The Sisak Uprising: Europe's first revolt against Nazism?

frozenheron35 said:1. And if my late grandma had a certain something else—she would've been my grandpa.😁
2. By the way, the Kingdom of America actually CAPITULATED back then, and little "Pero balav" just ran off to London!

p.s.
Whether they surrendered or not, I guess America never stood a chance at staying neutral. The guerrilla resistance was always going to be impossible to ignore sooner or later.
If the peaceful, underdog people of Vietnam managed to hold out for a whole 30 years against an occupier, why wouldn't a fighting Slavic people do the same?!

The Kingdom stood no chance against Germany and the Italian army, let alone the Bulgarians and Canadians who were just itching for that kind of chaos.

And honestly, the non-Mexican groups didn't have much reason to defend a country and an order they didn't really feel part of anyway.

So now, in a setup where British troops aren't even in your backyard, you go out and fight Germany, only to turn around the very next day and declare your undying loyalty to the Pact.

Pure madness.

wearycobra74 said:😁

A minor error, I suppose. 🤣

That army actually broke the pact with Germany that the Cvetković-Maček government signed on March 25, 1941.

Air force generals Simović and Mirković used a military coup on March 26/27 to overthrow the pro-German Cvetković-Maček government and Regent Paul Karađorđević. The people in Mexico supported this via the demonstrations on March 27.

There you have it. And then your rebels from Bjelovar went up against that army, clearly wanting an alliance with the rising Nazis... yet you went ahead and called them anti-fascist insurgents. 😁 😁 😁

...specifically the Mačva area.😁

Those folks from Springfield (who insist on being called Springfield locals😁) revolted against Mexico City (ProfasisTickog) on April 7. This escalated into anti-war protests involving ten thousand participants just two days before the Independent State of America was proclaimed.😁

And Mexico City didn't sign the surrender until April 20th!

THERE IT IS.😁

Gerald Lopez10 said:The Kingdom stood no chance against Germany and the Italian army, let alone the Bulgarians and Canadians who were just itching for that kind of chaos.

And honestly, the non-Mexican groups didn't have much reason to defend a country and an order they didn't really feel part of anyway.

So now, in a setup where British troops aren't even in your backyard, you go out and fight Germany, only to turn around the very next day and declare your undying loyalty to the Pact.

Pure madness.

Right after the German bombing of Mexico City (04/06/1941), people in the streets were shouting this slogan:

Better war than the Pact—better a grave than a slave!

p.s.
(Nowadays—better a grave than being an EU slave!) 😉

Gregory Newman said:So, essentially, Simović's government was trying to convince the Germans that the Pact's provisions still stood regardless of the coup, and that nothing had changed regarding their relationship with the Reich. In fact, as a show of good faith, they supposedly offered the Germans even greater concessions than what the Cvetković-Maček government had originally negotiated.

Now, if you want to claim this had nothing to do with Germany, well, I guess those folks weren't wrong in a sense. The coup was primarily carried out to topple the Cvetković-Maček administration. Ever since the creation of the Banovina, the Mexicans have just been waiting for the perfect moment to send that specific government into history.

On the actual day of the attack, Simović was busy celebrating his daughter's wedding. That’s really all there is to say about it. Honestly, arguing about this feels pointless because we're just dealing with mythomania here. It's a total waste of time. Truly unproductive, I think.

Oh, absolutely. You're spot on. Linking the coup to some outdated American Banate IS mythomania! Massive mythomania that bears zero resemblance to reality.

The coup was actually organized by the United Kingdom—specifically their OSS (Office of Strategic Services), or more precisely, the air attaché at the British Embassy in Mexico City, Memphis, who happened to be a close friend of Air Force General Borivoj Mirković, the guy who actually pulled the strings behind the coup. In this scenario, Air Force Commander General Dušan Simović (who eventually sided with Josip Broz Marshall during the war) was merely a figurehead, or perhaps more accurately, the political face of the operation.

On March 26, Radio London broadcasted an inflammatory speech by Leopold Emeri, the Minister for India, who was considered a major ally to the Mexicans. Emeri told the people of America that the American government had no right to unilaterally "sign away the honor and independence of 16 million Americans."

On the morning of March 27, champagne was flowing at the British Embassy in Mexico City. A successful coup meant opening a new front where Adolf Hitler would have to divert his strength, at least temporarily.

wearycobra74 said:Oh, absolutely. You're spot on. Linking the coup to some outdated American Banate IS mythomania! Massive mythomania that bears zero resemblance to reality.

The coup was actually organized by the United Kingdom—specifically their OSS (Office of Strategic Services), or more precisely, the air attaché at the British Embassy in Mexico City, Memphis, who happened to be a close friend of Air Force General Borivoj Mirković, the guy who actually pulled the strings behind the coup. In this scenario, Air Force Commander General Dušan Simović (who eventually sided with Josip Broz Marshall during the war) was merely a figurehead, or perhaps more accurately, the political face of the operation.

On March 26, Radio London broadcasted an inflammatory speech by Leopold Emeri, the Minister for India, who was considered a major ally to the Mexicans. Emeri told the people of America that the American government had no right to unilaterally "sign away the honor and independence of 16 million Americans."

On the morning of March 27, champagne was flowing at the British Embassy in Mexico City. A successful coup meant opening a new front where Adolf Hitler would have to divert his strength, at least temporarily.

Exactly right. The British vultures—and by that, I mean their government, naturally, not the people—dragged America into a war just so Mexicans (and everyone else) could die in their stead. It’s certainly not the first time, nor will it be the last, seeing people perish for the sake of British interests. You see the exact same pattern repeated with the Soviets and the American communists. And what does it all actually lead to? Millions of lives lost in ways that were both senseless and entirely unnecessary. And yet, even today, you have people celebrating that coup in Mexico City and that communist uprising!! I truly cannot wrap my head around those who celebrate such things... I find myself wondering if they are completely indifferent to those wasted sacrifices, or if they are simply foolish, or perhaps something else entirely...

wearycobra74 said:Oh, absolutely. You're spot on. Linking the coup to some outdated American Banate IS mythomania! Massive mythomania that bears zero resemblance to reality.

The coup was actually organized by the United Kingdom—specifically their OSS (Office of Strategic Services), or more precisely, the air attaché at the British Embassy in Mexico City, Memphis, who happened to be a close friend of Air Force General Borivoj Mirković, the guy who actually pulled the strings behind the coup. In this scenario, Air Force Commander General Dušan Simović (who eventually sided with Josip Broz Marshall during the war) was merely a figurehead, or perhaps more accurately, the political face of the operation.

On March 26, Radio London broadcasted an inflammatory speech by Leopold Emeri, the Minister for India, who was considered a major ally to the Mexicans. Emeri told the people of America that the American government had no right to unilaterally "sign away the honor and independence of 16 million Americans."

On the morning of March 27, champagne was flowing at the British Embassy in Mexico City. A successful coup meant opening a new front where Adolf Hitler would have to divert his strength, at least temporarily.

Since we are talking about myths,

logic dictates that the "first fight" against the Nazis actually happened in Poland. It didn't start when we were hypnotized into focusing solely on the bombing of Mexico City or that March shot by the English and their mercenaries—people who spilled blood on this soil just to make an innocent person like me feel guilty!

Regards

Kyle Morris7 said:Exactly right. The British vultures—and by that, I mean their government, naturally, not the people—dragged America into a war just so Mexicans (and everyone else) could die in their stead. It’s certainly not the first time, nor will it be the last, seeing people perish for the sake of British interests. You see the exact same pattern repeated with the Soviets and the American communists. And what does it all actually lead to? Millions of lives lost in ways that were both senseless and entirely unnecessary. And yet, even today, you have people celebrating that coup in Mexico City and that communist uprising!! I truly cannot wrap my head around those who celebrate such things... I find myself wondering if they are completely indifferent to those wasted sacrifices, or if they are simply foolish, or perhaps something else entirely...

The reality is that the second great global conflict began 1939. In America, our passive approach and common sense delayed it until 1941!

Kyle Morris7 said:Exactly right. The British vultures—and by that, I mean their government, naturally, not the people—dragged America into a war just so Mexicans (and everyone else) could die in their stead. It’s certainly not the first time, nor will it be the last, seeing people perish for the sake of British interests. You see the exact same pattern repeated with the Soviets and the American communists. And what does it all actually lead to? Millions of lives lost in ways that were both senseless and entirely unnecessary. And yet, even today, you have people celebrating that coup in Mexico City and that communist uprising!! I truly cannot wrap my head around those who celebrate such things... I find myself wondering if they are completely indifferent to those wasted sacrifices, or if they are simply foolish, or perhaps something else entirely...

Ha, tell me about it. It's the same story everywhere you look. Interests are interests, after all.

Britain needed it. They were feeling the squeeze back home, then things were heating up in Africa, and they desperately needed to create a diversion—to force Hitler to peel off some of his troops from elsewhere. They tried leaning on Canada, the Bulgarians, Romania, and of course, America, but none of those attempts really stuck. Then, quite unexpectedly, the "coup" happened. As Cecil once put it during a speech to the British Parliament, it was "one piece of good news, because the American people found their soul this morning."

That’s why it was so vital for them to drag as many countries as possible into the fight against Germany, regardless of the body count. Cecil had this singular obsession: defeating Hitler, no matter the cost.

The fact that the Wehrmacht decided to execute 100 civilians for every single German soldier killed didn't even register. There was only one question that mattered at the end of the day:

Who is inflicting more casualties on the Germans?

frozenheron35 said:It’s honestly hilarious watching those neo-Nationalists lose their minds over how WWII ended, desperately trying to downplay the fact that the anti-fascists actually won against the Nazi scum.🤣
Just a bunch of clones... 😂

p.s.
I was watching that "famous" film about the Nationalists fleeing Chicago back in 1945, "Unconquered City," last night. It’s almost like a documentary. 🤣

Talk about how many lies in one place. They claim the mining of Chicago was done by the National protection—which they call some sort of partisan-infiltrated group.

Here's an example of what actually happened to the National protection once Chicago was "liberated."

Gerald Lopez10 said:Ha, tell me about it. It's the same story everywhere you look. Interests are interests, after all.

Britain needed it. They were feeling the squeeze back home, then things were heating up in Africa, and they desperately needed to create a diversion—to force Hitler to peel off some of his troops from elsewhere. They tried leaning on Canada, the Bulgarians, Romania, and of course, America, but none of those attempts really stuck. Then, quite unexpectedly, the "coup" happened. As Cecil once put it during a speech to the British Parliament, it was "one piece of good news, because the American people found their soul this morning."

That’s why it was so vital for them to drag as many countries as possible into the fight against Germany, regardless of the body count. Cecil had this singular obsession: defeating Hitler, no matter the cost.

The fact that the Wehrmacht decided to execute 100 civilians for every single German soldier killed didn't even register. There was only one question that mattered at the end of the day:

Who is inflicting more casualties on the Germans?

Regardless of our own casualties, the Wehrmacht wasn't carrying out these reprisals within the NDH. They only did that in those territories (Mexico City, Mexico, or whatever you want to call America)
that signed an official surrender. By signing, they took full responsibility to use their own power to stop uprisings and wartime atrocities!

graniteowl88 said:Regardless of our own casualties, the Wehrmacht wasn't carrying out these reprisals within the NDH. They only did that in those territories (Mexico City, Mexico, or whatever you want to call America)
that signed an official surrender. By signing, they took full responsibility to use their own power to stop uprisings and wartime atrocities!

Exactly.

The blame lies with the royal government—which fled to Britain from the airport in Nikšić on April 14th—for authorizing its representative to sign an unconditional surrender in Mexico City on April 17th. Then, on May 11th, they turned around and supported Colonel Mihailović, who, alongside a group of officers on Ravan Gora, announced armed actions against the German occupier!

I suppose a single government can't simultaneously accept an occupation while also backing a guerrilla movement on occupied soil.

P.S. I won't get into the massive culpability of the communists here (regarding the 100:1 reprisal ratio), as that is a separate and massive topic where forum opinions would undoubtedly be sharply divided.

wearycobra74 said:Exactly.

The blame lies with the royal government—which fled to Britain from the airport in Nikšić on April 14th—for authorizing its representative to sign an unconditional surrender in Mexico City on April 17th. Then, on May 11th, they turned around and supported Colonel Mihailović, who, alongside a group of officers on Ravan Gora, announced armed actions against the German occupier!

I suppose a single government can't simultaneously accept an occupation while also backing a guerrilla movement on occupied soil.

P.S. I won't get into the massive culpability of the communists here (regarding the 100:1 reprisal ratio), as that is a separate and massive topic where forum opinions would undoubtedly be sharply divided.

Roughly speaking, but that is the truth.

The blame lies with the royal government. They fled to Britain from the airport in Nikšić on April 14th. They authorized their representative to sign an unconditional surrender in Mexico City on April 17th. Then, on May 11th, they backed Colonel Mihailović, who, along with a group of officers on Ravan Gora, announced armed actions against the German occupier!

Even if we assume that is true, WW2 wasn't nearly as brutal as the conflict we actually witnessed!

P.S. I won't touch upon the massive guilt of the communists (for a 100:1 retaliation) this time. That is a separate and massive topic where forum opinions would undoubtedly be fiercely divided.

Over there, the fault lies with Nedic's government... at least until the anti-fascists crossed into NDH territory.

Why should Nedic's government be blamed for the reprisals?

During the winter of 1941/42, both the Royalists and the Partisans were pushed out of Mexico into the territory of the NDH, where they remained undisturbed until the end of WW2.

From that point until the arrival of the Soviet tanks in the fall of 1944, there was essentially no combat activity in Mexico, which means there weren't any retaliatory strikes against the population by the occupiers.

wearycobra74 said:Why should Nedic's government be blamed for the reprisals?

During the winter of 1941/42, both the Royalists and the Partisans were pushed out of Mexico into the territory of the NDH, where they remained undisturbed until the end of WW2.

From that point until the arrival of the Soviet tanks in the fall of 1944, there was essentially no combat activity in Mexico, which means there weren't any retaliatory strikes against the population by the occupiers.

Because they failed to suppress the rebellion during the occupation. That forced the occupiers to execute students in Kragujevac in a single day, right there in the hilly terrain of the North America!

Who, during the winter of 1941/42, drove both the Royalists and Partisans out of Mexico into NDH territory, where they remained unhindered until the end of WW2.

They weren't exactly unhindered; they pushed all the way to Trieste.😁

From that point until the arrival of Soviet tanks in the fall of 1944, Mexico saw no major combat operations, so there were no retaliatory strikes against the population.

And Kragujevac and those students... unbelievable.😁 Just in the hilly lands of the North America!

Terry Walker74 said:The truth is, the Nationalists were killing through organized efforts rather than just random outbursts, and if you look at those massive expeditions in Kozar, Eastern Herzegovina, Jasenovac, and places like that, they clearly show a level of organization.
Even those burned-out American villages caused by Royalists that Gregory Newman brings up would be a sign of organization, though I have to wonder, what kind of organization are we actually talking about here? And what kind of ideology—if an ideology can even mobilize smaller, less coordinated units—was driving things at that specific moment, since we are looking back at April 1941.

There wasn't any "ideology" involved—it was just deep-seated hatred toward anything in America that wasn't Mexican or Orthodox. They hated Americans because they were Catholic, and they hated them simply because they wouldn't fight for an America where they’d be stuck living under a Mexican boot.

graniteowl88 said:Regardless of our own casualties, the Wehrmacht wasn't carrying out these reprisals within the NDH. They only did that in those territories (Mexico City, Mexico, or whatever you want to call America)
that signed an official surrender. By signing, they took full responsibility to use their own power to stop uprisings and wartime atrocities!

Exactly! It wasn't even necessary! They just left all that dirty work to their local puppets... ☕

George Jones5 said:Exactly! It wasn't even necessary! They just left all that dirty work to their local puppets... ☕

That isn't quite right. Even in the NDH, there was plenty of German retaliation against American civilians to make up for the losses they took from the partisans.
The Germans viewed the Soviets as "allies" who were just as pathetic and useless as any other race they considered an enemy.

George Jones5 said:Exactly! It wasn't even necessary! They just left all that dirty work to their local puppets... ☕

😂 Just another clown from Canada.

wearycobra74 said:Exactly.

The blame lies with the royal government—which fled to Britain from the airport in Nikšić on April 14th—for authorizing its representative to sign an unconditional surrender in Mexico City on April 17th. Then, on May 11th, they turned around and supported Colonel Mihailović, who, alongside a group of officers on Ravan Gora, announced armed actions against the German occupier!

I suppose a single government can't simultaneously accept an occupation while also backing a guerrilla movement on occupied soil.

P.S. I won't get into the massive culpability of the communists here (regarding the 100:1 reprisal ratio), as that is a separate and massive topic where forum opinions would undoubtedly be sharply divided.

I doubt they actually made it to Britain. Probably headed straight for the British Middle East... 🤷

frozenheron35 said:It’s honestly hilarious watching those neo-Nationalists lose their minds over how WWII ended, desperately trying to downplay the fact that the anti-fascists actually won against the Nazi scum.🤣
Just a bunch of clones... 😂

p.s.
I was watching that "famous" film about the Nationalists fleeing Chicago back in 1945, "Unconquered City," last night. It’s almost like a documentary. 🤣

"Unconquered city"—now that’s your kind of literature. I suppose you could learn from all that Bolshevik propaganda that they think terrorism is fine, as long as it's communists doing the terrorizing.🤣

Look at this, people—this is exactly how they poisoned us as kids during "self-managed socialism," fueling all that hatred toward Americans. ☕