Antifa Communism Rejected in Spain

[Lucy Hamilton]

War is hell.

There's a difference between casualties of war, and casualties of political retribution and thought-crime.

Dresden was not even a military target, but rather a refugee haven of Eastern German civilians fleeing the Soviets, that's why Dresden had so many civilians.

Obvious deliberate genocide massacre by firebombing by the Anglo-elite of the U.S, and England.

No, nothing Franco did compares to that.

Franco killed 400,000 of his own citizens for daring to disagree with him.

Some death toll FIGURES for the Dresden Firebombing have been sourced that high.

Only those that have a particular agenda.

Realistic estimates, based on Dresen records, indicate around 25,000 to 30,000 fatalities in Dresden.

Dresden had approx. 300,000 residents + refugees, it's hard to believe that over 90% of the population would have survived, when the city was in severe devastation.

I

The Victors inflated their own deaths and deliberately lowered the number of deaths they caused.

The Victors came up with a deliberately lower figure of deaths, just like they say only 200,000 died at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Only the brainwashed and ignorant would think only 200,000 people combined died at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

You could argue that the bombing of Dresden was a war crime.

But so was the Blitz, and twice as many British civilians died in London as a result of German bombs than Germany civilians in Dresden.

What about dropping Atomic Bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, there was no need to do that either but Truman did it, Japan was already in discussions to surrender when the Atomic Bombs were dropped murdering innocent peoples.

We dropped Atomic Bombs on Japan to show Stalin that we had them.

We knew what the new world order was going to be, from that point on (at least for the next 50 or so years) - and we were making a show of it.

Yes I know, America deliberately murdered Japanese people by incinerating them to illustrate that the small dicked America's had now got a dick enhancer.

You ramble about but but but Franco killed 400,000 people because they disagreed with him and in light of America committing a heinous war crime that would have had Truman and those around him swinging from a rope if the Communists had not have won the Second War for you.

Everyone except Americans know that it was the Russian POS who won the Second War, Americans think John Wayne won the war for you

Well, no. Americans who've actually read a history book know that while we essentially beat Japan on our own, the war in Europe had a lot more players.

Here's the thing, though - and I'm pretty sure you're going to agree with me, once you think about it.

There is an inherent difference between how a leader of a country needs to act towards its own citizens, and towards its enemies.

As I said before, war is Hell. It exemplifies the worst aspects of the human condition. In every we hear about now, non-combatants die at exponentially higher rates than combatants do. Good men do terrible things in war.

Because of that, we expect cruelty and viciousness in war. We've been conditioned to accept that we have to do terrible things in war, because the other side is doing them too, and we need to win.

On the other hand, killing your domestic political opponents, in peacetime, simply to maintain power is repugnant to everything a fair-minded citizen believes in.

Everyone has the right to their opinion, even if it's against what the leader of their country thinks. Everyone has the right to fight to be heard, and every leader has a responsibility to all of their people - not just their supporters - to protect them and keep them safe.

 

[MindWars]

 

[theDoctorisIn]

You could argue that the bombing of Dresden was a war crime.

But so was the Blitz, and twice as many British civilians died in London as a result of German bombs than Germany civilians in Dresden.

What about dropping Atomic Bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, there was no need to do that either but Truman did it, Japan was already in discussions to surrender when the Atomic Bombs were dropped murdering innocent peoples.

We dropped Atomic Bombs on Japan to show Stalin that we had them.

We knew what the new world order was going to be, from that point on (at least for the next 50 or so years) - and we were making a show of it.

So, why did we give Stalin most of Central-Europe on a silver platter, if we were working on, or even testing the a-bomb at the time the deal was finalized.

Because we weren't in a position to jump right into another World War.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Dresden was not even a military target, but rather a refugee haven of Eastern German civilians fleeing the Soviets, that's why Dresden had so many civilians.

Obvious deliberate genocide massacre by firebombing by the Anglo-elite of the U.S, and England.

No, nothing Franco did compares to that.

Franco killed 400,000 of his own citizens for daring to disagree with him.

Some death toll FIGURES for the Dresden Firebombing have been sourced that high.

Only those that have a particular agenda.

Realistic estimates, based on Dresen records, indicate around 25,000 to 30,000 fatalities in Dresden.

Dresden had approx. 300,000 residents + refugees, it's hard to believe that over 90% of the population would have survived, when the city was in severe devastation.

I

The Victors inflated their own deaths and deliberately lowered the number of deaths they caused.

The Victors came up with a deliberately lower figure of deaths, just like they say only 200,000 died at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Only the brainwashed and ignorant would think only 200,000 people combined died at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

What makes you believe those numbers are wrong?

In general, those numbers come from the governments of the cities themselves.

The city of Hiroshima has no reason to lie about it.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Also, to put things in perspective:

During the bombing of Dresden, Allied bombers dropped a little less than 4,000 tons of explosives on the city.

In the 3 years before the bombing of Dresden, german bombers had dropped more than ten times as much on residential areas of England - including almost 20,000 tons just on the city of London.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

You could argue that the bombing of Dresden was a war crime.

But so was the Blitz, and twice as many British civilians died in London as a result of German bombs than Germany civilians in Dresden.

What about dropping Atomic Bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, there was no need to do that either but Truman did it, Japan was already in discussions to surrender when the Atomic Bombs were dropped murdering innocent peoples.

Everyone except Americans know that it was the Russian POS who won the Second War, Americans think John Wayne won the war for you

Yeah, Russians did the most to combat Hitler, but with how much Lend-Lease from his Western allies?

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Also, to put things in perspective:

During the bombing of Dresden, Allied bombers dropped a little less than 4,000 tons of explosives on the city.

In the 3 years before the bombing of Dresden, german bombers had dropped more than ten times as much on residential areas of England - including almost 20,000 tons just on the city of London.

Hitler was worse than Churchill, or Franco, and I'm going to say Churchill was worse than Franco.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Also, to put things in perspective:

During the bombing of Dresden, Allied bombers dropped a little less than 4,000 tons of explosives on the city.

In the 3 years before the bombing of Dresden, german bombers had dropped more than ten times as much on residential areas of England - including almost 20,000 tons just on the city of London.

Hitler was worse than Churchill, or Franco, and I'm going to say Churchill was worse than Franco.

So you think the metric is simply "deaths caused by...", and that who died is irrelevant?

I think the Dresden Firebombing is well more brutal than anything that Franco did, indeed.

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

Also, to put things in perspective:

During the bombing of Dresden, Allied bombers dropped a little less than 4,000 tons of explosives on the city.

In the 3 years before the bombing of Dresden, german bombers had dropped more than ten times as much on residential areas of England - including almost 20,000 tons just on the city of London.

To put things in perspective.

When London was bombed the Second War was in action and many of the places bombed not in London were strategic in a military way for the British including port areas etc.

When Dresden was bombed the war was reaching an end and there was nothing of military significance about Dresden, it was 100% a civilian target with all those being women, children, elderly peoples.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Also, to put things in perspective:

During the bombing of Dresden, Allied bombers dropped a little less than 4,000 tons of explosives on the city.

In the 3 years before the bombing of Dresden, german bombers had dropped more than ten times as much on residential areas of England - including almost 20,000 tons just on the city of London.

Hitler was worse than Churchill, or Franco, and I'm going to say Churchill was worse than Franco.

Worse in what sense?

In the context of World War II, FDR and Churchill killed their enemies. Franco killed his own citizens.

There is no moral equivalency there.

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

Franco killed 400,000 of his own citizens for daring to disagree with him.

Some death toll FIGURES for the Dresden Firebombing have been sourced that high.

Only those that have a particular agenda.

Realistic estimates, based on Dresen records, indicate around 25,000 to 30,000 fatalities in Dresden.

Dresden had approx. 300,000 residents + refugees, it's hard to believe that over 90% of the population would have survived, when the city was in severe devastation.

I

The Victors inflated their own deaths and deliberately lowered the number of deaths they caused.

The Victors came up with a deliberately lower figure of deaths, just like they say only 200,000 died at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Only the brainwashed and ignorant would think only 200,000 people combined died at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

What makes you believe those numbers are wrong?

In general, those numbers come from the governments of the cities themselves.

The city of Hiroshima has no reason to lie about it.

I think to reduce the death total for diplomatic reasons.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Also, to put things in perspective:

During the bombing of Dresden, Allied bombers dropped a little less than 4,000 tons of explosives on the city.

In the 3 years before the bombing of Dresden, german bombers had dropped more than ten times as much on residential areas of England - including almost 20,000 tons just on the city of London.

To put things in perspective.

When London was bombed the Second War was in action and many of the places bombed not in London were strategic in a military way for the British including port areas etc.

When Dresden was bombed the war was reaching an end and there was nothing of military significance about Dresden, it was 100% a civilian target with all those being women, children, elderly peoples.

Twice as many civilians died due to German bombs in the Blitz than died in Dresden to Allied bombs.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Also, to put things in perspective:

During the bombing of Dresden, Allied bombers dropped a little less than 4,000 tons of explosives on the city.

In the 3 years before the bombing of Dresden, german bombers had dropped more than ten times as much on residential areas of England - including almost 20,000 tons just on the city of London.

Hitler was worse than Churchill, or Franco, and I'm going to say Churchill was worse than Franco.

Worse in what sense?

In the context of World War II, FDR and Churchill killed their enemies. Franco killed his own citizens.

There is no moral equivalency there.

So killing ones own citizens is an abomination.

Well you better go tell that to those who support Abraham Lincoln.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Yes I know, America deliberately murdered Japanese people by incinerating them to illustrate that the small dicked America's had now got a dick enhancer.

Yes, if another nation starts a war with us, like a sneak attack on our fleet, we will go to Total War, which means we will attack them in every way possible; their military, their economy, their morale, their trade, etc until they are completely and utterly defeated, or decimated.

I understand that people around the world dont like it.

But the solution is simple; dont fuck with us.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Also, to put things in perspective:

During the bombing of Dresden, Allied bombers dropped a little less than 4,000 tons of explosives on the city.

In the 3 years before the bombing of Dresden, german bombers had dropped more than ten times as much on residential areas of England - including almost 20,000 tons just on the city of London.

Hitler was worse than Churchill, or Franco, and I'm going to say Churchill was worse than Franco.

Worse in what sense?

In the context of World War II, FDR and Churchill killed their enemies. Franco killed his own citizens.

There is no moral equivalency there.

The big difference is much of those who died in the Spanish Civil War were combat veterans, as opposed to Dresden Firebombing where close to 100% were civilian.

 

[JimBowie1958]

So killing ones own citizens is an abomination.
Well you better go tell that to those who support Abraham Lincoln.

Lincoln did what he had to do to preserve our nation.

While I respect the leaders of the South, they brought the shit on themselves by declaring the Confederacy to be a free trade nation, meaning that they would allow smugglers to freely cross Southern territory to evade Union tariffs.

We became a stronger nation after that hell and prepped us for two world wars.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Some death toll FIGURES for the Dresden Firebombing have been sourced that high.

Only those that have a particular agenda.

Realistic estimates, based on Dresen records, indicate around 25,000 to 30,000 fatalities in Dresden.

Dresden had approx. 300,000 residents + refugees, it's hard to believe that over 90% of the population would have survived, when the city was in severe devastation.

I

The Victors inflated their own deaths and deliberately lowered the number of deaths they caused.

The Victors came up with a deliberately lower figure of deaths, just like they say only 200,000 died at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Only the brainwashed and ignorant would think only 200,000 people combined died at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

What makes you believe those numbers are wrong?

In general, those numbers come from the governments of the cities themselves.

The city of Hiroshima has no reason to lie about it.

I think to reduce the death total for diplomatic reasons.

That may have been true 50 years ago. Not today.

Today, the Hiroshima Peace Museum puts the death toll at 140,000. Add that to the highest estimates of Nagasaki (7,000), and we've got a total of 210,000.

Which is essentially the number you're doubting.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

So killing ones own citizens is an abomination.
Well you better go tell that to those who support Abraham Lincoln.

Lincoln did what he had to do to preserve our nation.

While I respect the leaders of the South, they brought the shit on themselves by declaring the Confederacy to be a free trade nation, meaning that they would allow smugglers to freely cross Southern territory to evade Union tariffs.

We became a stronger nation after that hell and prepped us for two world wars.

But, close to 100 years earlier, the American Revolutionary War rebels were like Confederate rebels, no?

Yes, yes.

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

Also, to put things in perspective:

During the bombing of Dresden, Allied bombers dropped a little less than 4,000 tons of explosives on the city.

In the 3 years before the bombing of Dresden, german bombers had dropped more than ten times as much on residential areas of England - including almost 20,000 tons just on the city of London.

Hitler was worse than Churchill, or Franco, and I'm going to say Churchill was worse than Franco.

Worse in what sense?

In the context of World War II, FDR and Churchill killed their enemies. Franco killed his own citizens.

There is no moral equivalency there.

Stalin killed his own citizens and most of them not during a war situation, again the 7 million Ukranians deliberately starved to death happen in 1932-1933, yet Churchill and FDR never demanded that Stalin be put to the rope.

Also during the near 50 years Eastern Europe given to the Communist rule, thousands and thousands of those Stalin butchers lived happily and the British and Americans never one time demanded that Stalin's butchers be arrested and put on trial.

Lazar Kaganovich who was the architect of the Holomodor lived until 1991, yet the British and Americans did not demand he was arrested and put on trial for Crimes Against Humanity for being directly responsible for 7 million people being deliberately starved to death in a non wartime situation and just because they "were in the way"

Lazar Kaganovich - Wikipedia

This article from the New York Times announcing his death at the age of 97 years of age does not even mention he was the architect of the Holomodor or even mention the Holomodor.

L. M. Kaganovich, Stalwart of Stalin, Dies at 97