Stalin was worse than Hitler (crimes, peasants, unemployment, Russia)

[Q-tip motha]

Originally Posted by erasure

Right.
Except for the children they've murdered and people they've tortured in Beslan were not Russians, but the neighboring Ossetians, whose guilt consisted only in what? their lack of Islamic faith, since the majority of them accepted Christian Orthodoxy long time ago. So as I've said, if someone would have thrown these mad dogs Chechens out from the Caucasus, I wouldn't cry bitter tears. So much for "crimes against humanity."

Another Muhammadan lie, spoken through the deceitful mouth of his follower.
This militant culture that it was from the very beginning, brought Islam by sword and fire to the whole region of former lands of Persia and left it with nothing but misery and poverty for centuries to come. Be that Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Central Asia or even Caucasus.
Russians may have brought a havoc upon their Western neighbors, but in the East they did nothing but good, deislamisizing these ancient lands and setting them free from this abominable religion and its practice - women first of all. And in Persia, Russia lost one of her most gifted and intelligent citizens, a writer and composer, who happened to be a diplomat at that time, while protecting the local inhabitants from craziness of Islamic Persia.

Aleksander Griboyedov - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So no need to tell lies about the nature of Islam and what became of lands it conquered, BEFORE anyone there "committed atrocities" against the perpetrators.

You can say that all you want, but its all too easy to point out the parallel throughout history between Russian action against the Chechens and their militant behavior. Russian brutality and indescriminate killing of civilians created a militant culture. Islam has little to do with it.

[ovcatto]

Originally Posted by Komodo666

To progressives, Stalin is their Daddy-O.

Historically, I can't think of a single person other than Adolf Hitler more despised by the American left that Joseph Stalin. As early as 1928 the Stalin's expulsion of Trotsky split the Communist Party USA into two separate factions. The CPUSA remained loyal to the Comintern while the Trotskyites denounced Stalin, broke off and form what is today the Socialist Workers Party.

In the 1930's as news of Stalin's purges reached the U.S. there was a another anti-Stalinist break that broke out in the Socialist Party when followers of Norman Thomas formed the anti-Stalinist, Social Democratic Federation. During the pre-war years, Stalin ordered the cessation of support for socialist parties this contributed to another split within the left as Communist parties following Stalin's orders worked in opposition to other socialist organizations. This would be exacerbated by Stalin's fostering of anti-fascist campaigns only to have them ended upon signing of the Soviet-Nazi Non-Aggression Pact. This switch appalled the non-communist parties and many members within the CPUSA. This of course was followed by the Nazi invasion of the Soviet Union which of course necessitated another backflip by the CPUSA further discrediting it from within the left and other "progressive" movements and organizations.

Following WWII the CPUSA was in rapid decline in no small part due to the legacy of Joseph Stalin and most liberal/progressive organizations the Congress of Industrial Unions (CIO) lead by the Reuther brothers launched two "progressive" but vehemently anti-communist organization Americans for Democratic Action and the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions.

By the sixties, Stalin had been so discredited by Nikita Khrushchev's revelations of the Stalinist era that the Stalinist parties had little sway over even the ultra left in the U.S. much less left progressives. By the late to middle sixties the battle amongst the ultra left was between followers of Leon Trotsky and those of Mao Zedong.

So, from a historical perspective... can we drop the nonsense about Stalin being anyone's freaking hero, much less a hero to the liberals and progressives?

[GreyKarast]

Thanks to Stalin, Europe and the world today speaks their native language is not German.

[CountryCarr]

Mixed thoughts on Stalin. He starts out good, at least at the war's beginning. To give him credit, he was a driving force in getting Russia mobilized to turn back the Germans, who had apparently not studied Napolean and I am willing to bet had never heard of or studied Sun Tzu. Not to mention Hitler's own stupidity of not letting his own Generals be in charge of the fighting.

But I can't help but to think of Stalin's actions towards his own troops after the war ended. When Stalin replaced Zhukov with Sokolovsky in 1946, a massive purge of his own army was already under way. Countless Russian soilders who's only crime was having served in eastern Europe were sent to Siberia or worse. Stalin was so afraid that once his troops had seen how life was in other countries, that his own time as supreme leader was bound to be short, and he may have been correct.

And then all the millions of other supposed enemies of the people who dissapeared in his camps and prisons. And don't forget, Stalin's allowing Beria free reign to act in his name also caused untold misery to many more. When he died in 1953, I have to feel that the mass support he had from the average Russian citizen was partly driven by his cult of personality, and partly by the fact that most of his bad stuff was not common knowledge....yet...Finally, I have to vote for Stalin as being just as bad as Hitler, but in a different way.

[erasure]

Originally Posted by Q-tip motha

You can say that all you want, but its all too easy to point out the parallel throughout history between Russian action against the Chechens and their militant behavior. Russian brutality and indescriminate killing of civilians created a militant culture. Islam has little to do with it.

You can say all you want, but it's all too easy to point out that Chechens are already on their killing spree on another continent. I guess they are geographically challenged while responding to "Russian actions" in Ossetia or in the US; either that, or Islam has got anything and everything to do with it.

[GreyKarast]

Originally Posted by CountryCarr

Mixed thoughts on Stalin. He starts out good, at least at the war's beginning. To give him credit, he was a driving force in getting Russia mobilized to turn back the Germans, who had apparently not studied Napolean and I am willing to bet had never heard of or studied Sun Tzu. Not to mention Hitler's own stupidity of not letting his own Generals be in charge of the fighting.

But I can't help but to think of Stalin's actions towards his own troops after the war ended. When Stalin replaced Zhukov with Sokolovsky in 1946, a massive purge of his own army was already under way. Countless Russian soilders who's only crime was having served in eastern Europe were sent to Siberia or worse. Stalin was so afraid that once his troops had seen how life was in other countries, that his own time as supreme leader was bound to be short, and he may have been correct.

And then all the millions of other supposed enemies of the people who dissapeared in his camps and prisons. And don't forget, Stalin's allowing Beria free reign to act in his name also caused untold misery to many more. When he died in 1953, I have to feel that the mass support he had from the average Russian citizen was partly driven by his cult of personality, and partly by the fact that most of his bad stuff was not common knowledge....yet...Finally, I have to vote for Stalin as being just as bad as Hitler, but in a different way.

Why, then, would not ascribe American bankers and politicians who funded the Germans? In such case they worst.

[GreyKarast]

In November 1918 ended the First World War, which began in August 1914 at the initiative of the European financial capital, and above all, its core of leadership in the face of the Rothschild banking family.

The purpose of the First World War, was a radical political reconstruction of Europe to dramatically improve the opportunities for further exploitation of European financial capital. To achieve this goal, provided that: 1) the elimination of all existing large countries in Europe, officially called themselves empires (Germany, Russia, Austria-Hungary, and Turkey), and 2) the maximum attenuation of the monarchical form of government and the spread of republican forms of government.
In order to capture the key positions in the world, the United States after his failure at the Versailles conference began to pay attention to the other major countries of the world, dissatisfied with the outcome of the First World War. The figure was 4: Germany, Italy, Russia and Japan.

Americans are directly financed Hitler through Swiss banks, in 1926-1932 years. this was done through the German banks and industrial concerns, which by this time become the German branches of America's financial and industrial groups, and especially Morgan.

Creating in the face of Germany's center of the future of the war in Europe, American bankers provide a similar center in Asia. This has become a hotbed of Asian Japan. During World War II, Japan has achieved the dominant economic position in China. But in 1922, at the Washington Conference of Japanese Americans forced to pull out of China.

But then another 5 years the Americans could not compete on equal terms with Britain, China and France.

Washington believed that the Japanese invasion of Manchuria (Northeast China) will make Chiang Kai-shek even more focus on the United States and lead to war in the future of Japan and the USSR.

To paralyze the possible intervention on the side of the Soviet Union and Czechoslovakia provide Munich Agreement, on orders from the U.S. Japan July 29, 1938 organized the invasion of Soviet territory in the Lake Khasan 3 infantry divisions and a mechanized brigade. In May and August 1939 a large-scale Soviet-Japanese military conflict on the river Halkin-Gol in Mongolia pursued goal to divert forces from Europe to the Soviet Union on the eve of the German attack on Poland and force the Soviet Union to take Germany's proposal to conclude a non-aggression pact, which was followed and in the midst of battle .

Germany on the orders of the United States in March 1936, introducing troops into the demilitarized Rhineland. The fact that the deployment of troops was not Hitler's personal initiative, indicate many Western historians.

The meaning of the U.S. foreign policy ideas in relation to the USSR was whether to return the Soviet Union to implement the "Dawes Plan" and for this it was necessary deindustrializovat him, returning to the level of 1925 in this, indeed, is the essence of the German plan "Barbarossa" according to which the German troops occupy the European part of the USSR, up to the foothills of the Urals, and thereby deprive him 80% of the industrial potential. That is, as a result of the German occupation of the European part of its industrial capacity has been reduced by 4-5 times, and thus return to the indicators about what he had in 1925 on the eve of the start of the first five-year plan.

Evidence that the decision to attack Germany on the Soviet Union was not made in Berlin, in New York and Washington, there are a great many.

I remind you - Hitler came to power with the help of Roosevelt

[GreyKarast]

CountryCarr,Now tell me who started the second world war, who wanted to rule the world as it is today? America. And all the victims of the war on the shoulders of the American government in the face of politicians and bankers.

[NJGOAT]

Originally Posted by GreyKarast

In November 1918 ended the First World War, which began in August 1914 at the initiative of the European financial capital, and above all, its core of leadership in the face of the Rothschild banking family.

The purpose of the First World War, was a radical political reconstruction of Europe to dramatically improve the opportunities for further exploitation of European financial capital. To achieve this goal, provided that: 1) the elimination of all existing large countries in Europe, officially called themselves empires (Germany, Russia, Austria-Hungary, and Turkey), and 2) the maximum attenuation of the monarchical form of government and the spread of republican forms of government.
In order to capture the key positions in the world, the United States after his failure at the Versailles conference began to pay attention to the other major countries of the world, dissatisfied with the outcome of the First World War. The figure was 4: Germany, Italy, Russia and Japan.

Americans are directly financed Hitler through Swiss banks, in 1926-1932 years. this was done through the German banks and industrial concerns, which by this time become the German branches of America's financial and industrial groups, and especially Morgan.

Creating in the face of Germany's center of the future of the war in Europe, American bankers provide a similar center in Asia. This has become a hotbed of Asian Japan. During World War II, Japan has achieved the dominant economic position in China. But in 1922, at the Washington Conference of Japanese Americans forced to pull out of China.

But then another 5 years the Americans could not compete on equal terms with Britain, China and France.

Washington believed that the Japanese invasion of Manchuria (Northeast China) will make Chiang Kai-shek even more focus on the United States and lead to war in the future of Japan and the USSR.

To paralyze the possible intervention on the side of the Soviet Union and Czechoslovakia provide Munich Agreement, on orders from the U.S. Japan July 29, 1938 organized the invasion of Soviet territory in the Lake Khasan 3 infantry divisions and a mechanized brigade. In May and August 1939 a large-scale Soviet-Japanese military conflict on the river Halkin-Gol in Mongolia pursued goal to divert forces from Europe to the Soviet Union on the eve of the German attack on Poland and force the Soviet Union to take Germany's proposal to conclude a non-aggression pact, which was followed and in the midst of battle .

Germany on the orders of the United States in March 1936, introducing troops into the demilitarized Rhineland. The fact that the deployment of troops was not Hitler's personal initiative, indicate many Western historians.

The meaning of the U.S. foreign policy ideas in relation to the USSR was whether to return the Soviet Union to implement the "Dawes Plan" and for this it was necessary deindustrializovat him, returning to the level of 1925 in this, indeed, is the essence of the German plan "Barbarossa" according to which the German troops occupy the European part of the USSR, up to the foothills of the Urals, and thereby deprive him 80% of the industrial potential. That is, as a result of the German occupation of the European part of its industrial capacity has been reduced by 4-5 times, and thus return to the indicators about what he had in 1925 on the eve of the start of the first five-year plan.

Evidence that the decision to attack Germany on the Soviet Union was not made in Berlin, in New York and Washington, there are a great many.

I remind you - Hitler came to power with the help of Roosevelt

Originally Posted by GreyKarast

CountryCarr,Now tell me who started the second world war, who wanted to rule the world as it is today? America. And all the victims of the war on the shoulders of the American government in the face of politicians and bankers.

You left out the part about the evil Zionist Jews running America.

[CountryCarr]

I still think that both were bad, but unfortunately for the Russian people they had to endure Stalin for 8 more years...