
UK GOES ON STRIKE...
Unions demand more taxpayer money...
Schools closed, flights delayed...
Riot police brace for violence...
"When the good men refuse to compromise their liberty, the evil men will ALWAYS resort to force."

"On the road to tyranny, we've gone so far that polite
political action is about as useless as a miniskirt in a convent."
The vote was 2-1 on the three-judge panel on the key question of whether the insurance requirement exceeded Congress's powers under the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The majority concluded that it did not.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...











The number of Obama supporters seems inversely related to his time in office. Many wonder what happened to "The One We Are Waiting For."
Obama assumed office in difficult economic times. After a couple of years of excuses -- which included "the problems were worse than we knew" and the generic, all-purpose "it's Bush's fault" -- Obama now owns the original problems and new ones of his own doing. An incomplete report card on his "accomplishments" would include the following:
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...

Having a head of state who only visits the country every two or three years plays right into the hands of republicans, after all.
But as they prepare for the arrival of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge later this week, royalists in Canada have come up with a novel solution to the age-old problem: install Prince Harry as their king.
They want the Prince, who is third in line to the throne, to set up home in the capital, Ottawa, to give the Royal family a permanent presence and to silence those who believe the country should have an elected head of state.
Etienne Boisvert, the Quebec provincial spokesman for the Monarchist League of Canada, pointed out that the Royal family was “an institution that knows how to reinvent itself” and believes now may be the right time for a radical change.
“Prince Harry, who has virtually no chance of becoming king, could set himself up here and found a Canadian branch of the Royal family,” he said.
Sergeant Peston comments: "Time the Left parasites become taxpayers and support me and Yukon King, heh?"OTTAWA — Back-to-work legislation parliamentarians have been debating for more than 48 hours passed in the House of Commons Saturday evening.
Labour Minister Lisa Raitt, who introduced the bill Monday said postal workers will be back on the job 24 hours after the bill becomes law. The bill still has to pass in the Senate — a process the federal government has said can be accomplished within one day — and senators will be in the red chamber Sunday to debate the proposed legislation.
Bill-C6 passed third reading shortly after 8:00 — following debate and filibusters that kept the Commons alive since Thursday — by a count of 158-113, with Liberals and New Democrats vehemently opposing its implementation.
“This is not in the interest of the employees, not in the interest of the employers and not in the interest of Canadians,” said Liberal MP Stephane Dion.
But Labour Minister Lisa Raitt said the bill “meets the requirement of the charter.”
Earlier Saturday, the NDP proposed an amendment to address their main point of contention: that the Conservatives’ proposal contains lower wages than what originally was proposed by Canada Post during its negotiations with the union.
Liberal MP Rodger Cuzner called it the “among the most concerning aspects of the bill.”
As debate on back-to-work legislation lurched towards the finish line Saturday afternoon, unionized Canada Post employees thanked the NDP for delaying government efforts to order the 50,000 locked-out workers back on the job.
In a letter to NDP leader Jack Layton, the president of the union said the stalling tactics bought them time, but it hasn’t been enough to end the impasse.
[...]
(Excerpt) Read more at news.nationalpost.com ...
![]() |
| freerepublic.com |
"When a country becomes this degenerate and twisted, a revolution is just around the corner." --- RONBO
One of the most talked about subjects in politics is whether or not Sarah Palin will run for the presidency. It's frankly anyone's guess which direction she will go with her decision and when she will make the decision. However, if Palin doesn't run it will be a disaster for the Republican Party and quite possibly the country.
Aside from the fact thata there isn't another libertarian-conservative in the race, at least not another one who isn't an international isolationist, if Palin doesn't run, it will represent an enormous victory for the Republican beltway establishment and the big players in the left-wing-dominated media. Furthermore, the leftist media will learn a fool-proof means to destroy any political opponent in a manner that will likely result in another four years of Obama.
In watching the coverage of the announced candidates, the alarm bells should be clanging violently. The fact that the leftist media hasn't really gone after the other Republican politicians in the race should be a violent warning to all conservatives and libertarians out there. It's totally out of character for the leftist media to not bring up Newt Gingrich's infidelity every ten minutes, or to have squads of reporters interviewing every foster child of Michele Bachmann that can be found to try to dig up some dirt. The rigorous inspection that has been visited upon Sarah Palin hasn't even started on the remainder of the Republican field. However, that doesn't mean the media has tacked suddenly to the center; far from it.
Throughout the last two years the media has embarked on a vitriolic, obsessed campaign to destroy Sarah Palin, not just as a politician but also as a person. They manipulated the legal system to try to bankrupt her while in office; they hacked her personal email and forced the release of her official email. When all of that produced nothing consequential, they simply made up the stories they wished and put them out to be in every headline for two weeks until they have the majority believing their deceits. As an example, ask any ten people you know who said, "I can see Russia from my house," and probably most of them will incorrectly name Sarah Palin rather than the comedian Tina Fey who actually said it. To the media, facts are unimportant so long as the story forwards the agenda.
If Sarah Palin doesn't run for president, the operatives in the media and Beltway establishment will have learned a fool-proof method of destroying any political opponent. If they are allowed to successfully paint a politician as stupid without any facts, merely because they disagree with the "aristocracy," America will be left with a choice of RINOs or progressive socialists. If that happens then the transformation of America from a libertarian culture to one of socialism and government dependence may very well be irreparable.
Assuming that Sarah Palin doesn't run the campaign will go sort of like this: the media will talk up the largest RINO they can find in an attempt to split the Republican Party from within. However, the real dirt will be kept securely under wraps. As the Republican primary nears its close, the research effort will go into full force. They will send squads of lawyers to go into every tiny detail of the candidate's personal and professional life. They will examine every detail of the life of the nominee from the day of their birth. The researchers will talk to every ex-boyfriend or girlfriend, every business partner, and any employees they can find.
After the primary is over, they will start to dump the juiciest tidbits in carefully edited and scripted special stories. National interviews will be granted to jilted lovers and business acquaintances that felt wronged by the candidate, or perhaps could be persuaded to feel wronged with a little interview stipend. The candidate will be mocked for their lack of intelligence and any microscopic mispronunciation or slip of the tongue will result in a weeklong national news cycle about why that candidate is too stupid to be president. The candidate will not have time to counter the perception and, combined with the media adoration of Obama, likely Obama would get another four years.
By contrast, if Sarah Palin runs, the media has already shot all of their ammo. They have done everything they can possibly do to destroy her but she has learned how to counter them via Facebook, Twitter, and streaming video. The accusations against Palin and her children have been flying in for two years and have failed to destroy her. All they have left is to repeat the old tired line of "Palin is an idiot." Of course it wouldn't take more than a debate or two, nationally televised with live video, to dispel that myth with everyone that can possibly be persuaded. The problem with the media is that all they have left to shoot are lies which can't stand in the light of day, and even all the plausible lies have been spent by Palin's opponents. If Palin wins the primary, the leftist media will be left to incoherent rage watched by fewer and fewer Americans.
With a properly run campaign, Palin will be able to easily counter the media perpetuated perception of stupidity with all except those that are so ideologically or emotionally committed as to be unpersuadable. Furthermore, on the issues Palin will be able to bring all guns blazing against Obama rather than being handicapped by prior records of endorsing government-mandated healthcare or global warming hysteria. On the issues, Palin's conservatism combined with her small-government libertarianism will make a stark contrast to Obama who will now be forced to defend his policies rather than run on emotion ad-hominem attacks and catchy phrases.
When the political calculus is done, it is clear that Palin is the only real conservative with libertarian leanings that can possibly be elected in the country. Although there are other conservatives with promise such as Bachmann, Cain, and West, they have not been subjected to the vetting that Sarah Palin has and there should be no doubt that the media will do everything they possibly can to destroy them should they win the nomination.
Yes, Virginia, our president is a low I.Q. phoney whose only accomplishment in life is to read the teleprompter and appear presidential.Big Media doesn’t pay much attention to them, even though Obama makes an amazing number of errors in his public statements. And I think it’s easy enough to understand why the BM largely ignores them: to report them all would totally undermine the image of the president to which a surprising number of “reporters” and pundits are wedded: that of an unusually intelligent and well educated man.
Yet someone who tells a crowd in Vienna that his “Austrian” isn’t very good, who tells Marines that he’s pleased to speak to the “Marine Corpse,” and who, just today, said he’d given the Medal of Honor to a survivor from the 10th Mountain Division, when in fact the award was given posthumously, doesn’t fit my definition of a brilliant and cultured man.
Yes, there was a Medal of Honor winner who lived to receive it, but it was a different man. The living honoree is named Giunta; the deceased hero from the 10th Mountain Division was named Monti. Both are Italian names. Did a White House speechwriter confuse the two Italians? And if so, what does that tell us about the ship under the command of President Obama? That’s worth pondering for a moment.
When you add up all the mistakes he’s made–not slips of the tongue, but real errors in statements and speeches he could read from the ubiquitous teleprompter–they make quite a number. So what? you may ask. The answer is that hundreds of people traditionally read the drafts of presidential speeches and statements. That happens for two good reasons. First, presidential utterances are instant policy. It’s hard to walk away from a public statement. Second, the myriad political appointees want their leader to look good, and they strain to ensure the accuracy of his statements. Or at least they did when I had first-hand knowledge of such things, now a few years back.
I don’t think that is happening in this administration. A friend said to me earlier today that he was really amazed at the discipline of Obama’s team, specifically in the small number of leaks compared with previous administrations–especially W’s years. It’s a good point, and that only happens when information flow is severely restricted; when only a handful of folks know what’s happening, chances to leak are reduced. (On the recent decision on force level reductions in Afghanistan, for example, most of the “inside the Beltway” rumors were dead wrong).
I suspect that drafts of presidential speeches and statements are treated the same way. I think they are only circulated among a very small number of people for comment, and those people are probably very busy, and don’t have the time to check things like the precise name and history of a Medal of Honor recipient.
That would explain today’s embarrassment (embarrassment to us, to the nation–he speaks for us, after all–since he doesn’t seem to suffer embarrassment very often), but it doesn’t explain things like the apology for his lack of fluency in “Austrian” or his lack of knowledge that we have a Marine Corps (pronounced “core”). That comes from lousy education, from lack of basic knowledge about the world. And if I’m right about the small number of administration officials who get to see his words before they’re delivered in public, it tells us that they, too, aren’t properly educated.
It tells us that the president and his trusted advisers are the products of the atrocious, politically correct educational system that’s wrecking the country in so many ways. And it’s very worrisome. It’s part of the Orwellian universe that envelops many of our leaders, a universe in which they feel free to simply invent “facts” so long as they fit the emotional and ideological pattern that really matters to the elite.
And these people think they’re the smart guys, and we’re the dummies, even though we know that German is spoken in Vienna, and many of us would be mortified to make a glaring error about an American hero.
The gaffes are important. They tell us a lot about the nature of our leaders, and it’s not good news. But it is news…even though it’s not reported as often as it should be, or with the sort of concern the gaffes deserve.

| ||||||||
|
Father Charles R. Fink, a Roman Catholic Priest of St. Philip Neri’s Church in Northport NY., served in Vietnam from March 1969 to March 1970 as a Sergeant in the 199th Light Infantry Brigade. Father Fink was the winning designer of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Suffolk County, NY.
This is a list of the U.S. military personnel who have given their lives serving their country in Afghanistan since Memorial Day, which was May 30. The list includes the hero's name, age, hometown and date of death as reported by the Department of Defense.
--Spc. Richard C. Emmons III, 22, North Grandby, Conn., May 31, 2011
--Sgt. Jeffrey C. S. Sherer, 29, Four Oaks, N.C., June 2, 2011
--Sgt. Christopher R. Bell, 21, Golden, Miss., June 4, 2011
--Sgt. Joshua D. Powell, 28, Quitman, Texas, June 4, 2011
--Spc. Devin A. Snyder, 20, Cohocton, N.Y., June 4, 2011
--Spc. Robert L. Voakes Jr., 21, L’Anse, Mich., June 4, 2011
--Chief Warrant Officer Kenneth R. White, 35, Fort Collins, Colo., June 5, 2011
--Chief Warrant Officer Bradley J. Gaudet, 31, Gladewater, Texas June 5, 2011
--Sgt. Joseph M. Garrison, 27, New Bethlehem, Pa., June 6, 2011
--Cpl. William J. Woitowicz, 23, Middlesex, Mass., June 7, 2011
--Lance Cpl. Nicholas S. O’Brien, 21, Stanley, N.C., June 9, 2011
--Cpl. Matthew T. Richard, 21, Acadia, La., June 9, 2011
--Capt. Michael W. Newton, 30, Newport News, Va., June 11, 2011
--Lance Cpl. Jason D. Hill, 20, Poway, Calif., June 11, 2011
--Lance Cpl. Sean M. N. O’Connor, 22, Douglas, Wyo., June 12, 2011
--Lance Cpl. Joshua B. McDaniels, 21, Dublin, Ohio, June 12, 2011
--Pfc. Eric D. Soufrine, 20, Woodbridge, Conn., June 14, 2011
--Staff Sgt. Jeremy A. Katzenberger, 26, Weatherby Lake, Mo., June 14, 2011
--Pvt. Ryan J. Larson, 19, Friendship, Wis., June 15, 2011
--Sgt. Mark A. Bradley, 25, Cuba, N.Y., June 16, 2011
--Spc. Scott D. Smith, 36, Indianapolis, Ind., June 17, 2011
--Pfc. Brian J. Backus, 21, Saginaw Township, Mich., June 18, 2011
-- Sgt. 1st Class Alvin A. Boatwright, 33, Lodge, S.C., June 18, 2011
--Sgt. Edward F. Dixon III, 37, Whiteman Air Force Base, Mo., June 18, 2011
--Staff Sgt. Alan L. Snyder, 28, Blackstone, Mass., June 18, 2011
--Spc. Tyler R. Kreinz, 21, Beloit, Wis., June 18, 2011
--Pfc. Josue Ibarra, 21, Midland, Texas, June 19, 2011
--Sgt. James W. Harvey II, 23, Toms River, N.J., June 20, 2011
--Pfc. Gustavo A. Rios-Ordonez, 25, Englewood, Ohio, June 20, 2011
--Lance Cpl. Jared C. Verbeek, 22, Visalia, Calif, June 21. 2011


In this picture taken Tuesday, May 10, 2011, United States Marines run through dust kicked up by a Blackhawk helicopter from Task Force Lift "Dust Off", Charlie Company 1-214 Aviation Regiment as they rush a colleague wounded in an IED strike for evacuation near Sangin, in the volatile Helmand Province of southern Afghanistan. (AP Photo/Kevin Frayer)
(CNSNews.com) - The average monthly casualty rate for U.S. military forces serving in Afghanistan has increased 5-fold since President Barack Obama was inaugurated on Jan. 20, 2009.
1,540 U.S. troops have been killed in Afghanistan since Oct. 7, 2001, when U.S. forces began fighting in that country to oust the Taliban regime that had been harboring al Qaeda and to track down and capture or kill al Qaeda terrorists.
During the Bush presidency, which ended on Jan. 20, 2009 with the inauguration of President Obama, U.S. troops were present in Afghanistan for 87.4 months and suffered 570 casualties—a rate of 6.5 deaths per month.
During the Obama presidency, through today, U.S. troops have been present in Afghanistan for 29.1 months and have suffered 970 casualties—a rate of 33.3 deaths per month.
This evening President Obama is expected to announce the scope of U.S. troop withdrawals set to begin next month.
Of the 1,540 U.S. casualties in Afghanistan, according to CNSNews.com’s database of all casualties in the war, 1,340 have resulted from enemy action and the other 200 have resulted from non-combat accidents, illnesses and other non-combat causes.
The 970 U.S. casualties that have occurred while President Obama has been commander in chief equal 63 percent--or almost two-thirds—of all U.S. casualties that have taken place in the nearly-ten-year-long war.
889 of the 970 U.S. casualties in Afghanistan that have occurred during the Obama presidency—or about 92 percent—have been combat-related casualties.
During Obama’s presidency, U.S. troops have given their lives in the service of their country in Afghanistan at an average rate of more than one per day.
CNSNews.com’s database of U.S. military fatalities in Afghanistan is derived from official casualty reports issued by the Department of Defense (DOD) augmented by information taken from media accounts.
The database includes all U.S. troops who died in and around Afghanistan while supporting military efforts against terrorism under Operation Enduring Freedom. It also includes some Americans who died in Pakistan and others who died in the Arabian Sea while supporting operations in Afghanistan.
In December 2009, President Obama announced that he was increasing the U.S. presence in Afghanistan by 30,000 troops. Currently, the U.S. has a force of 100,000 in the country. Tonight, the president is expected to outline his plan for beginning the withdrawal of some of those forces.
U.S. military officials have indicated that despite the expected reduction in forces, the U.S. will maintain a military presence in Afganistan beyond 2014. Gen. David Petraeus, the top-commander of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan has also told Congress that he would be open to maintaining a jointly-operated military base in Afghanistan.
--------
This is a list of the U.S. military personnel who have given their lives serving their country in Afghanistan since Memorial Day, which was May 30. The list includes the hero's name, age, hometown and date of death as reported by the Department of Defense.
--Spc. Richard C. Emmons III, 22, North Grandby, Conn., May 31, 2011
--Sgt. Jeffrey C. S. Sherer, 29, Four Oaks, N.C., June 2, 2011
--Sgt. Christopher R. Bell, 21, Golden, Miss., June 4, 2011
--Sgt. Joshua D. Powell, 28, Quitman, Texas, June 4, 2011
--Spc. Devin A. Snyder, 20, Cohocton, N.Y., June 4, 2011
--Spc. Robert L. Voakes Jr., 21, L’Anse, Mich., June 4, 2011
--Chief Warrant Officer Kenneth R. White, 35, Fort Collins, Colo., June 5, 2011
--Chief Warrant Officer Bradley J. Gaudet, 31, Gladewater, Texas June 5, 2011
--Sgt. Joseph M. Garrison, 27, New Bethlehem, Pa., June 6, 2011
--Cpl. William J. Woitowicz, 23, Middlesex, Mass., June 7, 2011
--Lance Cpl. Nicholas S. O’Brien, 21, Stanley, N.C., June 9, 2011
--Cpl. Matthew T. Richard, 21, Acadia, La., June 9, 2011
--Capt. Michael W. Newton, 30, Newport News, Va., June 11, 2011
--Lance Cpl. Jason D. Hill, 20, Poway, Calif., June 11, 2011
--Lance Cpl. Sean M. N. O’Connor, 22, Douglas, Wyo., June 12, 2011
--Lance Cpl. Joshua B. McDaniels, 21, Dublin, Ohio, June 12, 2011
--Pfc. Eric D. Soufrine, 20, Woodbridge, Conn., June 14, 2011
--Staff Sgt. Jeremy A. Katzenberger, 26, Weatherby Lake, Mo., June 14, 2011
--Pvt. Ryan J. Larson, 19, Friendship, Wis., June 15, 2011
--Sgt. Mark A. Bradley, 25, Cuba, N.Y., June 16, 2011
--Spc. Scott D. Smith, 36, Indianapolis, Ind., June 17, 2011
--Pfc. Brian J. Backus, 21, Saginaw Township, Mich., June 18, 2011
-- Sgt. 1st Class Alvin A. Boatwright, 33, Lodge, S.C., June 18, 2011
--Sgt. Edward F. Dixon III, 37, Whiteman Air Force Base, Mo., June 18, 2011
--Staff Sgt. Alan L. Snyder, 28, Blackstone, Mass., June 18, 2011
--Spc. Tyler R. Kreinz, 21, Beloit, Wis., June 18, 2011
--Pfc. Josue Ibarra, 21, Midland, Texas, June 19, 2011
--Sgt. James W. Harvey II, 23, Toms River, N.J., June 20, 2011
--Pfc. Gustavo A. Rios-Ordonez, 25, Englewood, Ohio, June 20, 2011
--Lance Cpl. Jared C. Verbeek, 22, Visalia, Calif, June 21. 2011

"....Late last year, the so-called DREAM Act which would give legal residency status to millions of illegal aliens who attend college or join the military was defeated in the Senate.
Every major poll has shown that the American people are overwhelmingly opposed to the DREAM Act as well as to any other form of amnesty.
However, with Obama’s poll numbers plummeting, this use of his executive powers is seen as an obvious ploy to solidify the Latino vote in the 2012 presidential election...."
(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...

AMSTERDAM | Thu Jun 23, 2011
(Reuters) - Dutch populist politician Geert Wilders was acquitted of inciting hatred of Muslims in a court ruling on Thursday that may strengthen his political influence and exacerbate tensions over immigration policy.
The case was seen by some as a test of free speech in a country which has a long tradition of tolerance and blunt talk, but where opposition to immigration, particularly from Muslim or predominantly Muslim countries, is on the rise.
Instantly recognizable by his mane of dyed blond hair, Wilders, 47, is one of the most outspoken critics of Islam and immigration in the Netherlands.
His Freedom Party is now the third-largest in parliament, a measure of support for its anti-immigrant stance, and is the minority government's chief ally. But many of Wilders' comments -- such as likening Islam to Nazism -- are socially divisive.
The presiding judge said Wilders' remarks were sometimes "hurtful," "shocking" or "offensive," but that they were made in the context of a public debate about Muslim integration and multi-culturalism, and therefore not a criminal act.
"I am extremely pleased and happy," Wilders told reporters after the ruling. "This is not so much a win for myself, but a victory for freedom of speech. Fortunately you can criticize Islam and not be gagged in public debate."
The ruling could embolden Wilders further. He has already won concessions from the government on cutting immigration and introducing a ban on Muslim face veils and burqas.
"This means that his political views are condoned by law, his political rhetoric has been legalized," said Andre Krouwel, a political scientist at Amsterdam's Free University.
"This has made him stronger politically. He is needed for a political majority, he is basically vice prime minister without even being in the government."
Some Dutch citizens have started to question their country's traditionally generous immigration and aid policies, worried by the deteriorating economic climate, higher unemployment, incidence of ethnic crime and signs that Muslim immigrants have not fully integrated into Dutch society.
Similar concerns have helped far-right parties to gain traction elsewhere in Europe, from France to Scandinavia.
Farid Azarkan of the SMN association of Moroccans in the Netherlands said he feared the acquittal could further split Dutch society and encourage others to repeat Wilders' comments.
"You see that people feel more and more supported in saying that minorities are good for nothing," Azarkan said.
"Wilders has said very extreme things about Muslims and Moroccans, so when will it ever stop? Some will feel this as a sort of support for what they feel and as justification."
Minorities groups said they would now take the case to the United Nations Human Rights Committee, arguing the ruling meant the Netherlands had failed to protect ethnic minorities from discrimination.
"The acquittal means that the right of minorities to remain free of hate speech has been breached. We are going to claim our rights at the U.N.," said Mohamed Rabbae of the National Council for Moroccans.
Wilders, who has received numerous death threats and has to live under 24-hour guard, argued that he was exercising his right to freedom of speech when criticizing Islam.
The Amsterdam court had used a Supreme Court ruling -- that an offensive statement about someone's religion was not a criminal offence -- as the basis of its decision, leading to acquittal, the judge said.
Unusually, the prosecution team had also asked for an acquittal, arguing that politicians have the right to comment on problem issues and that Wilders was not trying to foment violence or division.
"I think it is good that he has been acquitted," said Elsbeth Kalff, an 83-year-old retired sociologist in Amsterdam.
"He has been told that he has been rude and offensive but it is on the border of what the criminal law allows. It is good, the Netherlands is, after all, a tolerant country and we should keep it that way."
Operation Barbarossa (German: Unternehmen Barbarossa, for Frederick I) was the code name for Germany's invasion of the Soviet Union during World War II that began on 22 June 1941.[10][11] Over 4.5 million troops of the Axis powers invaded the USSR along a 2,900 km (1,800 mi) front.[12] In addition to the large number of troops, it also involved 600,000 motor vehicles and 750,000 horses.[13] Planning for Operation Barbarossa started on 18 December 1940; the secret preparations and the military operation itself lasted almost a year, from spring to winter 1941. The Red Army repelled the Wehrmacht's strongest blow, and Adolf Hitler did not achieve the expected victory, but the Soviet Union's situation remained dire. Tactically, the Germans had won some resounding victories and occupied some of the most important economic areas of the country, mainly in Ukraine.[14] Despite these successes, the Germans were pushed back from Moscow and could never mount an offensive simultaneously along the entire strategic Soviet-German front again.[15]
Operation Barbarossa's failure led to Hitler's demands for further operations inside the USSR, all of which eventually failed, such as continuing the Siege of Leningrad,[16][17] Operation Nordlicht, and Battle of Stalingrad, among other battles on the occupied Soviet territory.[18][19][20][21][22]
Operation Barbarossa was the largest military operation in human history in both manpower and casualties.[23] Its failure was a turning point in the Third Reich's fortunes. Most important, Operation Barbarossa opened up the Eastern Front, to which more forces were committed than in any other theatre of war in world history. Operation Barbarossa and the areas that fell under it became the site of some of the largest battles, deadliest atrocities, highest casualties, and most horrific conditions for Soviets and Germans alike — all of which influenced the course of both World War II and 20th century history. The German forces captured 3 million Russian POWs, who did not enjoy the protection stipulated in the Geneva Conventions[24] and some 2/3 of them never returned alive.
SOURCE