Talk:Forest Brothers

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Cleanup[edit]

The article is written in a heroic tone not exactly suitable for an encyclopedia. It must be cleaned from colorful language. Mikkalai 20:00, 19 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm in the process of doing that now. It is, however, difficult to expect the people who contribute these sort of articles to refrain from using nationalist tones or strong picturesque language and it is not one of the worst I've come across. Lstanley1979 (talk) 00:48, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

== Similar anti-Soviet Eastern European resistance groups fought against Soviet and communist rule in Bulgaria, Poland, Romania, Croatia and western Ukraine. Deleted CROATIA as it wasnt under Soviet or external Communist rule, neither there was such force that was not independent from Neonazi puppet state. --77.105.17.68 (talk) 22:01, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

NKVD, MVD, MGB, KGB[edit]

And shouldn't it be the NKVD rather than the KGB that gets referred to throughout?radek 01:45, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

yes, kgb dealed with these matters

KGB didn't exist until 1954. In most places in the article it should be NKVD, or MVD for 1946-1954.radek 03:27, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've come across the KGB, MGB, MVD, and NKVD in various sources on this topic... as the article doesn't get into much detail about specific operations yet, for now it's probably fine to let the KGB article explain the history of the organization... heqs 01:35, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Utterly Alone[edit]

I would like to do some work on this article soon. In the meantime I added a link to Vienui vieni ("Utterly alone"), a recent film about the Lithuanian Forest Brothers. See it if you get a chance, I really enjoyed it. Heqs 16:10, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Soviet names[edit]

Shouldn't the article contain Soviet phrases, including names like "criminals", "fascists"? Xx236 07:19, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article mentions that they were considered strictly as criminals and bandits by the Soviet authorities. As for fascists, sure, but it is implicit given the context. heqs ·:. 18:49, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"displaying executed partisans' corpses" isn't harsh. Harsh is when they deport thousands to Siberia or kill civilians. Xx236 07:19, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Look at some of the pictures of those events and then try and say that. heqs ·:. 18:49, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Why don't we just take out the word harsh and let people decide for themselves? heqs ·:. 02:40, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I do not get your Point - are you asking to rewrite this article in Soviet propaganda fashion? Or do you think that partisans deported people, and therefore it is not harsh do throw their bodies on the street? pleas formulate your opinion in more understandable way.--Lokyz 11:52, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • The article doesn't present the Soviet point of view - orders, propaganda. Xx236 07:19, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the Soviet POV should also be presented. Be bold, {{Sofixit}}, etc. heqs ·:. 18:49, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • In Poland during only Augustów chase 1945 2 000 were detained, about 600 of them perished. It was outside the SU. Why should the NKVD be more polite inside? Such facts should be descibed here. Xx236 13:29, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
What exactly are you trying to say...that the NKVD were justified in their actions in the SU? Augustów chase pushed into Lithuania as well. The Soviets were fighting the same war against the forest brothers as against the cursed soldiers in Poland. Speaking of which, there was a certain amount of overlap and collaboration between the Lithuanians and the Poles, who after many years of foolish fighting against eachother realized they had one common enemy. heqs ·:. 18:49, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I would object usage of Soviet propaganda rhetorics, as for your other points -well, this article certainly needs alot of works, because many sections of it are just stubs.--Lokyz 15:19, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So describe the Soviet orders in neutral way. But the hate propaganda was a historical fact and should be mentioned. BTW - everyone knows Goebbels, why the Soviet propaganda, sometimes better than the German one, is underestimated?Xx236 15:47, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's right people still believe lots of the soviet propaganda from world war 2, but how would believe Goebbels. As for legality, they fought in uniform carrying their weapons openly, now that makes them combatants. --197.229.137.72 (talk) 18:08, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Which battles have these "Combatants" fought? People still believe Soviet propaganda, because it wasn't propaganda at all. 84.44.183.65 (talk) 02:46, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Allegiance[edit]

The Forest Brothers, by and large, held no allegiance with any foreign power. Originally, many of them expected the Western Allies' help, and if that would have come, would likely adhered to whoever provided it — but this never happened. (See also Western Betrayal.) They certainly didn't wage their guerrilla warfare for the benefit of Nazi Germany, though. Many continued for years after the end of World War II.

However, Soviet propaganda of the day found it very convenient to label them "lingering remnants of the Nazi army". Digwuren 14:24, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The text you seem to be discussing was removed as simple vandalism, which it was. They were, to varying extents, covertly allied with their Western helpers (if you read the whole article you'll see they did receive help, the extent to which this help was actually help rather than just being used as pawns in the early moves of the Cold War "game" is debatable, but that's another story). heqs ·:. 12:21, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
They are all Nazi collaborators and terrorists. Which is very easy to prove, as every single one was "released" during Nazi occupation and none was held captive. Yet when Soviets took over, they all immediately felt the urge to go "underground". Now, how much true "independence" did Nazi regime actually allow? None. 84.44.183.65 (talk) 02:42, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Roses Bloom Red"[edit]

There is a Soviet book I read a while ago (I read the Polish translation under the title Róże kwitną czerwono but the book is still in a box of stuff in someone's basement in Łódź so I can't give the author's name or the Lithuanian title at all) which was a Soviet account of the post-war Lithuanian campaigns and the dilemmae the protagonists on both sides felt. Perhaps someone could help by filling in the blanks here, as for a Soviet novel, it was pretty daring. Lstanley1979 (talk) 00:52, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The book is Rožės žydi raudonai (translated as 'Roses Have Red Blossoms' or 'Scarlet Roses Are Blooming') by Alfonsas Bieliauskas (GSE)- I managed to google this quite easily. Based on what the annotation for the Estonian translation tells - I'd previously never heard of that author, of course- I doubt if his account would be shared by any Lithuanians these days ;-) Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (woof!) 16:56, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Major restructure[edit]

I don't think there is concensus for the major restructure of the article by User:Partisan1. Have reverted pending further discussion here. Martintg (talk) 03:45, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Box on the right[edit]

~In the box thing on the right it says Strength ~50,000, ought this not say estimated? given the actual lack of a full number for these guys? Veryborednow (talk) 23:50, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit-warring to keep an obvious mistake in the article[edit]

User Sander Säde chose to start a war to reinsert an obvious lie (interpretation of an article in American Lithuanian 1988 publication as "Investigation of newly-opened Soviet archives by Baltic historians in the 1990s"). Please note obvious discrepancies in dates. Seeing that edit history of the article is full of edit-warring, I prefer an independent user to review this particular paragraph and it's sources and resolve the edit dispute. Thank you in advance.216.66.131.87 (talk) 11:55, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"War" cannot be started with a permbanned user. All article edits by banned users are to be reverted immediately, despite the content, intent or message. In any case, now the sentence is "Investigation of newly-opened Soviet archives during Perestroika showed evidence that NKVD units dressed as forest brothers committed atrocities in order to discredit them and demoralize the civilian population.". And no wikidrama needed. --Sander Säde 12:49, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Is this casual manner of throwing unproven accusations (permabanned user) around a part of your discussion style? OK, that's your problem. Now, there's still a problem with content. You need to prove that 1988-published article had been indeed based on "Investigation of newly-opened Soviet archives during Perestroika". Until you do that, the problem exist. Claim about "the proof comes from Perestroika archives" is not supported. And, before you start accusing me of "using different IPs", this is the same user those efforts you reverted in your warring. I will continue from my home IP (216.66.131.87 or whatever my ISP will give) tonight. 206.186.8.130 (talk) 13:12, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest you put away your rants about lies, threats of disruption—and lay off the caffeine and processed carbohydrates for a while. PЄTЄRS J V ►TALK 13:23, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for you advice on my diet. It does not prove that claim of Lithuanian American publication had been indeed based on "Investigation of newly-opened Soviet archives during Perestroika". 206.186.8.130 (talk) 14:37, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi guys, this is the same person as 206.186.8.130. Please provide documentary proof for the statement you're trying to keep in the article. 216.66.143.132 (talk) 23:17, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

IN ESTONIA:

The final sentences under this heading makes no sense because one sentence says "Rather than surrender..." It appears that someone was attempting to tar the Russian Authorities with his murder. He WAS an Estonian Patriot. He was also wanted by the Authorities for sedition, murder, etc. Nathan Hale deserved to be hung by the British. This doesn't lessen my pride in him, and others...such as our Estonian... who ran for their lives or, having the opportunity, shot it out.

Please correct: "Instead of surrendering, he leaped into the stream and hooked himself to a log, drowning. The KGB insisted that Sabbe drowned while trying to escape, a theory difficult to credit given the shallow water and lack of cover at the site." (Paleocon444 (talk) 02:09, 14 February 2012 (UTC))[reply]

File:Bunker of lith partisans.jpg Nominated for Deletion[edit]

An image used in this article, File:Bunker of lith partisans.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests April 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Bunker of lith partisans.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 01:10, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

POV: Whitewashing overt Nazi collaboration[edit]

<ahem> http://espritdecorps.ca/on-target-4/on-target-nazis-are-bad-period
https://www.hopenothate.org.uk/2018/01/02/nato-forest-brothers-movie-madness-worst/
https://www.stalkerzone.org/forest-brothers-nato-propaganda-video-openly-glorifies-baltic-nazi-collaborators/
https://thegrayzone.com/2017/07/20/nato-film-baltic-nazi-collaborators-forest-brothers/
2607:FEA8:BFA0:BD0:98E7:82D4:5D63:6749 (talk) 23:52, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Forest_Brothers&oldid=1077499833"