Germany doesnt declare war on the U.S.

There was no reason to do so in 39 or even 41 as the death camps didn't really get started until later. Note that the Soviets probably commited more murders than the Germans up to the start of Barbarossa.

 

I have said this before ( not to you IWD ), but its interesting how you stated the "Soviets more then the Germans" and not the " Russians more then the Nazi's "

Why not the " Soviets more then the Nazis??"

 

While I am not a real expert (I minored in history in college with a focus on WWII and the Holocaust) my professor, Dr. Arnold Krammer, from my WWII, Nazi Germany, and Holocaust classes showed us NY Times articles from the late 30s and early 40s detailing the atrocities in the camps and the gassing.

 

Good point or good question. I'm not sure why I make one distinction and not the other. Part of it is the Soviet Union was more than just Russia and I'm using Soviet as short hand for Soviet Union. Probably should us USSR. There are probably a number of minor reasons that may be affecting my usage (Nazism was home grown in Germany, Communism was imported Russia for example). Something I should think about some more.

Thanks,
Lee

 

There is good arguments either way. The Soviets were a trans-national multi-ethnic regime, but it was dominated by Russia. The Soviets had a policy of "Russification" that led many like a Ukrainian friend of mine to grow up speaking Russian and have no knowledge of Ukrainian. Nazism was specifically about Germannic people. Now are the Norwegians, Dutch, Belgians, Austrians, Danes, etc. German? That is a tough question. The Nazis would have said yes, but now I doubt many would argue that they were. I think it is similar in trying to deciding between Commonwealth, British, and English. Each term has connotations that may or may not hold.

 

Not sure I understand your argument here...

 

That it was hard to separate Nazi from German and Soviet from Russian.

 

So wouldnt then you say that it would only be fair to refer to both sides equally??

Example 1. Soviets vs the Nazis

Example 2. Russians vs the Germans

as apposed to..


Soviets vs Germans or Nazis vs the Russians?

 

Personally I'd prefer to use Soviets vs Nazis in general. And it does make more sense to use your examples, but I understand why someone may say Soviets vs Germans or Russians vs Nazis

 

....

 

I think Britain shows the point exactly. Are the Scots, British?
Conversely with the 3rd Reich, are the Czechs, Nazis?

Now Soviet seems to definitely be the correct term, despite Moscow's Russification policies, since it really was more than Russia, wasn't it Ukrainians who took Berlin?

German seems wrong, unless the Dutch and Austrians are Germans.
Nazi seems wrong also, since the Wermacht is not necessarily Nazi (although as the war went on the difference between the definitely Nazi Wafen-SS and the Wermacht lessened), and it excludes the collobrators in occupied countries (Czech, Polish, Ukrainian, Dutch, French, etc).

It's a very complicated issue I think. Especially since some of the occupied nations that collaborated probably wouldn't like to be referred to as Nazis.

 

It does make sense and a very good argument...

How about this?


"German" is a nationality and this word was formed by the country of origin. During the times of Germany being an Empire called Gross Deutschland, germans still were the "#1" nationality, as per mr. Hitler, at least.
Britain is a country where britts were originally positioned as majority in terms of present nationalities, that's where the word "Britain" comes from.
There is no nationality (neither now nor in the past) as Soviets. This is political term, referring to political system where this particular citizen resides, having nothing else besides it. That's the difference.

For example one can say Americans vs. Soviets because neither one is a nationality. But not Germans vs Soviets as that would both be ethnically and politically incorrect, as Germans would be a referrence to ethnicity and Soviets would be a referrence to a political system.

Here is how you understand the difference, you can speak German but you cant speak Soviet.

Wha made you come to this conclussion?

 

I guess the question is was the 1st Ukrainian Front named for it's composition or for where it fought?

 

The 1st Ukrainian Front was one of 4 Fronts (guess what, calles 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th ) in which the part of the Red Army in Ukaine was subdivided. Further north you would find 4 Bielorussian Fronts. These were only convenient geographical designations, rather obsolete by the way as 1st Uk. Fr. for instance had already left Ukraine a few months back.

If we follow your reasoning I take it the Steppe Front formed before the battle of Kursk would have been formed of Steppians, and Voronezh Front would have been formed of Voronezhians

Back to Slipdigit's and Slonik's argument, I would say that the term British should not be entirely correct, as Britain is not the United Kingdom, it's the main island in it, there's still the other Uster bit in the Emerald Isle. A more strictly correct term would be Unitarian Subjects?

 

Why dont we just say, UnitedkingdomofgreatBritainandnorthernirelanders?

 

No, it was more a bit of confusion given that the Army was formed in the Ukraine border regions, led by a Ukrainian for a period (Zukhov), and had a high number of Ukrainians in it. Similarly to how Rudder's Rangers was led by a Texan, formed in Texas, and compromised mostly of Texans but it wouldn't be considered a Texan force.

According to the Wikipedia article on the British Isles. The main island is Great Britain. So people from the main island would be the Greater British. While all people from Great Britain, Man, Orkney, the Shetlands, Wight, Scilly, etc, etc, would be British. Ireland's inclusion seems to be a matter of debate. Of more interest is this article: British Isles (terminology) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, which goes into great depth on the matter.

 

I don't mind if you refer to us as 'Great British' at all Za.

Though 'The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland' is the full modern name of the country, all those within that geography are both 'British' & English/Northern Irish/Welsh/Scottish. It's the recent popular abbreviation to 'Brits' that I don't like.

(This is one of the more entertaining digressions I've seen a 'what if' take )

Oh yes, SD, Scots are definitely not English... for some odd reason we just ship them in to take over the Government .

Cheers,
Adam.

 

Personally my Scotch-Irish blood makes me want to say that the Scots just got tired of out sourcing their government to the English ;-)