![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Was UNA a Ukrainian or German unit ? Please discuss it here instead of revert warring. -- Lysy talk 08:40, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
The country never ceased to exist, there are no document about that : There always had been a President in exile. Consult President of Ukraine#Ukrainian People's Republic
and read Shandruks book....
Best regards —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.2.26.201 ( talk) 15:09, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
Hmm, but there are many examples of history that a nation without and independent country or even under occupation could still have its military forces. Second Infantry Fusiliers Division, Polish 3rd Carpathian Rifle Division, Polish 4th Infantry Division, Polish 1st Armoured Division or Armia Krajowa are just several examples but there are many more. So why Ukrainian National Army was not a Ukrainian unit ? -- Lysy talk 16:44, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
I know, they were interned in the territory controlled by Polish 2nd Corps in Italy, and were saved from deportation to Soviet Union by General Anders who protected them as former Polish citizens. Nevertheless, they were under Ukrainian, not German command. The question is to what degree they were independent from the Nazis. -- Lysy talk 19:32, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
Віталій Масловський, З ким і проти кого воювали українські націоналісти в роки Другої світової війни. — Москва, 1999. bottom of page 186.
В березні 1945 року українські націоналісти і гітлерівці дійшли остаточної згоди про те, що під керівництвом вермахту і в його складі буде створена УНА під керівництвом генерала П. Шандрука. УНА повинна була сформуватись із різних "українських" підрозділів, які перебували в складі вермахту, військ СС та поліції. Певне місце тут відводилось і безпосередньо "Тарасові Бульбі".
The use of your sources puzzles me in two ways (please log in, by the way). First of all, how can you use Shandruk's publications on his own Nazi formations and how can you use Michael Melnyk's publication on the division his father served in? And secondly, how exactly do your sources present the Ukrainian People's Republic in exile as a sovereign state in 1945? Lysy, obviously Shandruk is obviously ethically Ukrainian, I'm not denying that. But in World War II he wore a Nazi German uniform and commanded Nazi German SS divisions, that makes him a fascist.
I'll repeat myself, it is nonsense to present the Ukrainian People's Republic as a sovereign state in 1945. And the so called Ukrainian National Army was recreated from existing German formations, in Germany, for Germany. -- Bogdan що? 15:32, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
In this declaration, it is specified that the new Ukrainian State is the lawful successor of the UNR.
Here is a French unit ... but strangely it was not under the commandment of French sovereign state... but it is called a French division http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1st_Free_French_Division this does not support your point of view... There are many example. I just wonder why you have problem with Ukrainian ....
Again I don't understand your English, (if you can write a clearer reply in Ukrainian please do) are you asking the difference between the Polish units in the west and the UNA? -- Bogdan що? 20:12, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
in http://lib.galiciadivision.com/shandruk/r22.html
Regarding principal and practical purposes of the Ukrainian National Committee, President Livytsky believed that it should: 1) seek opportunities and ways of saving Ukrainian political emigres and numerous leaders who managed to flee from the Bolsheviks in Ukraine, and 2) take over from the Germans the care of hundreds of thousands of soldiers of various Ukrainian formations who found themselves within the German armed forces voluntarily or involuntarily, and special attention was to be paid to the Division "Halychyna" which in the event of German surrender could automatically be turned over to the Bolsheviks. President Livytsky said: "Can we permit our brave soldiers who are such a treasure in the Ukrainian cause to perish? As a soldier you must not only understand, but also feel it." He also considered it imperative to discuss with leaders from Ukraine and Galicia the problem of the several million Ukrainian laborers shipped to forced labor in Germany. It would be necessary to find out how many of them do not want to return home and take care of them so that they would not fall into Communist hands. In his opinion, it would be very beneficial to retain as many as possible in the West, at least those who are the most conscious patriots among youth because, in his opinion, events could unexpectedly create favorable conditions to employ them in the interests of Ukraine. [...]
In conclusion President Livytsky said: "General, I want you to recall my words of other confidential talks, I always told you that I knew my generals well, and that in case of an important decision they would seek support in my authority, but you alone I could always let go freely because you never deviate and never lose sight of our main purpose. This time I am convinced even more firmly that my opinion of you was well justified. Therefore right now, when I don't know what your decision is going to be, I give you, as the future chairman of the Ukrainian National Committee carte blanche: all your decisions will be approved by me."
So you think it's ok to use the book that Shandruk wrote about his own formation, becuase I gave you a link to SS, and not Waffen SS? -- Bogdan що? 08:22, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
If you are going to be a dick about it, I'll ask again. When one speaks of members of Nazi Waffen SS divisions in this manner (such a treasure in the Ukrainian cause ), how can you even think of using it as a source? -- Bogdan що? 20:12, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
No, I've never been to a psychiatric hospital, thanks for asking.
I think you need to take a look outside of your little diaspora rhetoric. And even with my inherent blindness I can see that millions on Ukrainians fought in the ranks of the Red Army, not even close to the UNA and UPA numbers. So when someone puts on a German Waffen SS uniform, takes a German Waffen SS machine gun, and goes to shoot at millions of his fellow Ukrainians, I don't consider that it makes him a treasure to the Ukrainian people. -- Bogdan що? 22:02, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
Don't put words in my mouth. The last thing you should be doing when defending waffen SS formations is speaking of massacres. And Katyn is totally besides the point here. The point is that by far most Ukrainians fought in the Red army, and calling members of Nazi divisions a treasure to the Ukrainian people is nothing but offensive to the wide majority. -- Bogdan що? 10:30, 4 August 2008 (UTC) P.S. I'm still waiting to hear your great wisdom on Ukrainian universities. -- Bogdan що? 10:32, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm not going to insult your intelligence by copy and pasting content from 14th Waffen Grenadier Division of the SS Galicia (1st Ukrainian), you can read it for yourself. But I've heard of good English language book exactly on this topic; it's called Pure Soldiers Or Bloodthirsty Murderers, by Sol Littman. I'll be honest I've never read it, but I'm sure it'll answer any questions you have. P.S. I'm still waiting to hear your great wisdom on Ukrainian universities. -- Bogdan що? 17:53, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
from http://lib.galiciadivision.com/shandruk/r25.html
After the conference I went to see President Livytsky who, as I mentioned, was living near Weimar. I gave him my report and presented my new idea to him with which he was very pleased and said: "I knew that you would find a way out." I then presented the problem of the High Command of the UNA: the UNC was to issue a resolution that I was being appointed Commander of the UNA, but I personally, and many of our older soldiers were legalists, and we would like to get an order of my appointment from the Supreme Command of the UNR Army. President Livytsky promised to do this, and within a few days I received the following order:
"ORDER. To the Army and Navy of the Ukrainian National Republic. No. 8. March 15, 1945.
Re: General Staff: Lieutenant-General of (he General Staff Pavlo Shandruk is hereby appointed Commander of the Ukrainian National Army as of March 15, 1945.
(Signed): A. Livytsky, Commander-in-Chief;
(signed) M. Sadovsky, Major General, for the Ministry of Military Affairs; Certified copy of the original:
(signed) A. Nosachenko, Lt.-Col. Seal." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.249.22.138 ( talk) 22:22, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
From Melnyk, Michal James (2002). To Battle, The History and Formation of the 14th Waffen SS Grenadier Division, second updated edition 2007, Helion and Co, p268
On 25April, this is the text of the oath repeated by soldiers of the 1st division of UNA
I swear to Almighty God on his Holy Gospel and his living Cross, sparing neither life nor health, always and everywhere to fight with weapons in my hand under the Ukrainian National Banner for my people and for my homeland, Ukraine. Aware of my great responsibility as a soldier of the Ukrainian National Army, I swear that I would carry out all orders of my superiors obediently and without question, and to keep secret all service orders. So help me God and the Holy Virgin. Amen
no reference to any German state....
from http://vijsko.milua.org/v3.htm
Українська Національна Армія (УНА) - назва, під якою робилися спроби сформування української армії під час Другої світової війни 1939-45. Наприкінці війни деякі урядові кола Німеччини намагалися залучити до боротьби проти СРСР народи Сх. Європи. З цією метою у Веймарі 12-14.1945 утворено Український національний комітет (УНК; голова - П.Шандрук, заст. - В.Кубійович та О.Семененко). 12.3.1945 німецький уряд визнав УНК єдиним представником українського народу, який “має право своє настановлення до майбутнього України заступати та у відозвах і маніфестах проголошувати”. Подібні комітети створили й ін. поневолені більшовизмом народи - білоруси, грузини, гірські народи Кавказу, татари, туркестанці, які доручали П.Шандрукові представляти їхні інтереси перед вищим німецьким командуванням. 17.3.1945 з метою продовження боротьби за українську державність ухвалено Декларацію Українського національного комітету, яка проголошувала створення УНА. Особовий склад УНА мав бути одягнений в українські однострої, підпорядковуватися українському командуванню. Декларація передбачала, що ідеологічний і політичний провід належатиме УНК, а також налагодження співпраці з національними комітетами ін. народів. Згідно з наказом війську і флотові УНР від 15.3.1945, виданому Урядом УНР в екзилі на чолі з А.Лівицьким, та постановою Президії УНК (від 8.3.1945) генерал-поручник П.Шандрук був призначений командувачем УНА. У всіх документах УНК (згодом видано відозву до українського громадянства та до українських вояків) не йшлося про жодні зобов'язання щодо Німеччини. Вирішено негайно вилучити дивізію “Галичина” з підпорядкування СС і зробити її 1-ю українською дивізією УНА. Незабаром розпочалося формування 2-ї української дивізії, командиром якої призначено полковника П.Дяченка. Ця дивізія формувалася у м. Німеку під Берліном з радянських полонених-українців, які мали відповідний військовий вишкіл і складалася з 3 куренів загальною чисельністю 1900 осіб. Протягом 10 днів (24.3.-5.4.1945) сформовано бригаду особливого призначення (парашутну), командиром якої призначено отамана Т.Боровця. Бригаду, що складалася з 2 куренів (бл. 400 вояків), направили на вишкіл до Чехії. Проголосила про своє входження до УНА й бригада вільного козацтва під командуванням полковника П.Терещенка (350 осіб), яку теж перевезли до Чехії. Незабаром повідомили П.Шандрукові про своє підпорядкування УНА командир 281-ої запасної бригади полковник Ф.Гудима (5000 осіб; дислокована в Данії), два охоронні полки (близько 1000 осіб; дислоковані у Голландії і Бельгії). Командування УНА ставило перед собою завдання зібрати всі формування УНА в Австрії, недалеко від фронту, що його тримала дивізія “Галичина”. Щодо входження дивізії “Галичина” до складу УНА у квітні 1945 проведено переговори з командиром частини ген. Ф.Фрайтагом. Особовий склад дивізії присягнув на вірність Україні. Під час відступу на захід генерал П.Шандрук зі своїм штабом старався випередити головні частини дивізії, щоб поінформувати союзницькі командування про характер дивізії та УНА в цілому. Офіційним наказом П.Шандрука від 27.4.1945 оголошено про перехід дивізії до союзників. У травні 1945 частина дивізії була інтернована англійцями у м. Філлаху, інша - американцями у м. Тамсвензі. Після капітуляції Німеччини командир дивізії Ф.Фрайтаг покінчив життя самогубством. Українських вояків було зосереджено в околиці Шпітталю. Згодом зі Шпітталю дивізію перевели до Белярії (Італія), а звідти - до табору полонених у Ріміні. І українська дивізія УНА перестала існувати. Українські вояки отримали статус членів ворожих збройних сил, що здалися добровільно. Після розслідування прийнято ухвалу не застосовувати до них секретного параграфу ялтинських угод щодо примусової репатріації радянських громадян: дивізія складалася з галичан, які станом на 1.9.1939 мали громадянство Польщі. У 1946-47 українські військовополонені були звільнені з таборів й емігрували до Великої Британії, США і Канади. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.199.111.161 ( talk) 09:55, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
I guess the Diaspora has paid more attention to these booklets then I have, sorry. But either way, why does co-authoring these booklets give him the right to summarize all the UNC documents in a sentence (on a self pubished website)? -- Bogdan що? 11:05, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
No need to get emotional, start writing in caps, and say "your opinion" five times. I'm asking you, in the two little blue numbers next to "Ukrainian Popular Republic in Exile", what are you citing to, specifically? -- Bogdan що? 13:55, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
http://zustrich.quebec-ukraine.com/lib/bulba/bulba_307armee.htm
He spokes about the irregular division of the UNA : the special group B —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.217.28.90 ( talk) 20:32, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Цією відозвою Комітет проголосив свою програму та організацію нової української армії при німецьких збройних силах.
-- Bogdan що? 20:50, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Навіть перекинення першого батальйону Групи „Б", що вже в квітні 1945 року був готовий і з яким я мав намір відлітати з своїм штабом в Україну, не відбулося, бо в німецькій авіяції вже не вистачало на такі операції пального. Нам, натомість, запропонували робити короткі десанти зараз за фронтом — на польсько-чеську територію — на що ми не дали згоди . Так операція відкладалася аж до капітуляції Німеччини.
Формування української армії в Німеччині не було закінчене через капітуляцію. Була оформлена Перша Дивізія, як частина УНА, одна протитанкова бригада під командуванням полковника Петра Дяченка та два батальйони Групи „Б". Перша Дивізія була передана німецьким командуванням під команду генерала П. Шандрука. йшла активна робота по організації нових окремих бригад та відділів Групи „Б".
Let me try to summarize what we've found so far.
Do we all agree with the above ? -- Lysy talk 08:51, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
Lets remember what it is that we are debating; this . Now, the use for that little country tab is defined as follows: if the unit is part of the armed forces of a sovereign state, the name of that state. So, as we have seen from Mr. Масловський and even Bulba Borovets, this was a formation in the Wehrmacht (Heer). If anyone has any questions or objections please ask them in a civil manner, without crying "NKVD extremist". -- Bogdan що? 09:28, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
There is only one way to interpret "при німецьких збройних силах". So is this a language issue? -- Bogdan що? 13:17, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Translate it for me then. -- Bogdan що? 13:44, 5 August 2008 (UTC) What no translation? OK, since there are no other questions, I've changed the article. -- Bogdan що? 14:00, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Then what does при німецьких збройних силах mean? Please tell me! P.S. What is the page number of this critism. (sorry, didn't see the page number) --
Bogdan
що?
11:05, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Where do you see it saying that his works are factually inaccurate? It writes that he (along with another man) was a worker of the institute (he died in 1999) that defended of the Soviet regime, and that his texts are aimed at discrediting the Ukrainian nationalists. Sure, accusations of bias can be made in both directions, but neutrality is irrelevant here. We are disputing the simple statement that the UNA was within the structure of the Wehrmacht, it either was, or it wasn't; there is no biased way to put it. Mr. Масловський is a historian and he undoubtedly had the necessary documents available to him to make that statement.-- Bogdan що? 20:27, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
(Outdent) The relative quality of the translator doesn't change anything; get any French dictionary and see what "при" translates to, my French friend. -- Bogdan що? 19:47, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
A military unit infobox may be used to summarize information about an individual military unit or formation, such as a regiment or division.. taken from [3] UNA was an army not a unit or a division! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.249.84.140 ( talk) 08:26, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
A formation is not a division , an army is not a unit ... please to be bad faith! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.249.84.140 ( talk) 09:20, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
APP-6A Symbol | Name | No. of personnel | No. of subordinate units | Unit leader |
---|---|---|---|---|
XXXXXX | region or theater or front | 1,000,000 + | 4+ army groups | |
XXXXX | army group | 250,000 + | 2+ armies | |
XXXX | army | 60,000-100,000+ | 2-4 corps | colonel general or general or army general |
XXX | corps | 30,000-50,000+ | 2+ divisions | lieutenant general |
XX | division | 10,000–20,000 | 2-4 brigades or regiments | major general |
X | brigade | 3000–5000 | 2+ regiments or 3–6 battalions or Commonwealth regiments |
brigadier general, brigadier or colonel |
III | regiment or group | 2000–3000 | 2+ battalions or U.S. Cavalry squadrons | colonel |
II | battalion (of infantry), (U.S. Cavalry squadron or Commonwealth armoured regiment) | 300–1000 | 2–6 companies, batteries, U.S. Cavalry troops, or Commonwealth squadrons | lieutenant colonel |
I | company (of infantry), artillery battery, U.S. Cavalry troop or Commonwealth armoured squadron | 70–250 | 2–8 platoons or Commonwealth troops | chief warrant officer and captain or major |
••• | platoon or Commonwealth troop | 25–60 | 2+ squads, sections, or vehicles | warrant officer and first or second lieutenant |
•• | section or patrol | 8–12 | 2+ fireteams | corporal to staff sergeant |
• | squad or crew | 8–16 | 2+ fireteams or 1+ cell | corporal to staff sergeant |
Ø | fireteam | 4–5 | n/a | lance corporal to sergeant |
Ø | fire and manoeuvre team | 2 | n/a | any/Private First Class |
Sol Littman - a credible source????? During the Deschenes Commission under oath, Sol Littman testified that his "documentation" to support his outrageous allegation that Josef Mengele had entered Canada, was "analyzed" by two "retired" civil servants, but that both had "exacted" from him a pledge not to reveal their names.
Under threat of a criminal charge, he did reveal their names as Al Naylor and Corporal Fred Yetter. Under oath, Naylor testified that he had analyzed no document for Littman nor had he exacted any pledge of confidentially [Vol. 25, p.3446] --- he had never seen the documentation until it was shown to his by the commission [Vol. 25, p.3426]. He also testified that Littman deliberately made up his "retired" status in order to deceive the Deschenes Commission [Vol. 23, p.3417]. Inquiring minds would like to know why Littman was never charged with perjury for lying to a Royal Commission.
Articles attesting to Sol Littman's deceptions appeared in: Hamilton Spectator, Dec. 7, 1985 - Windsor Star Dec 5, 1985 - Globe and Mail Jan 23, 1985 - Toronto Star Jan 23, 1985 - Ukrainian Echo Feb. 1986 - Globe and Mail Jan 31, 1997.
I don't think he is credible.
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Was UNA a Ukrainian or German unit ? Please discuss it here instead of revert warring. -- Lysy talk 08:40, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
The country never ceased to exist, there are no document about that : There always had been a President in exile. Consult President of Ukraine#Ukrainian People's Republic
and read Shandruks book....
Best regards —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.2.26.201 ( talk) 15:09, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
Hmm, but there are many examples of history that a nation without and independent country or even under occupation could still have its military forces. Second Infantry Fusiliers Division, Polish 3rd Carpathian Rifle Division, Polish 4th Infantry Division, Polish 1st Armoured Division or Armia Krajowa are just several examples but there are many more. So why Ukrainian National Army was not a Ukrainian unit ? -- Lysy talk 16:44, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
I know, they were interned in the territory controlled by Polish 2nd Corps in Italy, and were saved from deportation to Soviet Union by General Anders who protected them as former Polish citizens. Nevertheless, they were under Ukrainian, not German command. The question is to what degree they were independent from the Nazis. -- Lysy talk 19:32, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
Віталій Масловський, З ким і проти кого воювали українські націоналісти в роки Другої світової війни. — Москва, 1999. bottom of page 186.
В березні 1945 року українські націоналісти і гітлерівці дійшли остаточної згоди про те, що під керівництвом вермахту і в його складі буде створена УНА під керівництвом генерала П. Шандрука. УНА повинна була сформуватись із різних "українських" підрозділів, які перебували в складі вермахту, військ СС та поліції. Певне місце тут відводилось і безпосередньо "Тарасові Бульбі".
The use of your sources puzzles me in two ways (please log in, by the way). First of all, how can you use Shandruk's publications on his own Nazi formations and how can you use Michael Melnyk's publication on the division his father served in? And secondly, how exactly do your sources present the Ukrainian People's Republic in exile as a sovereign state in 1945? Lysy, obviously Shandruk is obviously ethically Ukrainian, I'm not denying that. But in World War II he wore a Nazi German uniform and commanded Nazi German SS divisions, that makes him a fascist.
I'll repeat myself, it is nonsense to present the Ukrainian People's Republic as a sovereign state in 1945. And the so called Ukrainian National Army was recreated from existing German formations, in Germany, for Germany. -- Bogdan що? 15:32, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
In this declaration, it is specified that the new Ukrainian State is the lawful successor of the UNR.
Here is a French unit ... but strangely it was not under the commandment of French sovereign state... but it is called a French division http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1st_Free_French_Division this does not support your point of view... There are many example. I just wonder why you have problem with Ukrainian ....
Again I don't understand your English, (if you can write a clearer reply in Ukrainian please do) are you asking the difference between the Polish units in the west and the UNA? -- Bogdan що? 20:12, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
in http://lib.galiciadivision.com/shandruk/r22.html
Regarding principal and practical purposes of the Ukrainian National Committee, President Livytsky believed that it should: 1) seek opportunities and ways of saving Ukrainian political emigres and numerous leaders who managed to flee from the Bolsheviks in Ukraine, and 2) take over from the Germans the care of hundreds of thousands of soldiers of various Ukrainian formations who found themselves within the German armed forces voluntarily or involuntarily, and special attention was to be paid to the Division "Halychyna" which in the event of German surrender could automatically be turned over to the Bolsheviks. President Livytsky said: "Can we permit our brave soldiers who are such a treasure in the Ukrainian cause to perish? As a soldier you must not only understand, but also feel it." He also considered it imperative to discuss with leaders from Ukraine and Galicia the problem of the several million Ukrainian laborers shipped to forced labor in Germany. It would be necessary to find out how many of them do not want to return home and take care of them so that they would not fall into Communist hands. In his opinion, it would be very beneficial to retain as many as possible in the West, at least those who are the most conscious patriots among youth because, in his opinion, events could unexpectedly create favorable conditions to employ them in the interests of Ukraine. [...]
In conclusion President Livytsky said: "General, I want you to recall my words of other confidential talks, I always told you that I knew my generals well, and that in case of an important decision they would seek support in my authority, but you alone I could always let go freely because you never deviate and never lose sight of our main purpose. This time I am convinced even more firmly that my opinion of you was well justified. Therefore right now, when I don't know what your decision is going to be, I give you, as the future chairman of the Ukrainian National Committee carte blanche: all your decisions will be approved by me."
So you think it's ok to use the book that Shandruk wrote about his own formation, becuase I gave you a link to SS, and not Waffen SS? -- Bogdan що? 08:22, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
If you are going to be a dick about it, I'll ask again. When one speaks of members of Nazi Waffen SS divisions in this manner (such a treasure in the Ukrainian cause ), how can you even think of using it as a source? -- Bogdan що? 20:12, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
No, I've never been to a psychiatric hospital, thanks for asking.
I think you need to take a look outside of your little diaspora rhetoric. And even with my inherent blindness I can see that millions on Ukrainians fought in the ranks of the Red Army, not even close to the UNA and UPA numbers. So when someone puts on a German Waffen SS uniform, takes a German Waffen SS machine gun, and goes to shoot at millions of his fellow Ukrainians, I don't consider that it makes him a treasure to the Ukrainian people. -- Bogdan що? 22:02, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
Don't put words in my mouth. The last thing you should be doing when defending waffen SS formations is speaking of massacres. And Katyn is totally besides the point here. The point is that by far most Ukrainians fought in the Red army, and calling members of Nazi divisions a treasure to the Ukrainian people is nothing but offensive to the wide majority. -- Bogdan що? 10:30, 4 August 2008 (UTC) P.S. I'm still waiting to hear your great wisdom on Ukrainian universities. -- Bogdan що? 10:32, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm not going to insult your intelligence by copy and pasting content from 14th Waffen Grenadier Division of the SS Galicia (1st Ukrainian), you can read it for yourself. But I've heard of good English language book exactly on this topic; it's called Pure Soldiers Or Bloodthirsty Murderers, by Sol Littman. I'll be honest I've never read it, but I'm sure it'll answer any questions you have. P.S. I'm still waiting to hear your great wisdom on Ukrainian universities. -- Bogdan що? 17:53, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
from http://lib.galiciadivision.com/shandruk/r25.html
After the conference I went to see President Livytsky who, as I mentioned, was living near Weimar. I gave him my report and presented my new idea to him with which he was very pleased and said: "I knew that you would find a way out." I then presented the problem of the High Command of the UNA: the UNC was to issue a resolution that I was being appointed Commander of the UNA, but I personally, and many of our older soldiers were legalists, and we would like to get an order of my appointment from the Supreme Command of the UNR Army. President Livytsky promised to do this, and within a few days I received the following order:
"ORDER. To the Army and Navy of the Ukrainian National Republic. No. 8. March 15, 1945.
Re: General Staff: Lieutenant-General of (he General Staff Pavlo Shandruk is hereby appointed Commander of the Ukrainian National Army as of March 15, 1945.
(Signed): A. Livytsky, Commander-in-Chief;
(signed) M. Sadovsky, Major General, for the Ministry of Military Affairs; Certified copy of the original:
(signed) A. Nosachenko, Lt.-Col. Seal." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.249.22.138 ( talk) 22:22, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
From Melnyk, Michal James (2002). To Battle, The History and Formation of the 14th Waffen SS Grenadier Division, second updated edition 2007, Helion and Co, p268
On 25April, this is the text of the oath repeated by soldiers of the 1st division of UNA
I swear to Almighty God on his Holy Gospel and his living Cross, sparing neither life nor health, always and everywhere to fight with weapons in my hand under the Ukrainian National Banner for my people and for my homeland, Ukraine. Aware of my great responsibility as a soldier of the Ukrainian National Army, I swear that I would carry out all orders of my superiors obediently and without question, and to keep secret all service orders. So help me God and the Holy Virgin. Amen
no reference to any German state....
from http://vijsko.milua.org/v3.htm
Українська Національна Армія (УНА) - назва, під якою робилися спроби сформування української армії під час Другої світової війни 1939-45. Наприкінці війни деякі урядові кола Німеччини намагалися залучити до боротьби проти СРСР народи Сх. Європи. З цією метою у Веймарі 12-14.1945 утворено Український національний комітет (УНК; голова - П.Шандрук, заст. - В.Кубійович та О.Семененко). 12.3.1945 німецький уряд визнав УНК єдиним представником українського народу, який “має право своє настановлення до майбутнього України заступати та у відозвах і маніфестах проголошувати”. Подібні комітети створили й ін. поневолені більшовизмом народи - білоруси, грузини, гірські народи Кавказу, татари, туркестанці, які доручали П.Шандрукові представляти їхні інтереси перед вищим німецьким командуванням. 17.3.1945 з метою продовження боротьби за українську державність ухвалено Декларацію Українського національного комітету, яка проголошувала створення УНА. Особовий склад УНА мав бути одягнений в українські однострої, підпорядковуватися українському командуванню. Декларація передбачала, що ідеологічний і політичний провід належатиме УНК, а також налагодження співпраці з національними комітетами ін. народів. Згідно з наказом війську і флотові УНР від 15.3.1945, виданому Урядом УНР в екзилі на чолі з А.Лівицьким, та постановою Президії УНК (від 8.3.1945) генерал-поручник П.Шандрук був призначений командувачем УНА. У всіх документах УНК (згодом видано відозву до українського громадянства та до українських вояків) не йшлося про жодні зобов'язання щодо Німеччини. Вирішено негайно вилучити дивізію “Галичина” з підпорядкування СС і зробити її 1-ю українською дивізією УНА. Незабаром розпочалося формування 2-ї української дивізії, командиром якої призначено полковника П.Дяченка. Ця дивізія формувалася у м. Німеку під Берліном з радянських полонених-українців, які мали відповідний військовий вишкіл і складалася з 3 куренів загальною чисельністю 1900 осіб. Протягом 10 днів (24.3.-5.4.1945) сформовано бригаду особливого призначення (парашутну), командиром якої призначено отамана Т.Боровця. Бригаду, що складалася з 2 куренів (бл. 400 вояків), направили на вишкіл до Чехії. Проголосила про своє входження до УНА й бригада вільного козацтва під командуванням полковника П.Терещенка (350 осіб), яку теж перевезли до Чехії. Незабаром повідомили П.Шандрукові про своє підпорядкування УНА командир 281-ої запасної бригади полковник Ф.Гудима (5000 осіб; дислокована в Данії), два охоронні полки (близько 1000 осіб; дислоковані у Голландії і Бельгії). Командування УНА ставило перед собою завдання зібрати всі формування УНА в Австрії, недалеко від фронту, що його тримала дивізія “Галичина”. Щодо входження дивізії “Галичина” до складу УНА у квітні 1945 проведено переговори з командиром частини ген. Ф.Фрайтагом. Особовий склад дивізії присягнув на вірність Україні. Під час відступу на захід генерал П.Шандрук зі своїм штабом старався випередити головні частини дивізії, щоб поінформувати союзницькі командування про характер дивізії та УНА в цілому. Офіційним наказом П.Шандрука від 27.4.1945 оголошено про перехід дивізії до союзників. У травні 1945 частина дивізії була інтернована англійцями у м. Філлаху, інша - американцями у м. Тамсвензі. Після капітуляції Німеччини командир дивізії Ф.Фрайтаг покінчив життя самогубством. Українських вояків було зосереджено в околиці Шпітталю. Згодом зі Шпітталю дивізію перевели до Белярії (Італія), а звідти - до табору полонених у Ріміні. І українська дивізія УНА перестала існувати. Українські вояки отримали статус членів ворожих збройних сил, що здалися добровільно. Після розслідування прийнято ухвалу не застосовувати до них секретного параграфу ялтинських угод щодо примусової репатріації радянських громадян: дивізія складалася з галичан, які станом на 1.9.1939 мали громадянство Польщі. У 1946-47 українські військовополонені були звільнені з таборів й емігрували до Великої Британії, США і Канади. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.199.111.161 ( talk) 09:55, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
I guess the Diaspora has paid more attention to these booklets then I have, sorry. But either way, why does co-authoring these booklets give him the right to summarize all the UNC documents in a sentence (on a self pubished website)? -- Bogdan що? 11:05, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
No need to get emotional, start writing in caps, and say "your opinion" five times. I'm asking you, in the two little blue numbers next to "Ukrainian Popular Republic in Exile", what are you citing to, specifically? -- Bogdan що? 13:55, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
http://zustrich.quebec-ukraine.com/lib/bulba/bulba_307armee.htm
He spokes about the irregular division of the UNA : the special group B —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.217.28.90 ( talk) 20:32, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Цією відозвою Комітет проголосив свою програму та організацію нової української армії при німецьких збройних силах.
-- Bogdan що? 20:50, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Навіть перекинення першого батальйону Групи „Б", що вже в квітні 1945 року був готовий і з яким я мав намір відлітати з своїм штабом в Україну, не відбулося, бо в німецькій авіяції вже не вистачало на такі операції пального. Нам, натомість, запропонували робити короткі десанти зараз за фронтом — на польсько-чеську територію — на що ми не дали згоди . Так операція відкладалася аж до капітуляції Німеччини.
Формування української армії в Німеччині не було закінчене через капітуляцію. Була оформлена Перша Дивізія, як частина УНА, одна протитанкова бригада під командуванням полковника Петра Дяченка та два батальйони Групи „Б". Перша Дивізія була передана німецьким командуванням під команду генерала П. Шандрука. йшла активна робота по організації нових окремих бригад та відділів Групи „Б".
Let me try to summarize what we've found so far.
Do we all agree with the above ? -- Lysy talk 08:51, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
Lets remember what it is that we are debating; this . Now, the use for that little country tab is defined as follows: if the unit is part of the armed forces of a sovereign state, the name of that state. So, as we have seen from Mr. Масловський and even Bulba Borovets, this was a formation in the Wehrmacht (Heer). If anyone has any questions or objections please ask them in a civil manner, without crying "NKVD extremist". -- Bogdan що? 09:28, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
There is only one way to interpret "при німецьких збройних силах". So is this a language issue? -- Bogdan що? 13:17, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Translate it for me then. -- Bogdan що? 13:44, 5 August 2008 (UTC) What no translation? OK, since there are no other questions, I've changed the article. -- Bogdan що? 14:00, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Then what does при німецьких збройних силах mean? Please tell me! P.S. What is the page number of this critism. (sorry, didn't see the page number) --
Bogdan
що?
11:05, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Where do you see it saying that his works are factually inaccurate? It writes that he (along with another man) was a worker of the institute (he died in 1999) that defended of the Soviet regime, and that his texts are aimed at discrediting the Ukrainian nationalists. Sure, accusations of bias can be made in both directions, but neutrality is irrelevant here. We are disputing the simple statement that the UNA was within the structure of the Wehrmacht, it either was, or it wasn't; there is no biased way to put it. Mr. Масловський is a historian and he undoubtedly had the necessary documents available to him to make that statement.-- Bogdan що? 20:27, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
(Outdent) The relative quality of the translator doesn't change anything; get any French dictionary and see what "при" translates to, my French friend. -- Bogdan що? 19:47, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
A military unit infobox may be used to summarize information about an individual military unit or formation, such as a regiment or division.. taken from [3] UNA was an army not a unit or a division! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.249.84.140 ( talk) 08:26, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
A formation is not a division , an army is not a unit ... please to be bad faith! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.249.84.140 ( talk) 09:20, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
APP-6A Symbol | Name | No. of personnel | No. of subordinate units | Unit leader |
---|---|---|---|---|
XXXXXX | region or theater or front | 1,000,000 + | 4+ army groups | |
XXXXX | army group | 250,000 + | 2+ armies | |
XXXX | army | 60,000-100,000+ | 2-4 corps | colonel general or general or army general |
XXX | corps | 30,000-50,000+ | 2+ divisions | lieutenant general |
XX | division | 10,000–20,000 | 2-4 brigades or regiments | major general |
X | brigade | 3000–5000 | 2+ regiments or 3–6 battalions or Commonwealth regiments |
brigadier general, brigadier or colonel |
III | regiment or group | 2000–3000 | 2+ battalions or U.S. Cavalry squadrons | colonel |
II | battalion (of infantry), (U.S. Cavalry squadron or Commonwealth armoured regiment) | 300–1000 | 2–6 companies, batteries, U.S. Cavalry troops, or Commonwealth squadrons | lieutenant colonel |
I | company (of infantry), artillery battery, U.S. Cavalry troop or Commonwealth armoured squadron | 70–250 | 2–8 platoons or Commonwealth troops | chief warrant officer and captain or major |
••• | platoon or Commonwealth troop | 25–60 | 2+ squads, sections, or vehicles | warrant officer and first or second lieutenant |
•• | section or patrol | 8–12 | 2+ fireteams | corporal to staff sergeant |
• | squad or crew | 8–16 | 2+ fireteams or 1+ cell | corporal to staff sergeant |
Ø | fireteam | 4–5 | n/a | lance corporal to sergeant |
Ø | fire and manoeuvre team | 2 | n/a | any/Private First Class |
Sol Littman - a credible source????? During the Deschenes Commission under oath, Sol Littman testified that his "documentation" to support his outrageous allegation that Josef Mengele had entered Canada, was "analyzed" by two "retired" civil servants, but that both had "exacted" from him a pledge not to reveal their names.
Under threat of a criminal charge, he did reveal their names as Al Naylor and Corporal Fred Yetter. Under oath, Naylor testified that he had analyzed no document for Littman nor had he exacted any pledge of confidentially [Vol. 25, p.3446] --- he had never seen the documentation until it was shown to his by the commission [Vol. 25, p.3426]. He also testified that Littman deliberately made up his "retired" status in order to deceive the Deschenes Commission [Vol. 23, p.3417]. Inquiring minds would like to know why Littman was never charged with perjury for lying to a Royal Commission.
Articles attesting to Sol Littman's deceptions appeared in: Hamilton Spectator, Dec. 7, 1985 - Windsor Star Dec 5, 1985 - Globe and Mail Jan 23, 1985 - Toronto Star Jan 23, 1985 - Ukrainian Echo Feb. 1986 - Globe and Mail Jan 31, 1997.
I don't think he is credible.