Josef Stalin: Most Prolific Mass Murderer In History

[Centrehalf]

Sorry, "Stalin", I just don't buy your schtick anymore. You're trying to pull everybody's chains by pretending to be a disciple of Josef Stalin.

Yep, I'm leaning this way too.

As for genocide in the Ukraine, it doesn't matter whether or not there were natural factors resulting in a small harvest. The Ukraine still produced enough to feed itself, but they couldn't feed themselves because Moscow took their food. It really is that simple. Stalin was a bad guy.

Rick, I agree with everything you've put up in this thread except for this:

The soviets didn't fight the japanese till the germans were defeated, their one-front war continued to be one front, just on the east.

It's true that technically the Soviets were fighting a one-front war against Germany, but that front was by far the single biggest battlefront ever in the history of mankind. Nothing else comes close to it. Most sources say that the Germans had between 80%-90% of their military on their Eastern Front. The sheer size of that front should, in my opinion, qualify as three fronts. It was so large that the Germans needed three separate logistical networks to supply it.

If the Soviets hadn't put up the fight they did, Overlord never would have happened and we probably would have had a negotiated peace with Germany. I think calling it a single front downplays the Soviet military contribution to the eventual Allied victory.

 

[clarkatticus]

I didn't realize "Stalin" was the arbiter of facts in this forum. I went back and read your previous posts, plenty of disjointed facts and premis' strung together to defend the indefensible. Whatever Stalins good traits were, it had nothing to do with what was good for Russia. The United States had many crop failures during the Depression, but no famines. Did he intentionally commit genocide in the Ukraine? He intentionally took all their food to feed other parts of the Soviet State although I doubt he cared either way who starved in the Ukraine and Siberia or other parts that suffered during that era. Your "experts" vs others "experts" are a prime example of what I was trying to say, both sides are partially right, Stalin took the food not because he wanted to kill all Ukrainians, he took it because he didn't care about the Ukrainians but did care about the Georgians and Russians. In the end, it is still true that Communism and Marxism do not work, Stalin was a sociopath and mass murderer and the Russian people are brave and resourceful despite this.

 

[Rick]

The only problem I have with anything you wrote is your timeline with Roosevelt. He died in April, 1945, well before the Trinity test. But yes, he gave Stalin the keys to eastern Europe at Yalta. Roosevelt was so ill by that time, that I really don't think he knew what he was doing.

I stand corrected on FDR, but of course Truman, who was a much better president imo, could have contacted "Uncle Joe". To Truman's credit he DID keep other countries out of the post-war occupation of Japan.

 

[Centrehalf]

I didn't realize "Stalin" was the arbiter of facts in this forum. I went back and read your previous posts, plenty of disjointed facts and premis' strung together to defend the indefensible. Whatever Stalins good traits were, it had nothing to do with what was good for Russia. The United States had many crop failures during the Depression, but no famines. Did he intentionally commit genocide in the Ukraine? He intentionally took all their food to feed other parts of the Soviet State although I doubt he cared either way who starved in the Ukraine and Siberia or other parts that suffered during that era. Your "experts" vs others "experts" are a prime example of what I was trying to say, both sides are partially right, Stalin took the food not because he wanted to kill all Ukrainians, he took it because he didn't care about the Ukrainians but did care about the Georgians and Russians. In the end, it is still true that Communism and Marxism do not work, Stalin was a sociopath and mass murderer and the Russian people are brave and resourceful despite this.

Well said, great post.

 

[Rick]

I didn't realize "Stalin" was the arbiter of facts in this forum. I went back and read your previous posts, plenty of disjointed facts and premis' strung together to defend the indefensible. Whatever Stalins good traits were, it had nothing to do with what was good for Russia. The United States had many crop failures during the Depression, but no famines. Did he intentionally commit genocide in the Ukraine? He intentionally took all their food to feed other parts of the Soviet State although I doubt he cared either way who starved in the Ukraine and Siberia or other parts that suffered during that era. Your "experts" vs others "experts" are a prime example of what I was trying to say, both sides are partially right, Stalin took the food not because he wanted to kill all Ukrainians, he took it because he didn't care about the Ukrainians but did care about the Georgians and Russians. In the end, it is still true that Communism and Marxism do not work, Stalin was a sociopath and mass murderer and the Russian people are brave and resourceful despite this.

Geez, why are the most horrific chapters of history the subject of so many falsehoods. The Holodomor was waged by the soviets to suppress Ukrainian nationalism, and to punish their active refusal to support the collectivization of agriculture and the first five year plan. Read a damn history book.

 

[Stalin]

McDonald's might be hiring. They usually have job openings. You have to start somewhere. There's nothing wrong with having a job where your principle duty involves the phrase "please pull forward to the second window". At least you'll have a job, and you'll sucking less on the government teet.

On the other hand, if you really are who you say you are, you are completely BATS. Period.

My family STARTED a fast food chain

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgie_Pie

Comrade Stalin

 

[Rick]

It's true that technically the Soviets were fighting a one-front war against Germany, but that front was by far the single biggest battlefront ever in the history of mankind. Nothing else comes close to it.

So what? The US was fighting with massive forces ALL OVER THE PLANET - nothing else in history comes close to it.

Most sources say that the Germans had between 80%-90% of their military on their Eastern Front.

So what? If the US colonized and controlled, say, all of north and south america, the way the russians colonized a good part of europe and asia and got control of many subject peoples, we could have put tens of millions of soldiers into the battle line.

If the Soviets hadn't put up the fight they did, Overlord never would have happened and we probably would have had a negotiated peace with Germany. I think calling it a single front downplays the Soviet military contribution to the eventual Allied victory.

If western allies didn't put up the fight they did, leaving russia to fight a two front war (not a one week "war" against already crushed japanese) they'd all be singing Deutschland Uber Alles now in russia. Lots of things go into winning a war - comparing the number of troops on this or that front is simplistic.

 

[Centrehalf]

So what? The US was fighting with massive forces ALL OVER THE PLANET - nothing else in history comes close to it.

America had at it's highest troop strength, 100 land divisions. That's it. The Allies could not have won in Europe without the Soviet manpower contribution, just as the Soviets could not have been effective without Allied (primarily American) logistics and resource support. I'm not defending the Soviet system of government, but I'm also not going to re-write history just because I want to discredit everything that another forum member posts, like some people here do. Out of curiosity, where exactly did the United States face off against "massive forces all over the planet"?

So what? If the US colonized and controlled, say, all of north and south america, the way the russians colonized a good part of europe and asia and got control of many subject peoples, we could have put tens of millions of soldiers into the battle line.

So what. We didn't do that. Your point has nothing to do with reality. If my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle. I put that in there because it's just as relevant to reality as what you posted is.

If western allies didn't put up the fight they did, leaving russia to fight a two front war (not a one week "war" against already crushed japanese) they'd all be singing Deutschland Uber Alles now in russia. Lots of things go into winning a war - comparing the number of troops on this or that front is simplistic.

I'm not downplaying the western allies contributions. It's simplistic to assume that because I give the Soviets credit when it's due I must therefore take credit away from someone else.What's simplistic is referring to the Russian Front as a single front, obviously hoping that people will infer that it was nothing out of the ordinary and not much of a contribution to the war effort. It's also simplistic to ignore history for the sake of making your political views look better. I agree completely with you about Stalin being a really bad man and about the Soviet system being wrong, but denying the military contribution of the USSR and trying to re-write history is pretty funny coming from a guy who routinely calls out others for being ignorant of history.

 

[Gipper]

Agreed...the Soviets do desire credit for their contributions to beating Germany. Their soldiers fought courageously even though their leadership from Stalin on down to low ranking officers was completely incompetent. Millions died due to this incompetence.

But, let us not lose sight of who the Soviets and Stalin were. They aligned with Hitler in 1939 and conquered half of Poland and the Baltic States after Germany invaded. They also attacked Finland later in 1939. Stalin had visions of enlarging his empire while working happily with the Nazis.

Had Hitler not foolishly invaded the USSR, they would have continued as allies and Stalin would have continued to support the Nazis along with killing all the Jews.

Stalin considered Hitler a friend and ally prior to Barbarossa. And, even after the German invasion, the little pocked marked Mommy's boy murderer from Gori, refused to accept that his buddy Adolph was attacking him...all the while his troops were dying and surrendering in droves.

Additionally, Stalin signed a non-aggression pact with Japan in April 1941. Essentially aligning the USSR with the two major aggressor nations at that time....Germany and Japan. That pact would later allow Stalin to move large numbers of troops west to fight the Germans because the Japs were to busy fighting the Americans.

The ONLY thing admirable about the actions of the USSR in WWII was the bravery of their soldiers who were used by Stalin as cannon fodder. Nothing else is admirable or honorable. They were a scumbag nation just like their dictator.

 

[TruthSeeker]

My family STARTED a fast food chain

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgie_Pie

Comrade Stalin

The "Georgie Pie" sounds like the "Runza" meat pie, which is sold at Runza restaurants in Nebraska.

Ironically (for Stalin), the parent company that owned Georgie Pie restaurants was called "Progressive Enterprises".

Even more ironic, the Georgie Pie restaurant chain was bought out by McDonald's.

I rest my case.

 

[Gipper]

Agreed...the Soviets do desire credit for their contributions to beating Germany. Their soldiers fought courageously even though their leadership from Stalin on down to low ranking officers was completely incompetent. Millions died due to this incompetence.

But, let us not lose sight of who the Soviets and Stalin were. They aligned with Hitler in 1939 and conquered half of Poland and the Baltic States after Germany invaded. They also attacked Finland later in 1939. Stalin had visions of enlarging his empire while working happily with the Nazis.

Had Hitler not foolishly invaded the USSR, they would have continued as allies and Stalin would have continued to support the Nazis along with killing all the Jews.

Stalin considered Hitler a friend and ally prior to Barbarossa. And, even after the German invasion, the little pocked marked Mommy's boy murderer from Gori, refused to accept that his buddy Adolph was attacking him...all the while his troops were dying and surrendering in droves.

Additionally, Stalin signed a non-aggression pact with Japan in April 1941. Essentially aligning the USSR with the two major aggressor nations at that time....Germany and Japan. That pact would later allow Stalin to move large numbers of troops west to fight the Germans because the Japs were to busy fighting the Americans.

The ONLY thing admirable about the actions of the USSR in WWII was the bravery of their soldiers who were used by Stalin as cannon fodder. Nothing else is admirable or honorable. They were a scumbag nation just like their dictator.

That first sentence should read...


Agreed...the Soviets do deserve credit for their contributions to beating Germany.

 

[Rick]

That first sentence should read...


Agreed...the Soviets do deserve credit for their contributions to beating Germany.

One wonders what credit is due them from the west. They were one totalitarian system attacked by another totalitarian system - they had no choice but to fight back. And after the war they enslaved all of eastern europe - expanding the sphere of control of their dictatorship over scores of millions of people.

 

[TruthSeeker]

One wonders what credit is due them from the west. They were one totalitarian system attacked by another totalitarian system - they had no choice but to fight back. And after the war they enslaved all of eastern europe - expanding the sphere of control of their dictatorship over scores of millions of people.

It's a perfect example of "choose your poison". Would an eastern European country rather be under the rule of Nazis or under the rule of communists.

Imagine the damage that Hitler could have done if he had not decided to forego the invasion of the UK and attack Russia instead.

 

[Rick]

It's a perfect example of "choose your poison". Would an eastern European country rather be under the rule of Nazis or under the rule of communists.

Imagine the damage that Hitler could have done if he had not decided to forego the invasion of the UK and attack Russia instead.

He made that decision because the preliminary action to the UK invasion, control of the air over the UK, failed, thanks to the RAF, as would have an attempted invasion for that very reason. Hitler's correct choice was to consolidate the gains he made on the continent.

 

[Centrehalf]

Additionally, Stalin signed a non-aggression pact with Japan in April 1941. Essentially aligning the USSR with the two major aggressor nations at that time....Germany and Japan. That pact would later allow Stalin to move large numbers of troops west to fight the Germans because the Japs were to busy fighting the Americans.

I agree with you on almost everything and I really don't want to nitpick, but the Japanese Imperial Army was busy fighting the Chinese, not us.