personal naivety and/or desperation. To call their efforts highly appreciated is a little bit of an overstatement to be honest. Most of them weren't really criminals.. but they weren't heros neither.

The Estonian prime minister certainly isn't alone in statements like this, though. Jörg Haider, leader of the Austrian Freedom Party, a well known far-right extremist and anti-semite publically acknowledged "efforts" Austrian SS-Waffen veterans made during WW2. And he's not just some lunatic from the edge of the political spectrum - for a while he and his party were a part of the Austrian coalition! And I'm sure some of his far-right political peers all over Europe would agree with his views (Jean-Marie Le Pen comes to mind).

Argos
14-07-2006, 17:58
...Jörg Haider, leader of the Austrian Freedom Party, a well known far-right extremist and anti-semite publically acknowledged "efforts" Austrian SS-Waffen veterans made during WW2. And he's not just some lunatic from the edge of the political spectrum - for a while he and his party were a part of the Austrian coalition!
How little you know about Austrian politics. Your anti-semite regularly visits his numerous Jewish friends at the East-Coast. Haider is no far-right no extremist no antisemite. He is only a lyer, a demagoge, a cheap little parasite, who abuses the fears of people in a small country, who have to live at the borders which devide rich western europe from poor eastern europe. He has no own opinions, he only has his ears at the asses of the 'little people', so he can hear every fart. And by the way, he is still in coalition and hopefully no longer after the election this October.

marina
14-07-2006, 18:16
So , Estonians who fought for Nazi Germany during WWII could be called the freedom fighters ?
And the armed fight on the side of Hitler could be declared a fight against the USSR's aggression and illegal occupation ?

Neat.


p.s. they have a bloody nerve ...where is Stalin when you need him ?:D

freddie
14-07-2006, 18:23
How little you know about Austrian politics. Your anti-semite regularly visits his numerous Jewish friends at the East-Coast. Haider is no far-right no extremist no antisemite. He is only a lyer, a demagoge, a cheap little parasite, who abuses the fears of people in a small country, who have to live at the borders which devide rich western europe from poor eastern europe. He has no own opinions, he only has his ears at the asses of the 'little people', so he can hear every fart. And by the way, he is still in coalition and hopefully no longer after the election this October.

I don't care who's opinion he endorses... he's a politician - politicians do exactly what you describe - exploiting people's fears and expectations to gain support. He's still widely seen as a far-right extremist and a known anti-semite. For god sakes, Israel even called off their ambassador from Austria after a coalition was formed with Heider in it. Let me not even go into specific statements he made which were at the least quasi-nazi if not full-out anti-semite. There are plenty of those. I couldn't give a damn if he's not really an antisemite in his own personal convictions. All I see is his public persona which certainly shows it. That's all I need in that respect.
And trust me - I know enough about the guy and Austrian foreign policies, mostly since good ol' Jörg's been an active participant in breaching rights of Slovene national minority in Austrian Carinthia, by exploiting loop holes and riding waves of national intolerance among (some) native Austrian citizens in Carinthia.

haku
14-07-2006, 19:32
Well, it's a difficult topic, there was no 'good side' on the Eastern front, on one side you had Nazi Germany and on the other side you had Bolshevik Russia, none were fighting for 'freedom', they were both fighting to impose a different kind of oppression.
A country like Estonia that was caught in the middle had no decent way out, regardless of the outcome of the war, it would either end up annexed by the USSR or annexed by the IIIrd Reich, there was no other alternative.
No matter which side they chose, no matter if they were on the winning or the losing side of the war, oppression was the only thing waiting for the Estonian people.

And let's not forget that it's the Soviet Union which invaded Estonia in 1940 (Estonia was neutral before that, like Finland), and there was only 2 sides in that war, the Allies and the Axis, and since Estonia had been invaded by one of the Allies, it fell automatically in the Axis side.
Estonia simply ended up on the side that had *not* attacked it, it was not a choice, it simply had no other alternative.
That's why in the end i consider Estonia a victim of the war, no matter what side they were on, especially since the war was followed for them by half a century of Soviet oppression.

freddie
14-07-2006, 20:45
Well, it's a difficult topic, there was no 'good side' on the Eastern front, on one side you had Nazi Germany and on the other side you had Bolshevik Russia, none were fighting for 'freedom', they were both fighting to impose a different kind of oppression.
A country like Estonia that was caught in the middle had no decent way out, regardless of the outcome of the war, it would either end up annexed by the USSR or annexed by the IIIrd Reich, there was no other alternative.
No matter which side they chose, no matter if they were on the winning or the losing side of the war, oppression was the only thing waiting for the Estonian people.

And let's not forget that it's the Soviet Union which invaded Estonia in 1940 (Estonia was neutral before that, like Finland), and there was only 2 sides in that war, the Allies and the Axis, and since Estonia had been invaded by one of the Allies, it fell automatically in the Axis side.
Estonia simply ended up on the side that had *not* attacked it, it was not a choice, it simply had no other alternative.
That's why in the end i consider Estonia a victim of the war, no matter what side they were on, especially since the war was followed for them by half a century of Soviet oppression.

If you look at it that way then Slovenia, Croatia, Serbia and all other ex-Yu republics were victims of a communist oppression just as well - up until 1950 there was no notable difference between Yugoslavia smf other ex Soviet satelite states like Poland, Romania Czechoslovakia or Bulgaria... and yet even today history still regards communist partisans who fought on Tito's side as freedom fighters and eventual liberators compared to those who sided with Hitler (granted there's been much political dispute regarding the topic, but still). Slovenia was an independent country before Yugoslavia once. We could have easily regarded the communists as those who took away our freedom - but in turn we rather saw them as people who took our freedom into isloation for 50 years but ultimately still preserved at least a glimpse of hope of independence (something that would NEVER happen if Germany won - a Slavic country in the 3rd Reich? Come on!). USSR was possibly a same kind of prolongued freedom instrument for Estonia.

haku
14-07-2006, 21:16
even today history still regards communist partisans who fought on Tito's side as freedom fightersAnd that's something i've always disagreed with. Communism is a form of totalitarianism just as bad as national-socialism, there is no more room for freedom in a communist regime than in a national-socialist regime.
Those communist fighters were anything but "freedom" fighters, they were fighting to gain power and install a proletarian dictatorship, and in all countries where those communist fighters did take power after WWII, they were as ruthless as nazis in eliminating political opponents and oppressing people, there was no freedom whatsoever.

Even in France, the communist resistants made no secret that they were taking their orders from Moscow and wanted to take power by force in Paris when the German army would withdraw, an extreme faction even wanted France to become a SSR.
Charles de Gaule was fully aware of this and he never trusted the communist resistants as he knew they would turn on him and try to seize power during the withdrawal of the German army. He was very careful in 1944 to keep communists away from stratigical locations during the liberation to prevent them from taking power, and one of his first actions once he was in Paris was to force the communist resistants to disarm.

So no, communists are no freedom fighters, they were just another totalitarian beast. I've always refused to consider that the Soviet Union, Stalin and his communist fighters all over Europe were fighting on the side of freedom just because they were fighting against the nazis.

freddie
15-07-2006, 01:40
And that's something i've always disagreed with. Communism is a form of totalitarianism just as bad as national-socialism, there is no more room for freedom in a communist regime than in a national-socialist regime.
Those communist fighters were anything but "freedom" fighters, they were fighting to gain power and install a proletarian dictatorship, and in all countries where those communist fighters did take power after WWII, they were as ruthless as nazis in eliminating political opponents and oppressing people, there was no freedom whatsoever.

Even in France, the communist resistants made no secret that they were taking their orders from Moscow and wanted to take power by force in Paris when the German army would withdraw, an extreme faction even wanted France to become a SSR.
Charles de Gaule was fully aware of this and he never trusted the communist resistants as he knew they would turn on him and try to seize power during the withdrawal of the German army. He was very careful in 1944 to keep communists away from stratigical locations during the liberation to prevent them from taking power, and one of his first actions once he was in Paris was to force the communist resistants to disarm.

So no, communists are no freedom fighters, they were just another totalitarian beast. I've always refused to consider that the Soviet Union, Stalin and his communist fighters all over Europe were fighting on the side of freedom just because they were fighting against the nazis.

This opens up a different question entirely. The whole philosophy of communism as an ideology. In it's untarnished condition it'd really be the perfect form of government - power to the people, literally. Isn't that what the hippies were fighting for in the 70s? The fundamental problem with communism though is that it's not realistic. It's pure utopia. It doesn't consider one basic fact: that humans are flawed... and prone to corruption. This is it's weakest property - communism is helpless against corruption of it's highest institutions (which is usually a solitary Communist Party).
What you need to understand though, is that communist partisans actually did fight for their homeland. An average partisan was nothing but a peasant from a nearby village who was given a machine-gun. They actually believed the utopic idea of communism where it'd be the people running the factories and plowing the fields. Corruption was the furthest thing from their minds. All they saw were promises of a better future - like a promise they'll be given land of their former land-overlords (who were mostly German). Land they'll be able to keep and maintain to become self-sufficient. Doesn't sound bad in theory does it? An average Joe had no clue about the plans communist party made after the war. Tito was just a heroic figure - an icon of the resistance... and no one even knew Stalin existed when they were fighting against nazi occupation. All those things came later. So these people were actually fighting for their homelands and nothing else. Real flaws of communism were only exposed 5 or 10 years later... when it was too late already.

marina
15-07-2006, 04:37
Communism is a form of totalitarianism just as bad as national-socialism, there is no more room for freedom in a communist regime than in a national-socialist regime.


Absolutely not ! They are both oppressed you but not quite the same . Under the communists if you kept your mouth shut and obeyed, you lived. My grandparents , my parents , I lived ....and I'm still alive :) Of course , I haven't got freedom back then as I have now , I couldn't probably talk to you in a way I do this moment or , God forbid ! , move abroad whenever I pleased ....But never in my life I was hungry , I had a medical service and Uni education. Free. And more importantly -- I've lived ....I am alive.
Under the Nazis, your nationality , looks , blood , something you cannot control over , damned you to 1)death or 2) harsh slavery and then death.

dradeel
15-07-2006, 13:55
Don't wanna fuck up and cut in with uninteresting stuff, but I just felt like saying that we - untill this day - have never seen real Communism at work. The cases in Sovjet, China and many other places around the earth have never evolved into _Communism_. A few personalities has taken advantage of the situation and created a dictatorship. Lenin, Stalin and Mao were never Communists... They just took advantage of the ideologies and tricked masses of people for their own pleasures. :)

If perfect Communism had excisted it would've been pretty super. Personally I'm no communist tho. I have other opinions of how the world should be, as I have to fait in a Communist revolution/evolution. In short I'd say it's a utopia... but I still want to defend the Communist-name. :)

There... Hehe.

First I thought I'd agree with Marina on the Communism-Nazism issue, buuut it's just that Hitler was a little pussy compared to Stalin :p Stalin have killed a hell of alot more of his own country-men than any other leader. Mao were ruthless as well, by killing off around 30 millions in hunger because he needed to melt metals for the industry. And then take nazi-germany and even _NORWAY_ for that case; Hitler didn't want to kill anyone of his own people, as long as they were blue-eyed arians. If you were white and non-jewish in Germany, you were super-safe. The germans never did anything with norwegians that didn't do anything against them. The germans came up here to "save us". They thought of us as their allies in need, it's just that we didn't want their help. Hehe. But we did fine under the war. There weren't many norwegians that died.

But yeah, the reasons for the nazis to kill people were extreme. As you say: they killed people for things they couldn't control. The jewish genocide was just insane. But that's indirectly what happened in China and Russia as well, since the normal comrade couldn't do anything with hunger caused by stupid desicions of one man or mass deaths in bloody wars. So you could say the communist countries in some ways were more free (if you weren't politically against the communist party that is, but as Marina said; if you shut your mouth that wouldn't be a problem)... but people still died heavily all over the place tho. Heh.