Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Who was worse, Stalin or Hitler ?
Options
Comments
-
The Gerams were cruel ,no doubting that but the mass rape during the fall of Berlin of aprox 20 million German women
Unfortunatly when Germany pushed the Slavs to the brink of extinction and they somehow managed to fight back and take the German capital city and free the surviving slavic slaves they were a little pee'd off. what did the Germans expect? a handshake?
They tried to EXTERMINATE the slavs.
I'm Just SHOCKED by the fact that Stalin is seen as worse then Hitler in this Thread .
NOBODY was worse then Hitler. Stalin was a necessary Evil at the time.
Jesus people its Hitler and the Nazis for god sake.
Seems to be some pro German sentiment and anti slavic sentiment on this thread.
Wouldnt be suprised if some of you subscribed to holocaust denial.0 -
No doubting that at all and the russians proved themselfs on the battlefield time and again .I always thought that Hitler and the Nazis trying to fight on so many fronts ,Europe ,The East , Africa ,Greece ,Italy was like a boxer in a ring with 5 other boxers coming at him , it's only going to end his defeat .CiscoStudent wrote: »Unfortunatly when you push a nation to the brink of extinction and they somehow manage to fight back and then take your capitol city and free the surviving slavic slaves they were a little pee'd off. what did the Germans expect? a handshake?
They tried to EXTERMINATE the slavs.
The question could be if given the choice , who would you want to have take over the world and be ruled by ,The Nazis or the Reds ? Even with the benefit of history and hindsight ,it's not the easiest of questions to answer .0 -
No doubting that at all and the russians proved themselfs on the battlefield time and again .I always thought that Hitler and the Nazis trying to fight on so many fronts ,Europe ,The East , Africa ,Greece ,Italy was like a boxer in a ring with 5 other boxers coming at him , it's only going to end his defeat .
The question could be if given the choice , who would you want to have take over the world and be ruled by ,The Nazis or the Reds ? Even with the benefit of history and hindsight ,it's not the easiest of questions to answer .
Its VERY easy to answer.
Firstly the "reds" were not trying to take over the world they were defending themselves from a Nazi invasion.
THe Nazis planned on enslaving the lesser races, Celts are one of those lesser "slave" races. That means Irish would be slaves.
The FIRST country to stand up and recognise Irelands independance was the USSR.
My wife, and her family are from Soviet union. My Mother in Law had a very happy childhood in USSR.
So it is very easy.
What would you prefer? To serve as a slave to the Master race? or to live as a citizen in a socialist society?
By the way Italy was fighting alongside the Nazis as an ally.0 -
.I'm Just SHOCKED by the fact that Stalin is seen as worse then Hitler in this Thread
NOBODY was worse then Hitler. Stalin was a necessary Evil at the time.
Jesus people its Hitler and the Nazis for god sake.
Seems to be some pro German sentiment and anti slavic sentiment on this thread.
Wouldnt be suprised if some of you subscribed to holocaust denial.
He was the nesessary evil at the time yes but we are talking about Stalin the man ,not Stalin the guy who froze when it came to making key decisions but who like Hitler had the last word on any military actions ( and shot any general or anybody who dared question his judgment ) Where Hitlers concentration camps worse then staling Gulages ? Some reading up on them show the russians were just as as cruel although addmittedly they didn't burn 6 million jews in the gas chamber ( it's a bit insulting for you ,30 odd post on boards to suggest people are pro German - anti Slavic and in denial about the holocust . )0 -
.
He was the nesessary evil at the time yes but we are talking about Stalin the man ,not Stalin the guy who froze when it came to making key decisions but who like Hitler had the last word on any military actions ( and shot any general or anybody who dared question his judgment ) Where Hitlers concentration camps worse then staling Gulages ? Some reading up on them show the russians were just as as cruel although addmittedly they didn't burn 6 million jews in the gas chamber ( it's a bit insulting for you ,30 odd post on boards to suggest people are pro German - anti Slavic and in denial about the holocust . )
Actually I have 1000's of posts on boards.ie over the years but I forgot my old password and my old email addy was deleted so I lost my old username.
I will not engage in this debate any more with you as you really dont have a clue. first you thought Germany was at war with Italy in WW2 and now your confusing the Russians with the Soviet Union of which Russia was one of 15 countrys known as republics. So your reading up on google now and debating from what your reading? you dont know anything yourself?
End of debate for me. No hard feelings. I cant argue with an uneducated googler. Go back to your fantasy of WW2 where Russia tried to take over the world and Italy and Germany were at war./
goodnight0 -
Advertisement
-
Am sure the Russian people are as nice and as horrible as any race can be but I've never had any desire to vist Russia and dont ever intend to but I like Germany .CiscoStudent wrote: »Its VERY easy to answer.
Firstly the "reds" were not trying to take over the world they were defending themselves from a Nazi invasion.
THe Nazis planned on enslaving the lesser races, Celts are one of those lesser "slave" races. That means Irish would be slaves.
The FIRST country to stand up and recognise Irelands independance was the USSR.
My wife, and her family are from Soviet union. My Mother in Law had a very happy childhood in USSR.
Nothings ever easySo it is very easy.
Neither but I think the average German like the Russian peasent thought and believed that what was happenning in the beginning was for the betterWhat would you prefer? To serve as a slave to the Master race? or to live as a citizen in a socialist society?
There was a hell of a big American and British contingent making life hard for them to .By the way Italy was fighting alongside the Nazis as an ally.0 -
There should be a rule about letting children debate in an adult forum although I must say ,I have met many talented and intelligent children in my life .Sadly you are not one of themCiscoStudent wrote: »
I will not engage in this debate any more with you as you really dont have a clue. first you thought Germany was at war with Italy in WW2 and now your confusing the Russians with the Soviet Union of which Russia was one of 15 countrys known as republics. So your reading up on google now and debating from what your reading? you dont know anything yourself?
End of debate for me. No hard feelings. I cant argue with an uneducated googler. Go back to your fantasy of WW2 where Russia tried to take over the world and Italy and Germany were at war./
goodnight
Your remark about me thinking Germany was at war with Italy is not even worth of a reply .
Weren't we lucky .You've insulted everybody else in the thread as it is .Actually I have 1000's of posts on boards.ie over the years but I forgot my old password and my old email addy was deleted so I lost my old username.0 -
jonniebgood1 wrote: »It is very important to make the distiction between supporters of communism and supporters of Stalin and his methods. Communism is a system rather than a person and to link 'communists' to the crimes of Stalin is incorrect.
Same could be said for the other side, but it is never seen that way...EVER.
I don't see how it is ok to go around wearing Che Guevara on your t-shirt, yet anything to do with Nationalism/National Socialism or even ANYTHING along those lines, is just horrible and vile.
Why is it one rule for one 'monster', and another rule for another?0 -
CiscoStudent wrote: »Unfortunatly when Germany pushed the Slavs to the brink of extinction and they somehow managed to fight back and take the German capital city and free the surviving slavic slaves they were a little pee'd off. what did the Germans expect? a handshake?
They tried to EXTERMINATE the slavs.
.
Wow. So did Stalin........He killed as many of his own people as Hitler killed.
What is worse?
They were at war with Russia, they're hardly going to NOT kill people..
They only 'exterminated' Russian Communists, not Russians in general.
Why any of them would even be in Germany is beyond me, talk about bringing trouble upon yourself.. :rolleyes:0 -
CiscoStudent wrote: »Stalin had a brain disorder which confounded his paranoia and insanity, hitler was calculated and cold. Stalin at least wanted to bring the world together in his own twisted way, regardless of race. For example, oriental people were as welcome as Slavic people in the soviet union.
Hitler wanted a ruling Master race of Germanic peoples and to enslave the 'Lower races'
Hitler was worse.
When Stalins soviet troops arrived in Ukraine and defeated the Nazi occupiers they were seen as heros.
Ukraine flourished under soviet rule in comparison to what it is now.
People forget that nobody fought the Nazis like the soviets did, the sacrifice of 22 million people to defeat Fascism should not be overlooked.
During WW2 the soviets (the soviet union was not limited to Russia folks, so to call them 'the Russians' is incorrect) were the greatest ally of the free world. There is a strong possibility that if the Nazis managed to take the USSR then there would of been no stopping them. Britian would of certainly fell along with Ireland. USA would of had a very difficult time trying to stop a Nazi run Europe and Eurasia.
So you're saying, people can kill however many they want.....As long as you agree with the reason. :rolleyes:0 -
Advertisement
-
For the record ,my education on WW1/WW2 goes back long before Google was born and most likely Ciscokid to .
Indeed ,who when I said Germany was fighting on several fronts including the Italian campaign ( against the allies ) said I had them ( Germans ) fighting the Italians .:rolleyes:CoolGirl101 wrote: »
talk about bringing trouble upon yourself.. :rolleyes:0 -
CiscoStudent wrote: »
I'm Just SHOCKED by the fact that Stalin is seen as worse then Hitler in this Thread .
NOBODY was worse then Hitler. Stalin was a necessary Evil at the time.
Jesus people its Hitler and the Nazis for god sake.
Seems to be some pro German sentiment and anti slavic sentiment on this thread.
Wouldnt be suprised if some of you subscribed to holocaust denial.
If you feel there is a problem with any post in the thread it should be reported where it will be dealt with if necessary. This thread has many different views expressed, mostly backed up by fact, and all of them valid whether you agree with them or not. If you disagree with specific points then debate those specific points with those who post them rather than generalising on the 'sentiment' in the overall thread.0 -
Stalin0
-
Again you are mixing together Stalinism and Communism. Wearing the iconic image of Guevara is surely seen as a sign of rebellion and revolution (Ultimately freedom) rather than a sign of support for Stalinism?CoolGirl101 wrote: »I don't see how it is ok to go around wearing Che Guevara on your t-shirt, yet anything to do with Nationalism/National Socialism or even ANYTHING along those lines, is just horrible and vile.
What???CoolGirl101 wrote: »They were at war with Russia, they're hardly going to NOT kill people..
They only 'exterminated' Russian Communists, not Russians in general.
You need to back that up with some evidence. The estimates of USSR civilian (not military) losses in WWII are anything from 7,000,000 to 13,000,000 and above. http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/ww2stats.htm
Are you saying that these were all committed communists? Even if they were all committed communists I fail to see your point?0 -
CiscoStudent wrote: »Its VERY easy to answer.
Firstly the "reds" were not trying to take over the world they were defending themselves from a Nazi invasion.
But they were not above taking advantage. When the Warsaw Uprising started, the Russians were pretty much on the eastern side of the Vistula River. Instead they held back. I'm pretty sure that this was just to let the German's wipe out the same people who would have given Stalin trouble when he was in power and then mop up the Germans when the time was right. Those who say this was purely a military tactic and not a political one, argue that they turned south to focus on the Magnuszew bridgehead, but looking at the amount of impact they had in that area at the same time as the uprising, frankly I am skeptcial. OP, as per your original post I was having a similar drink with Poles and the majority of their ire was directed at Russia (although you could probably argue that this was because of the amount of time that Poland was under Stalin rather than Hitler). One friend of mine said that there was old Polish riddle that "if the Germans and Russians invaded at the same time, who would you shoot first?" and the answer was invariably "The Germans - business before pleasure..."0 -
CoolGirl101 wrote: »They were at war with Russia, they're hardly going to NOT kill people..
They only 'exterminated' Russian Communists, not Russians in general.
If you genuinely believe that, I would suggest you read I Am From The Burning Village which is eye witness accounts of the small number of people who managed to survive the Nazi genocide in Belorussia. Although fair warning - it makes for unrelentingly grim reading.0 -
jonniebgood1 wrote: »If you feel there is a problem with any post in the thread it should be reported where it will be dealt with if necessary. This thread has many different views expressed, mostly backed up by fact, and all of them valid whether you agree with them or not. If you disagree with specific points then debate those specific points with those who post them rather than generalising on the 'sentiment' in the overall thread.
Duly Noted0 -
CoolGirl101 wrote: »So you're saying, people can kill however many they want.....As long as you agree with the reason. :rolleyes:
I didnt say that, Please point out where you felt I said that?0 -
But they were not above taking advantage. When the Warsaw Uprising started, the Russians were pretty much on the eastern side of the Vistula River. Instead they held back. I'm pretty sure that this was just to let the German's wipe out the same people who would have given Stalin trouble when he was in power and then mop up the Germans when the time was right. Those who say this was purely a military tactic and not a political one, argue that they turned south to focus on the Magnuszew bridgehead, but looking at the amount of impact they had in that area at the same time as the uprising, frankly I am skeptcial. OP, as per your original post I was having a similar drink with Poles and the majority of their ire was directed at Russia (although you could probably argue that this was because of the amount of time that Poland was under Stalin rather than Hitler). One friend of mine said that there was old Polish riddle that "if the Germans and Russians invaded at the same time, who would you shoot first?" and the answer was invariably "The Germans - business before pleasure..."
Its true that the Polish were mistreated and abused by Bolsheviks , the Communist movement saw the Polish feudal society as an enemy just as they saw their own 'White Russians' or Tsarists as their enemy. The tsarist Russians etc were imprisoned alongside the Polish.
They didnt fair much better during soviet occupation.
Im not saying that there was no monstrosity commited by Soviets. i am saying that the Soviet system pale in comparison to the Nazi's plans on enslaving and exterminated all non "Aryans" - A delusional concept of Hitlers by the way as there is no "Aryan" race, unless you count the Aryans of India whom are definitly Not blonde with blue eyes and definatly not Germanic.
I am saying that we have alot to thank the Soviets for wheter you like them or not. Without their defeat of Nazi Germany we would be slaves.
All Totalitarian doctrines are wrong, however, to Compare Stalin and Hitler is to compare the Communist And Nazi Agenda's.
There is no comparison between the two. One is utopian idealism open to all humans which didnt work in practice as well as it sounded on paper mainly due to the fact that the kind of power a person can have at the head of the only legal government party totally corrupted its leaders. All power corrupts etc.
Now, Nazi'sm on the other hand, did not want a Utopia open to all . No Hitlers world would be open to a select few. A master race, an imaginary race from a fantasy. An Occult and fanciful ideal that somehow there was a superman gene present in all true Aryans, and that selective breeding could bring this back to its historical Purity, as it was in the ancient Aryan continent of Atlantis (Yes Atlantis!). You see how absurd this is? I could go on its just the tip of the Nazi Iceberg.
They actually believed that all non Aryans where impure, and needed to be exterminated and enslaved. Pure and undiluted Racial hatred that was brought to bear on the Jewish, the Slavs, The Gypsies and any other race that wasnt 'pure'. Hitler had plans for the Celts too, yes we had some Nordic blood but we were mongrels, half bloods and we would be enslaved had they had their way. The Soviet Union however DID have its way, and it never laid a finger on Ireland or the UK etc as it had no interest in domination of the world.
Yes Stalin was mad and yes he did kill many of his own people, as hitler did. However, Hitlers plans were alot more dire had he been succesful and his crimes alot more sadistic then Stalins. Stalin had people killed yes, people he saw as a threat to the communist party, and people he didnt think were worth providing for, who simply starved to death in isolated regions, he also sentenced, in some war manouvers , his own soldiers to death, Yes it is evil and yes it is wrong.
However Hitler went that extra mile, he had people killed and their bodys crafted into furniture as I pointed out before, its one of many many atrocities. Hitler and his Nazis went that extra sadistic mile that the Stalinists didnt.
Therefore Hitler was worse.0 -
CiscoStudent wrote: »Its true that the Polish were mistreated and abused by Bolsheviks , the Communist movement saw the Polish feudal society as an enemy just as they saw their own 'White Russians' or Tsarists as thier enemy. The tsarist Russians etc were imprisoned alongside the Polish.
They didnt fair much better during soviet occupation.
Im not saying that there was no monstrosity commited by Soviets. i am saying that the Soviet system pale in comparison to the Nazi's plans on enslaving and exterminated all non "Aryans" - A delusional concept of Hitlers by the way as there is no "Aryan" race, unless you count the Aryans of India whom are definitly Not blonde with blue eyes and definatly not Germanic.
I am saying that we have alot to thank the Soviets for wheter yo like them or not. Without their defeat of Nazi Germany we would be slaves, The Nazi's invaded the Soviets merely retaliated.
I don't disagree with you on any particular point, other than that Stalin was quick to avail himself of a land grab when one presented itself. I have a huge amount of respect for what the Russian people did during the war.0 -
Advertisement
-
For the record ,my education on WW1/WW2 goes back long before Google was born and most likely Ciscokid to :rolleyes:
Thats MR Ciscokid, A grown and married man! Anyway I actually enjoy reading some of your threads and despite our disagreements I would prefer not to get into name calling with you.
At the end of the day this is a delicate subject matter to debate to say the least.
Im sure we can both actually agree that neither you nor I can imagine the reality of the atrocities and horrors committed during WW2 and therefore are merely blowing hot air here.0 -
-
I don't disagree with you on any particular point, other than that Stalin was quick to avail himself of a land grab when one presented itself. I have a huge amount of respect for what the Russian people did during the war.
Its very true, But There was an element of fear involved in Stalins agreement to assist an invasion in Poland.
Hitler had threatened to invade USSR had he disagreed. It seems to me that Fear governed alot of the supposed man of steels decisions. Fear and Paranoia. He also suffered from a brain disorder called atherosclerosis which drove him insane.0 -
And this is exactly what's wrong with this stupid Stalin nostalgia. In the first place the claims are usually either bull**** (eg, there was a persistent housing crisis under Stalin that saw most city dwellers live in appalling conditions) or nationalist bull****. Most obviously, the GPW was a victory for the Soviet Union and its people; Stalin himself can be largely blamed for strategic mistakes that led to the deaths of millions during the conflict. The USSR won that conflict despite, not because of, StalinCiscoStudent wrote:Thats what I meant, the post Stalin soviet union is well remembered by many ex soviet citizens, I have family who were born and raised in soviet Ukraine.
The Soviet union broke the backbone of the Nazi's and took eastern Europe and Eurasia from illiterate serfdom to space exploration within 3 generations, while managing to dominate the olympics and ensure 0% unemployment and 100% housing needs met in the largest nation the world has ever known
And at the end of the day its all a case of 'whataboutism'. Today's hardships in the former-CIS make nostalgia understandable but in no way excuse the crimes of Stalinism. It should be possible to discuss the latter without reference to Yeltsin
Source for both the quote and the numbers please. The latter is particularly ludicrous: are you suggesting that Red Army soldiers raped over two thirds of all German women in 1945?The Gerams were cruel ,no doubting that but the mass rape during the fall of Berlin of aprox 20 million German women ( and many russian female prisoners along the way to ) by the russian army was sanctioned by Stalin as '' prize of war /revenge '' .Stalins quote '' the death of one man is sad ,the deaths of millions is just a statistic '' is a man who's playing god
Its not a particularly nice scenario but there are definitely different shades of what I'll call, for lack of better term, 'evil'. A Nazi victory would have seen the ethnic cleansing of most of Eastern Europe and Russia; the deaths of tens of millions as part of a major German resettlement plan. The Poles and others can, rightly, complain about Soviet occupation but if Hitler had won then Poles would no longer existThe question could be if given the choice , who would you want to have take over the world and be ruled by ,The Nazis or the Reds ? Even with the benefit of history and hindsight ,it's not the easiest of questions to answer .
So essentially the choice is better a dictatorship which forced through a brutal industrialisation programme (but which quickly settled down post-Stalin) and a Nazi Germany who cherished industrial genocide and dreams of world domination
Yes. This is so often missed. The GULAG was a prison system in which the majority of prisoners served 3-5 year sentences. It was criminally brutal but more by circumstances than by design. In contrast, Nazi Germany ran extermination camps. Once you entered a Nazi camp you were not expected to emerge alive. As a result the latter killed many millions more (over the space of a fraction of the time) than did the Soviet camp systemWhere Hitlers concentration camps worse then staling Gulages ?
Again, not excusing the criminal neglect of the GULAG, but it has to be put in perspective
So those 20+ million dead Soviet civilians were just an accident?CoolGirl101 wrote:They only 'exterminated' Russian Communists, not Russians in general
I'll answer my own question: no. From the moment it crossed the Soviet border, the German armed forces carried out brutal repressions against the civilian population. The purpose of these ranged from military attempts to control the populace to economic plans to depopulate vast areas through mass starvation. It is denialism of the highest order to claim that these deaths did not take place
Incidentally, the idea that it is somehow 'okay' to simply execute prisoners out of hand because of their political orientation is itself something that should be condemned in the strongest possible terms
They weren't. The vast majority of "Russian Communists" executed by the Nazis were killed on Soviet soil. What with that little matter of the German invasion and all. Of course the Nazis also killed tens of thousands of German communists... along with German socialists and German trade unionists and others who resisted the Nazi regimeWhy any of them would even be in Germany is beyond me, talk about bringing trouble upon yourself..
Oh I'm sorry, how many National Socialists were opposed to the Holocaust?Same could be said for the other side, but it is never seen that way...EVER
Hmmm, controversial. Personally I would give the Red Army the benefit of the doubt on this one (at least until some convincing evidence otherwise emerges) largely because of the incredible nature of their advance across Poland. They can't have had much fighting capacity left, to storm a city at least, after that stunning 24/7 campaignEllian wrote:Those who say this was purely a military tactic and not a political one, argue that they turned south to focus on the Magnuszew bridgehead, but looking at the amount of impact they had in that area at the same time as the uprising, frankly I am skeptcial
Then again, Stalin almost certainly didn't give a damn about the people in Warsaw. I think a lot of his crimes can simply be attributed to a simple, if scary, callousness rather than active maliciousness. He was just one cold bastard0 -
-
CiscoStudent wrote: »Its very true, But There was an element of fear involved in Stalins agreement to assist an invasion in Poland.
Hitler had threatened to invade USSR had he disagreed
This was in August 44 when the Warsaw Uprising took place. Stalin was fighting the Germans and when the Poles rebelled, the Russians left them to it, despite the fact they were less than a mile away on the other side of the Vistula. It was a calculated political move (in my opinion although there is evidence enough to argue that it was a military decision) to annex a soverign country. (Let's even skip over the part about the Katyn massacre a couple fo years earlier) I have no interest at all in debating who was worse - they were both capricious power hungry men with twisted idealogies and by most people's definition would qualify as evil. And I imagine to a lot of the poor folk between Berlin and Moscow between '39 and '45 there wasn't a lick of difference between them as they watched armies marching one way and then the other.0 -
There is a twisted logic running thru the thread that either regime had benign elements -they did not.
As Ellian quite rightly points out the Soviets just stood aside during the Warsaw uprising and just watched the Nazi's strut their stuff and massacre the brave men and women of the Polish Home Army.
The Nazi-Soviet pact was essentially imperialism on both sides. Why did the post Stalin Soviets deny the secret protocols with the Nazi's.
Both ideoligies killed people and took their stuff and whether you kill people with gas or bullets or starve them to death or exile them doesn't make a person any less dead or deprived of their liberty ,family and goods . They both also acted with depraved indifference to the victims of the other.
If the Soviets apres Stalin were the benign happy clappy people that they are being portrayed as why didnt they just withdraw from the countries they took over and allow them self determination. Poland, Latvia and all the rest.
The Warsaw Pact countries invasion of the Czech Republic in 1968 in response to the Prague Spring and the Soviet Afghanistan invasion just shows which regime lasted the longest.
Being Irish, the being invaded ,robbed, starved and killed bit is the bit I don't like.
It makes me wonder then that when we celebrate and applaud leaders like Blair, Cameron and Queen Elisabeth for apologising for the behavior of their political forebearers and hold church officers to account for their predessors why we do not do the same with politicians. What political heir of Irish Soviet supporter has apoligised.
AFAIK no democtratic Irish Political Party supported the Nazi's but lots supported the Soviet Union. We can laugh at the idea of Lord Haw Haw and say well William Joyce was harshly treated but the guy was a nazi and thems the breaks.
I personally believe Maire Mac an tSaoi and Kevin Myers were right to denounce the anti-semite, writer, nazi sympathiser ,former IRA activist and son in law of Maud Gonne Francis Stuart when he was elected a Saoi of Aosdana.
I don't see the same moral courage displayed when dealing with former soviet supporters. Replace anti-semite and Jew with the contemporaneous dekulakisation ( peasant farmer killing) by the soviets and it does not sit well with me. I am Irish and just a few generations away from the land myself.
History is about facts and factually my sympathies start with the peasant farmer who were not really any different to my own peasant farmers. I have no problems with the jews, and those I have met are sound , but these guys are more real to me.
Have the Soviet apologists lost the plot here. Double standards anyone - ideological excuses are fine but they don't cut it with me.0 -
Has to be Hitler imo, and on here the best points put forward have been from CiscoStudent and Reekwind, also imo0
-
Actually when I wasn't name calling but instead of refreshing page to see your correct username, which I wasn't familiar with and which I should have done , for some reason I had Ciscokid in my head .CiscoStudent wrote: »Thats MR Ciscokid, A grown and married man! Anyway I actually enjoy reading some of your threads and despite our disagreements I would prefer not to get into name calling with you.
At the end of the day this is a delicate subject matter to debate to say the least.
Sure and thankfully You or I wern't there back then but I don't think it's all that hard to imagine the horrors of in WW1/2 or any major conflict since and I don't mean just by looking at old newsreels over and over again ( although that's as good a source as any ) .It's like when you read a book about historical and tragic events and you get to a chapter on an eyewitness accounts of what happened , what they saw .Im sure we can both actually agree that neither you nor I can imagine the reality of the atrocities and horrors committed during WW2 and therefore are merely blowing hot air here.
Then you close your eyes for a minute or two trying to imagine what's going on and you shudder at images so our imaginations don't need a lot to picture the horrific scenes although of course that's nothing compared to the Reality of being there .
I don't see that your mother in law having a happy life in Russia or your wife being Russian has anything to do with thread about Stalin and Hitler although I will acept that you may speak some Russian ,have visted Russia and know a lot more about the Russia ,their people and their customs than myself but you said people on this thread come across as being pro German -anti Slovac and probably in denial about the Holocust simply because they have a different point of view than yours ?CiscoStudent wrote: »Fair enough but I dont see what what that has to do with Hitler V Stalin.
Then you told me to stick to my google references for information which is a bit iggnorant and insulting in it's assumtions that people haven't read books or recearched on subjects which long before Google, is what most of the world did and still prefer to do ( give me a good read with a book over internet text anyday ) .Google just makes it easier to access information and references quicker .
Actually I made a typo error in the numbers which should have being 2 million women, not 20 million .You don't have to look far for sources there's lots on it on the internet but 'Berlin: The Downfall 1945' by Antony Beevor is as good a place to start as any and it wasn't just Berlin were mass rapes took place ( estimated 100,000 wemon of all ages raped in Vienna ) and Americans and British soldiers raped to but on a much smaller , lesser scale .
Source for both the quote and the numbers please. The latter is particularly ludicrous: are you suggesting that Red Army soldiers raped over two thirds of all German women in 1945?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2002/may/01/news.features11
http://histclo.com/essay/war/ww2/sold/sold-occ.html0 -
Advertisement
-
If you genuinely believe that, I would suggest you read I Am From The Burning Village which is eye witness accounts of the small number of people who managed to survive the Nazi genocide in Belorussia. Although fair warning - it makes for unrelentingly grim reading.
It is grim but nothing that Stalin and his mob would not do.CiscoStudent wrote: »I wasnt actually in favour of Stalin Nostalgia.
Anyway besides that I agree 100% with your above post, your spot on.Has to be Hitler imo, and on here the best points put forward have been from CiscoStudent and Reekwind, also imo
I have always thought that what makes Stalin worse is that the guy knew the difference and proceeded anyway. Killing wasn't Stalins only goal and there is no doubt he enjoyed it and no doubt his comrades did.
If you want to put it on a depravity scale Hitler but thats like saying who is the most badass serial killer.
And if you want to say who was the most sucessful it was Stalin because his regime survived him and in history terms that is success.0
Advertisement