Honoring The Sacrifices Of The Soviet Union in WWII….Really?

[Oz and the Orchestra]

The war propaganda in support of the Marxists has never abated, and has led America to a precipice. Now, the truth.


1.An interesting and significant month, August.

August 20–25, 1944
Allied troops reach Paris. On August 25, Free French forces, supported by Allied troops, enter the French capital. By September, the Allies reach the German border; by December, virtually all of France, most of Belgium, and part of the southern Netherlands are liberated. World War II: Timeline.

Did you see any mention of Soviet troops there?


2. Government school propaganda provides two beliefs about the Soviets in WWII.

a. That they deserve gratitude and honor for their valiant efforts and great loses in the war

b. U.S. war propaganda had painted pipesmoking "Uncle Joe Stalin" as a friendly fellow, and the liberal propaganda left people to thinking of Communist Party members as lovable idealists.

Really???

There is no honor or credit due to the Soviet Union because they lost 20 million in the war. The glorification of the role that the Soviets played in WWII is unfounded, and almost entirely due to the neo-Marxist influence in our society due to Democrats/Liberals/Progressives doing public relations for them, as they share the same values and aims.

First: most of the Soviet loses were their troops killed by Stalin’s own forces. One reason they lost 20 million, while we lost 415,000 was due to the value that America placed on human life, and the lack of same interest by Bolsheviks: they don’t care about human life, a characteristic absorbed and propounded by the current Democrat Party.



3. "Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"
Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin

And.....

World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans. Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.

And.....

"In 1945 Zhukov is reported to have said to US General Dwight D. Eisenhower, "If we come to a minefield, our infantry attacks exactly as it were not there." The shear weight of numbers eventually drove the Germans back, along with the Soviet leadership's determination not to relent, whatever the cost."

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

www.moreorless.net.au

Tom Clancy has a hero combat soldier exclaim his opinion about the thugs who ran the Soviet Union, the communists:

"Misha waved his hand, looking in annoyance at the way it shook. "I have never had much respect for the chekisti. When I was leading my men, they were there-behind us. They were very efficient at shooting prisoners-prisoners that real soldiers had taken. They were also rather good at murdering people who'd been forced to retreat. I even remember one case where a chekist lieutenant took command of a tank troop and led it into a fucking swamp. At least the Germans I killed were men, fighting men. I hated them, but I could respect them for the soldiers they were. Your kind, on the other hand… perhaps we simple soldiers never really understood who the enemy was. Sometimes I wonder who has killed more Russians, the Germans-or people like you?" “The Cardinal of the Kremlin,”p. 383



So those ‘great loses’ were not at the hands of the Germans, they were by their own leaders. Someone should have told Roosevelt.

Oh…wait….they did!

Love is blind.

Ha ha ha - you stupid twisted imbecile.

You just can't resist it can you? Taking the well documented historical record WWll and twisting,restructuring, airbrushing and wholly misrepresenting it. All because your extreme right wing views, fondness of the Nazi's and hatred of communism you feel compels you.

"1.An interesting and significant month, August."

Isn't it! You then outline the allied achievements in liberating North Western Europe even including the Free French, de Gaulle and a few officers who basically flew from London to Paris backed by the allies. Wow!

You obviously have absolutely no knowledge of Geography-

" Did you see any mention of Soviet troops there?"

Ha ha.......NO, Did you expect me to?

Perhaps it might be because the soviets were over 500 miles away having liberated - Crimea, Hungary, Belarus, Ukraine, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland single handedly, and were approaching Germany's eastern border.

The only possible way they could have been in France, Holland etc, is if they had already occupied Germany in which case the war would be over.

I am quite shocked by your ignorance!

Need to be somewhere now, but don't run away as I haven't even started your thrashing and have much to add.

How ignorant of you for saying this:

"Perhaps it might be because the soviets were over 500 miles away having liberated - Crimea, Hungary, Belarus, Ukraine, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland single handedly, and were approaching Germany's eastern border."

The Soviet Union was Russia and their conquered territories. So drop the term "soviets" and refer to them as what they are: Russians. The Russians conquered Crimea, Hungary, Belarus, Ukraine, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, and Poland and installed puppet governments. There was no voluntary union on the part of the conquered territories.

.

The Soviet Union was the Republics I mentioned bar Poland.

Your contradicting yourself!

"The Soviet Union was Russia and their conquered territories. So drop the term "soviets" and refer to them as what they are: Russians".

Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

Those Republics adopted the Red Flag hammer & sickle. Whether there was popular support at least initially I don't know. but that is beside the point. The Nazi's had invaded them and the point I made to 'political chic' who asked - "Why did the Soviets play no part in liberating France, Holland etc." (yes, -I can't believe she asked it either) was because they were busy liberating their former Soviet Republics from the Nazi's and were hundreds of miles away on the other side of Germany.

Hope this helps!

 

[westwall]

the deal we got was a crap deal. fdr deserves no credit for it. he should never had run for that fourth term.

How was it a crap deal when FDR got Stalin to do most of the fighting and dying for four years?

We saved Western Europe with minimal casualties. The Soviets got Eastern Europe in return for tens of millions of casualties.

fdr had nothing to do with that. that was all hitler. he invaded stalinist russia and forced them to fight.

until that, stalin was happy to have peace and trade and hugs with nazi germany.


yes, we saved western europe with minimal casualties. and set up the next big conflict as we did it.


short term thinking.

FDR was fine with Hitler taking other countries. He never met a dictator he didn't like.

Munich Agreement, (September 30, 1938), settlement reached by Germany, Great Britain, France, and Italy that permitted German annexation of the Sudetenland in western Czechoslovakia. After his success in absorbing Austria into Germany proper in March 1938, Adolf Hitler looked covetously at Czechoslovakia, Munich Agreement | Definition, Summary, & Significance







At the Munich conference where Europe sold out Czechoslovakia, even though France had a treaty to go to war to preserve Czechoslovakia…..Chamberlain was about to appease Hitler….and FDR sent this message to Chamberlain:



MUNICH MESSAGE FROM U.S. BARED; Roosevelt Sent Encouraging 'Good Man' to Chamberlain Day Before Conference

MUNICH MESSAGE FROM U.S. BARED; Roosevelt Sent Encouraging 'Good Man' to Chamberlain Day Before Conference (Published 1955)

Documents on US foreign relations in '38, pub by State Dept, include P Gilbert rept on Anschluss, noting strong Austrian support for move

mobile.nytimes.com

"Munich." The lesson of appeasement—that giving in to aggression just invites more aggression—has calcified into dogma. Neville Chamberlain's name has become code for a weak-kneed, caviling politician, just as Winston Churchill has become the beau ideal of indomitable leadership.

When Chamberlain first announced, after returning from signing his deal with Hitler at Munich in 1938, that "peace is at hand," FDR sent Chamberlain a telegram: "Good man," it said. "I am not a bit upset over the final result," FDR wrote the U.S. ambassador to Italy. When Hitler began to chew up the rest of Europe in 1939, FDR temporized and maneuvered to build political support for intervention among his decidedly isolationist countrymen. Indeed, the United States did not declare war on Germany until Germany declared war on the United States in December 1941, four days after Pearl Harbor." Presidents and the Mythology of Munich

The war propaganda in support of the Marxists has never abated, and has led America to a precipice. Now, the truth.


1.An interesting and significant month, August.

August 20–25, 1944
Allied troops reach Paris. On August 25, Free French forces, supported by Allied troops, enter the French capital. By September, the Allies reach the German border; by December, virtually all of France, most of Belgium, and part of the southern Netherlands are liberated. World War II: Timeline.

Did you see any mention of Soviet troops there?


2. Government school propaganda provides two beliefs about the Soviets in WWII.

a. That they deserve gratitude and honor for their valiant efforts and great loses in the war

b. U.S. war propaganda had painted pipesmoking "Uncle Joe Stalin" as a friendly fellow, and the liberal propaganda left people to thinking of Communist Party members as lovable idealists.

Really???

There is no honor or credit due to the Soviet Union because they lost 20 million in the war. The glorification of the role that the Soviets played in WWII is unfounded, and almost entirely due to the neo-Marxist influence in our society due to Democrats/Liberals/Progressives doing public relations for them, as they share the same values and aims.

First: most of the Soviet loses were their troops killed by Stalin’s own forces. One reason they lost 20 million, while we lost 415,000 was due to the value that America placed on human life, and the lack of same interest by Bolsheviks: they don’t care about human life, a characteristic absorbed and propounded by the current Democrat Party.



3. "Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"
Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin

And.....

World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans. Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.

And.....

"In 1945 Zhukov is reported to have said to US General Dwight D. Eisenhower, "If we come to a minefield, our infantry attacks exactly as it were not there." The shear weight of numbers eventually drove the Germans back, along with the Soviet leadership's determination not to relent, whatever the cost."

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

www.moreorless.net.au

Tom Clancy has a hero combat soldier exclaim his opinion about the thugs who ran the Soviet Union, the communists:

"Misha waved his hand, looking in annoyance at the way it shook. "I have never had much respect for the chekisti. When I was leading my men, they were there-behind us. They were very efficient at shooting prisoners-prisoners that real soldiers had taken. They were also rather good at murdering people who'd been forced to retreat. I even remember one case where a chekist lieutenant took command of a tank troop and led it into a fucking swamp. At least the Germans I killed were men, fighting men. I hated them, but I could respect them for the soldiers they were. Your kind, on the other hand… perhaps we simple soldiers never really understood who the enemy was. Sometimes I wonder who has killed more Russians, the Germans-or people like you?" “The Cardinal of the Kremlin,”p. 383



So those ‘great loses’ were not at the hands of the Germans, they were by their own leaders. Someone should have told Roosevelt.

Oh…wait….they did!

Love is blind.

Most of what You write is well researched and I like reading it,
but this is just a bunch disgraceful rubbish.

Yes the Russians were shooting their own not to retreat,
but the Russians, common Soviet folk fought HEROICALLY!

It's beyond disrespectful to present the cause of their death like that,
no better than the vulgar leftist one-sided propaganda.

The Soviets would round up a village, march them at gunpoint to a battlefield, and make them run at german machinegun nests to run them out of bullets.

Brave? No, not really. They were going to be shot either way. They just hoped the death by the Germans would be quicker.

Were there Soviet soldiers who were brave? Absolutely. But to declare that everyone was brave is a lie. A lie based on propaganda.

So you go to the other pathetic extreme to excuse this kind of disrespect...
This is just rubbish for the arrogant who have no memory of war on their soil.

They fought BRAVELY AS A NATION, no need to split hairs, have some basic man's honor.

Where does this need to overcompensate so extremely come from?

2. Government school propaganda provides two beliefs about the Soviets in WWII.



a. That they deserve gratitude and honor for their valiant efforts and great loses in the war



b. U.S. war propaganda had painted pipesmoking "Uncle Joe Stalin" as a friendly fellow, and the liberal propaganda left people to thinking of Communist Party members as lovable idealists.



Really???



There is no honor or credit due to the Soviet Union because they lost 20 million in the war. The glorification of the role that the Soviets played in WWII is unfounded, and almost entirely due to the neo-Marxist influence in our society due to Democrats/Liberals/Progressives doing public relations for them, as they share the same values and aims.



First: most of the Soviet loses were their troops killed by Stalin’s own forces. One reason they lost 20 million, while we lost 415,000 was due to the value that America placed on human life, and the lack of same interest by Bolsheviks: they don’t care about human life, a characteristic absorbed and propounded by the current Democrat Party.







3. "Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"

Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin



And.....



World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans. Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.



And.....



"In 1945 Zhukov is reported to have said to US General Dwight D. Eisenhower, "If we come to a minefield, our infantry attacks exactly as it were not there." The shear weight of numbers eventually drove the Germans back, along with the Soviet leadership's determination not to relent, whatever the cost."

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

www.moreorless.net.au

Tom Clancy has a hero combat soldier exclaim his opinion about the thugs who ran the Soviet Union, the communists:



"Misha waved his hand, looking in annoyance at the way it shook. "I have never had much respect for the chekisti. When I was leading my men, they were there-behind us. They were very efficient at shooting prisoners-prisoners that real soldiers had taken. They were also rather good at murdering people who'd been forced to retreat. I even remember one case where a chekist lieutenant took command of a tank troop and led it into a fucking swamp. At least the Germans I killed were men, fighting men. I hated them, but I could respect them for the soldiers they were. Your kind, on the other hand… perhaps we simple soldiers never really understood who the enemy was. Sometimes I wonder who has killed more Russians, the Germans-or people like you?" “The Cardinal of the Kremlin,”p. 383







So those ‘great loses’ were not at the hands of the Germans, they were by their own leaders. Someone should have told Roosevelt.



Oh…wait….they did!



Love is blind.

You see the world in black and white.

I'm not a product of Your American school systems.

You should AT LEAST get out there and try communicate with Russian veterans.

But unfortunately too late,
arrogance will prevail.

That's why in spite bringing the USSR down,
the Soviet ideology won in America.

I have. I have been to several celebrations on Mamayev Kurgan. I have walked the grain silo in Stalingrad with the soldiers who fought there.

You?

Family, who captured Berlin,
field spy unit, from the age of 17 in war,
didn't hold anything but a pen and paper before.

Then returned to ruined home all skin and bones,
brought up his family in honor and even adopted orphans.

True heroes, true men,
with strong women behind them.

This thread is a disgrace!

Your fathers sacrifice aside, the reason why his home was a ruin was because his government didn't give a shit about him.

And, no. This thread is not a disgrace. Heroism is knowingly placing yourself in harm's way in the clear knowledge that you probably won't survive the experience, yet you do it anyway to save your friends, fellow soldiers, or family.

Merely surviving an incredibly unpleasant experience is a wonderful thing, but it ain't herouc.

They didn't just "survive unpleasant experience"
but moved on and defeated the reich.

They even defeated America, ideologically from within,
but You refused to look or listen when people told You decades ago.

"They even defeated America, ideologically from within, "


Are you claiming that they were Marxists, and you are proud of how this ideology has corrupted America?

Leninists, Marxists, Stalinists ...You name it.
Why do I have to be 'proud' about something for pointing out?

My constant contention throughout our exchange is that -

they all filled a void in American society,
and instead of minimal intellectual introspection,
all I get is a bunch of nervous infantile defensive reactions.

All suggesting denial is vast,
and problem is even worse.

IF they were a real threat, as you admit they were, attacking them, then and now, would be the healthy and smart response.

I don't know how You reach such 'complex' conclusions,
but in Israel we say "if granny had rollerblades..."

you're talking about how marxist from europe came here and defeated us by filling a vacuum of ideas.

then and now, honestly and harshly judging the idea and the people on their merits or lack there of, would have been then, and is now, a fine defense against that type of thing.

marxists, no matter how good of a job they might have done fighting nazis, are still bad guys and should be treated as such.


not glorified like rw wants to. not invited to immigrate there, or join our universities. or worse yet, governments.

Ideas are mobile enough to move without immigration.
Soviets subverted the American society.

When USSR fell,
it was already too late.

Russians know Americans well,
can't say the opposite.

Oh, you're wrong. The Republic hasn't fallen yet. The Soviet Union collapsed, but evil people do evil things. Evil people are being constantly bred.

You can't get rid of them, you can only control them for short periods at a time.

Hope I'm wrong.

We talk different things - You only see it when a country falls,
I'm talking about ideological subversion, when a critical generational mass reached.

That happened what, already 2 generations ago?
Folks keep drawing Russian caricatures...

Yes, the education system has been subverted. But the Republic can still be saved. I am betting that we do.

 

[Oz and the Orchestra]

the deal we got was a crap deal. fdr deserves no credit for it. he should never had run for that fourth term.

How was it a crap deal when FDR got Stalin to do most of the fighting and dying for four years?

We saved Western Europe with minimal casualties. The Soviets got Eastern Europe in return for tens of millions of casualties.

fdr had nothing to do with that. that was all hitler. he invaded stalinist russia and forced them to fight.

until that, stalin was happy to have peace and trade and hugs with nazi germany.


yes, we saved western europe with minimal casualties. and set up the next big conflict as we did it.


short term thinking.

FDR was fine with Hitler taking other countries. He never met a dictator he didn't like.

Munich Agreement, (September 30, 1938), settlement reached by Germany, Great Britain, France, and Italy that permitted German annexation of the Sudetenland in western Czechoslovakia. After his success in absorbing Austria into Germany proper in March 1938, Adolf Hitler looked covetously at Czechoslovakia, Munich Agreement | Definition, Summary, & Significance







At the Munich conference where Europe sold out Czechoslovakia, even though France had a treaty to go to war to preserve Czechoslovakia…..Chamberlain was about to appease Hitler….and FDR sent this message to Chamberlain:



MUNICH MESSAGE FROM U.S. BARED; Roosevelt Sent Encouraging 'Good Man' to Chamberlain Day Before Conference

MUNICH MESSAGE FROM U.S. BARED; Roosevelt Sent Encouraging 'Good Man' to Chamberlain Day Before Conference (Published 1955)

Documents on US foreign relations in '38, pub by State Dept, include P Gilbert rept on Anschluss, noting strong Austrian support for move

mobile.nytimes.com

"Munich." The lesson of appeasement—that giving in to aggression just invites more aggression—has calcified into dogma. Neville Chamberlain's name has become code for a weak-kneed, caviling politician, just as Winston Churchill has become the beau ideal of indomitable leadership.

When Chamberlain first announced, after returning from signing his deal with Hitler at Munich in 1938, that "peace is at hand," FDR sent Chamberlain a telegram: "Good man," it said. "I am not a bit upset over the final result," FDR wrote the U.S. ambassador to Italy. When Hitler began to chew up the rest of Europe in 1939, FDR temporized and maneuvered to build political support for intervention among his decidedly isolationist countrymen. Indeed, the United States did not declare war on Germany until Germany declared war on the United States in December 1941, four days after Pearl Harbor." Presidents and the Mythology of Munich

The war propaganda in support of the Marxists has never abated, and has led America to a precipice. Now, the truth.


1.An interesting and significant month, August.

August 20–25, 1944
Allied troops reach Paris. On August 25, Free French forces, supported by Allied troops, enter the French capital. By September, the Allies reach the German border; by December, virtually all of France, most of Belgium, and part of the southern Netherlands are liberated. World War II: Timeline.

Did you see any mention of Soviet troops there?


2. Government school propaganda provides two beliefs about the Soviets in WWII.

a. That they deserve gratitude and honor for their valiant efforts and great loses in the war

b. U.S. war propaganda had painted pipesmoking "Uncle Joe Stalin" as a friendly fellow, and the liberal propaganda left people to thinking of Communist Party members as lovable idealists.

Really???

There is no honor or credit due to the Soviet Union because they lost 20 million in the war. The glorification of the role that the Soviets played in WWII is unfounded, and almost entirely due to the neo-Marxist influence in our society due to Democrats/Liberals/Progressives doing public relations for them, as they share the same values and aims.

First: most of the Soviet loses were their troops killed by Stalin’s own forces. One reason they lost 20 million, while we lost 415,000 was due to the value that America placed on human life, and the lack of same interest by Bolsheviks: they don’t care about human life, a characteristic absorbed and propounded by the current Democrat Party.



3. "Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"
Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin

And.....

World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans. Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.

And.....

"In 1945 Zhukov is reported to have said to US General Dwight D. Eisenhower, "If we come to a minefield, our infantry attacks exactly as it were not there." The shear weight of numbers eventually drove the Germans back, along with the Soviet leadership's determination not to relent, whatever the cost."

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

www.moreorless.net.au

Tom Clancy has a hero combat soldier exclaim his opinion about the thugs who ran the Soviet Union, the communists:

"Misha waved his hand, looking in annoyance at the way it shook. "I have never had much respect for the chekisti. When I was leading my men, they were there-behind us. They were very efficient at shooting prisoners-prisoners that real soldiers had taken. They were also rather good at murdering people who'd been forced to retreat. I even remember one case where a chekist lieutenant took command of a tank troop and led it into a fucking swamp. At least the Germans I killed were men, fighting men. I hated them, but I could respect them for the soldiers they were. Your kind, on the other hand… perhaps we simple soldiers never really understood who the enemy was. Sometimes I wonder who has killed more Russians, the Germans-or people like you?" “The Cardinal of the Kremlin,”p. 383



So those ‘great loses’ were not at the hands of the Germans, they were by their own leaders. Someone should have told Roosevelt.

Oh…wait….they did!

Love is blind.

Most of what You write is well researched and I like reading it,
but this is just a bunch disgraceful rubbish.

Yes the Russians were shooting their own not to retreat,
but the Russians, common Soviet folk fought HEROICALLY!

It's beyond disrespectful to present the cause of their death like that,
no better than the vulgar leftist one-sided propaganda.

The Soviets would round up a village, march them at gunpoint to a battlefield, and make them run at german machinegun nests to run them out of bullets.

Brave? No, not really. They were going to be shot either way. They just hoped the death by the Germans would be quicker.

Were there Soviet soldiers who were brave? Absolutely. But to declare that everyone was brave is a lie. A lie based on propaganda.

So you go to the other pathetic extreme to excuse this kind of disrespect...
This is just rubbish for the arrogant who have no memory of war on their soil.

They fought BRAVELY AS A NATION, no need to split hairs, have some basic man's honor.

Where does this need to overcompensate so extremely come from?

2. Government school propaganda provides two beliefs about the Soviets in WWII.



a. That they deserve gratitude and honor for their valiant efforts and great loses in the war



b. U.S. war propaganda had painted pipesmoking "Uncle Joe Stalin" as a friendly fellow, and the liberal propaganda left people to thinking of Communist Party members as lovable idealists.



Really???



There is no honor or credit due to the Soviet Union because they lost 20 million in the war. The glorification of the role that the Soviets played in WWII is unfounded, and almost entirely due to the neo-Marxist influence in our society due to Democrats/Liberals/Progressives doing public relations for them, as they share the same values and aims.



First: most of the Soviet loses were their troops killed by Stalin’s own forces. One reason they lost 20 million, while we lost 415,000 was due to the value that America placed on human life, and the lack of same interest by Bolsheviks: they don’t care about human life, a characteristic absorbed and propounded by the current Democrat Party.







3. "Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"

Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin



And.....



World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans. Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.



And.....



"In 1945 Zhukov is reported to have said to US General Dwight D. Eisenhower, "If we come to a minefield, our infantry attacks exactly as it were not there." The shear weight of numbers eventually drove the Germans back, along with the Soviet leadership's determination not to relent, whatever the cost."

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

www.moreorless.net.au

Tom Clancy has a hero combat soldier exclaim his opinion about the thugs who ran the Soviet Union, the communists:



"Misha waved his hand, looking in annoyance at the way it shook. "I have never had much respect for the chekisti. When I was leading my men, they were there-behind us. They were very efficient at shooting prisoners-prisoners that real soldiers had taken. They were also rather good at murdering people who'd been forced to retreat. I even remember one case where a chekist lieutenant took command of a tank troop and led it into a fucking swamp. At least the Germans I killed were men, fighting men. I hated them, but I could respect them for the soldiers they were. Your kind, on the other hand… perhaps we simple soldiers never really understood who the enemy was. Sometimes I wonder who has killed more Russians, the Germans-or people like you?" “The Cardinal of the Kremlin,”p. 383







So those ‘great loses’ were not at the hands of the Germans, they were by their own leaders. Someone should have told Roosevelt.



Oh…wait….they did!



Love is blind.

You see the world in black and white.

I'm not a product of Your American school systems.

You should AT LEAST get out there and try communicate with Russian veterans.

But unfortunately too late,
arrogance will prevail.

That's why in spite bringing the USSR down,
the Soviet ideology won in America.

I have. I have been to several celebrations on Mamayev Kurgan. I have walked the grain silo in Stalingrad with the soldiers who fought there.

You?

Family, who captured Berlin,
field spy unit, from the age of 17 in war,
didn't hold anything but a pen and paper before.

Then returned to ruined home all skin and bones,
brought up his family in honor and even adopted orphans.

True heroes, true men,
with strong women behind them.

This thread is a disgrace!

Your fathers sacrifice aside, the reason why his home was a ruin was because his government didn't give a shit about him.

And, no. This thread is not a disgrace. Heroism is knowingly placing yourself in harm's way in the clear knowledge that you probably won't survive the experience, yet you do it anyway to save your friends, fellow soldiers, or family.

Merely surviving an incredibly unpleasant experience is a wonderful thing, but it ain't herouc.

They didn't just "survive unpleasant experience"
but moved on and defeated the reich.

They even defeated America, ideologically from within,
but You refused to look or listen when people told You decades ago.

"They even defeated America, ideologically from within, "


Are you claiming that they were Marxists, and you are proud of how this ideology has corrupted America?

Leninists, Marxists, Stalinists ...You name it.
Why do I have to be 'proud' about something for pointing out?

My constant contention throughout our exchange is that -

they all filled a void in American society,
and instead of minimal intellectual introspection,
all I get is a bunch of nervous infantile defensive reactions.

All suggesting denial is vast,
and problem is even worse.

IF they were a real threat, as you admit they were, attacking them, then and now, would be the healthy and smart response.

I don't know how You reach such 'complex' conclusions,
but in Israel we say "if granny had rollerblades..."

you're talking about how marxist from europe came here and defeated us by filling a vacuum of ideas.

then and now, honestly and harshly judging the idea and the people on their merits or lack there of, would have been then, and is now, a fine defense against that type of thing.

marxists, no matter how good of a job they might have done fighting nazis, are still bad guys and should be treated as such.


not glorified like rw wants to. not invited to immigrate there, or join our universities. or worse yet, governments.

Ideas are mobile enough to move without immigration.
Soviets subverted the American society.

When USSR fell,
it was already too late.

Russians know Americans well,
can't say the opposite.

Oh, you're wrong. The Republic hasn't fallen yet. The Soviet Union collapsed, but evil people do evil things. Evil people are being constantly bred.

You can't get rid of them, you can only control them for short periods at a time.

Hope I'm wrong.

We talk different things - You only see it when a country falls,
I'm talking about ideological subversion, when a critical generational mass reached.

That happened what, already 2 generations ago?
Folks keep drawing Russian caricatures...

Yes, the education system has been subverted. But the Republic can still be saved. I am betting that we do.

There is no doubt the Soviet Union failed.
I think though even you republicans now accept Marxism is a superior ideology and the search for a new form of Marxism is on and it could possibly/probably break through in the US.

Were all hoping!

 

[PoliticalChic]

the deal we got was a crap deal. fdr deserves no credit for it. he should never had run for that fourth term.

How was it a crap deal when FDR got Stalin to do most of the fighting and dying for four years?

We saved Western Europe with minimal casualties. The Soviets got Eastern Europe in return for tens of millions of casualties.

fdr had nothing to do with that. that was all hitler. he invaded stalinist russia and forced them to fight.

until that, stalin was happy to have peace and trade and hugs with nazi germany.


yes, we saved western europe with minimal casualties. and set up the next big conflict as we did it.


short term thinking.

FDR was fine with Hitler taking other countries. He never met a dictator he didn't like.

Munich Agreement, (September 30, 1938), settlement reached by Germany, Great Britain, France, and Italy that permitted German annexation of the Sudetenland in western Czechoslovakia. After his success in absorbing Austria into Germany proper in March 1938, Adolf Hitler looked covetously at Czechoslovakia, Munich Agreement | Definition, Summary, & Significance







At the Munich conference where Europe sold out Czechoslovakia, even though France had a treaty to go to war to preserve Czechoslovakia…..Chamberlain was about to appease Hitler….and FDR sent this message to Chamberlain:



MUNICH MESSAGE FROM U.S. BARED; Roosevelt Sent Encouraging 'Good Man' to Chamberlain Day Before Conference

MUNICH MESSAGE FROM U.S. BARED; Roosevelt Sent Encouraging 'Good Man' to Chamberlain Day Before Conference (Published 1955)

Documents on US foreign relations in '38, pub by State Dept, include P Gilbert rept on Anschluss, noting strong Austrian support for move

mobile.nytimes.com

"Munich." The lesson of appeasement—that giving in to aggression just invites more aggression—has calcified into dogma. Neville Chamberlain's name has become code for a weak-kneed, caviling politician, just as Winston Churchill has become the beau ideal of indomitable leadership.

When Chamberlain first announced, after returning from signing his deal with Hitler at Munich in 1938, that "peace is at hand," FDR sent Chamberlain a telegram: "Good man," it said. "I am not a bit upset over the final result," FDR wrote the U.S. ambassador to Italy. When Hitler began to chew up the rest of Europe in 1939, FDR temporized and maneuvered to build political support for intervention among his decidedly isolationist countrymen. Indeed, the United States did not declare war on Germany until Germany declared war on the United States in December 1941, four days after Pearl Harbor." Presidents and the Mythology of Munich

The war propaganda in support of the Marxists has never abated, and has led America to a precipice. Now, the truth.


1.An interesting and significant month, August.

August 20–25, 1944
Allied troops reach Paris. On August 25, Free French forces, supported by Allied troops, enter the French capital. By September, the Allies reach the German border; by December, virtually all of France, most of Belgium, and part of the southern Netherlands are liberated. World War II: Timeline.

Did you see any mention of Soviet troops there?


2. Government school propaganda provides two beliefs about the Soviets in WWII.

a. That they deserve gratitude and honor for their valiant efforts and great loses in the war

b. U.S. war propaganda had painted pipesmoking "Uncle Joe Stalin" as a friendly fellow, and the liberal propaganda left people to thinking of Communist Party members as lovable idealists.

Really???

There is no honor or credit due to the Soviet Union because they lost 20 million in the war. The glorification of the role that the Soviets played in WWII is unfounded, and almost entirely due to the neo-Marxist influence in our society due to Democrats/Liberals/Progressives doing public relations for them, as they share the same values and aims.

First: most of the Soviet loses were their troops killed by Stalin’s own forces. One reason they lost 20 million, while we lost 415,000 was due to the value that America placed on human life, and the lack of same interest by Bolsheviks: they don’t care about human life, a characteristic absorbed and propounded by the current Democrat Party.



3. "Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"
Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin

And.....

World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans. Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.

And.....

"In 1945 Zhukov is reported to have said to US General Dwight D. Eisenhower, "If we come to a minefield, our infantry attacks exactly as it were not there." The shear weight of numbers eventually drove the Germans back, along with the Soviet leadership's determination not to relent, whatever the cost."

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

www.moreorless.net.au

Tom Clancy has a hero combat soldier exclaim his opinion about the thugs who ran the Soviet Union, the communists:

"Misha waved his hand, looking in annoyance at the way it shook. "I have never had much respect for the chekisti. When I was leading my men, they were there-behind us. They were very efficient at shooting prisoners-prisoners that real soldiers had taken. They were also rather good at murdering people who'd been forced to retreat. I even remember one case where a chekist lieutenant took command of a tank troop and led it into a fucking swamp. At least the Germans I killed were men, fighting men. I hated them, but I could respect them for the soldiers they were. Your kind, on the other hand… perhaps we simple soldiers never really understood who the enemy was. Sometimes I wonder who has killed more Russians, the Germans-or people like you?" “The Cardinal of the Kremlin,”p. 383



So those ‘great loses’ were not at the hands of the Germans, they were by their own leaders. Someone should have told Roosevelt.

Oh…wait….they did!

Love is blind.

Most of what You write is well researched and I like reading it,
but this is just a bunch disgraceful rubbish.

Yes the Russians were shooting their own not to retreat,
but the Russians, common Soviet folk fought HEROICALLY!

It's beyond disrespectful to present the cause of their death like that,
no better than the vulgar leftist one-sided propaganda.

The Soviets would round up a village, march them at gunpoint to a battlefield, and make them run at german machinegun nests to run them out of bullets.

Brave? No, not really. They were going to be shot either way. They just hoped the death by the Germans would be quicker.

Were there Soviet soldiers who were brave? Absolutely. But to declare that everyone was brave is a lie. A lie based on propaganda.

So you go to the other pathetic extreme to excuse this kind of disrespect...
This is just rubbish for the arrogant who have no memory of war on their soil.

They fought BRAVELY AS A NATION, no need to split hairs, have some basic man's honor.

Where does this need to overcompensate so extremely come from?

2. Government school propaganda provides two beliefs about the Soviets in WWII.



a. That they deserve gratitude and honor for their valiant efforts and great loses in the war



b. U.S. war propaganda had painted pipesmoking "Uncle Joe Stalin" as a friendly fellow, and the liberal propaganda left people to thinking of Communist Party members as lovable idealists.



Really???



There is no honor or credit due to the Soviet Union because they lost 20 million in the war. The glorification of the role that the Soviets played in WWII is unfounded, and almost entirely due to the neo-Marxist influence in our society due to Democrats/Liberals/Progressives doing public relations for them, as they share the same values and aims.



First: most of the Soviet loses were their troops killed by Stalin’s own forces. One reason they lost 20 million, while we lost 415,000 was due to the value that America placed on human life, and the lack of same interest by Bolsheviks: they don’t care about human life, a characteristic absorbed and propounded by the current Democrat Party.







3. "Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"

Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin



And.....



World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans. Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.



And.....



"In 1945 Zhukov is reported to have said to US General Dwight D. Eisenhower, "If we come to a minefield, our infantry attacks exactly as it were not there." The shear weight of numbers eventually drove the Germans back, along with the Soviet leadership's determination not to relent, whatever the cost."

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

www.moreorless.net.au

Tom Clancy has a hero combat soldier exclaim his opinion about the thugs who ran the Soviet Union, the communists:



"Misha waved his hand, looking in annoyance at the way it shook. "I have never had much respect for the chekisti. When I was leading my men, they were there-behind us. They were very efficient at shooting prisoners-prisoners that real soldiers had taken. They were also rather good at murdering people who'd been forced to retreat. I even remember one case where a chekist lieutenant took command of a tank troop and led it into a fucking swamp. At least the Germans I killed were men, fighting men. I hated them, but I could respect them for the soldiers they were. Your kind, on the other hand… perhaps we simple soldiers never really understood who the enemy was. Sometimes I wonder who has killed more Russians, the Germans-or people like you?" “The Cardinal of the Kremlin,”p. 383







So those ‘great loses’ were not at the hands of the Germans, they were by their own leaders. Someone should have told Roosevelt.



Oh…wait….they did!



Love is blind.

You see the world in black and white.

I'm not a product of Your American school systems.

You should AT LEAST get out there and try communicate with Russian veterans.

But unfortunately too late,
arrogance will prevail.

That's why in spite bringing the USSR down,
the Soviet ideology won in America.

I have. I have been to several celebrations on Mamayev Kurgan. I have walked the grain silo in Stalingrad with the soldiers who fought there.

You?

Family, who captured Berlin,
field spy unit, from the age of 17 in war,
didn't hold anything but a pen and paper before.

Then returned to ruined home all skin and bones,
brought up his family in honor and even adopted orphans.

True heroes, true men,
with strong women behind them.

This thread is a disgrace!

Your fathers sacrifice aside, the reason why his home was a ruin was because his government didn't give a shit about him.

And, no. This thread is not a disgrace. Heroism is knowingly placing yourself in harm's way in the clear knowledge that you probably won't survive the experience, yet you do it anyway to save your friends, fellow soldiers, or family.

Merely surviving an incredibly unpleasant experience is a wonderful thing, but it ain't herouc.

They didn't just "survive unpleasant experience"
but moved on and defeated the reich.

They even defeated America, ideologically from within,
but You refused to look or listen when people told You decades ago.

"They even defeated America, ideologically from within, "


Are you claiming that they were Marxists, and you are proud of how this ideology has corrupted America?

Leninists, Marxists, Stalinists ...You name it.
Why do I have to be 'proud' about something for pointing out?

My constant contention throughout our exchange is that -

they all filled a void in American society,
and instead of minimal intellectual introspection,
all I get is a bunch of nervous infantile defensive reactions.

All suggesting denial is vast,
and problem is even worse.

IF they were a real threat, as you admit they were, attacking them, then and now, would be the healthy and smart response.

I don't know how You reach such 'complex' conclusions,
but in Israel we say "if granny had rollerblades..."

you're talking about how marxist from europe came here and defeated us by filling a vacuum of ideas.

then and now, honestly and harshly judging the idea and the people on their merits or lack there of, would have been then, and is now, a fine defense against that type of thing.

marxists, no matter how good of a job they might have done fighting nazis, are still bad guys and should be treated as such.


not glorified like rw wants to. not invited to immigrate there, or join our universities. or worse yet, governments.

Ideas are mobile enough to move without immigration.
Soviets subverted the American society.

When USSR fell,
it was already too late.

Russians know Americans well,
can't say the opposite.

Oh, you're wrong. The Republic hasn't fallen yet. The Soviet Union collapsed, but evil people do evil things. Evil people are being constantly bred.

You can't get rid of them, you can only control them for short periods at a time.

Hope I'm wrong.

We talk different things - You only see it when a country falls,
I'm talking about ideological subversion, when a critical generational mass reached.

That happened what, already 2 generations ago?
Folks keep drawing Russian caricatures...

Yes, the education system has been subverted. But the Republic can still be saved. I am betting that we do.

I wonder if you've found what I have: I was lucky enough to attend the best schools in the world, yet I found that my real education took place after college.

Once my education was directed by no one but myself, I could ask and find answers that university didn't.

 

[Decus]

The war propaganda in support of the Marxists has never abated, and has led America to a precipice. Now, the truth.


1.An interesting and significant month, August.

August 20–25, 1944
Allied troops reach Paris. On August 25, Free French forces, supported by Allied troops, enter the French capital. By September, the Allies reach the German border; by December, virtually all of France, most of Belgium, and part of the southern Netherlands are liberated. World War II: Timeline.

Did you see any mention of Soviet troops there?


2. Government school propaganda provides two beliefs about the Soviets in WWII.

a. That they deserve gratitude and honor for their valiant efforts and great loses in the war

b. U.S. war propaganda had painted pipesmoking "Uncle Joe Stalin" as a friendly fellow, and the liberal propaganda left people to thinking of Communist Party members as lovable idealists.

Really???

There is no honor or credit due to the Soviet Union because they lost 20 million in the war. The glorification of the role that the Soviets played in WWII is unfounded, and almost entirely due to the neo-Marxist influence in our society due to Democrats/Liberals/Progressives doing public relations for them, as they share the same values and aims.

First: most of the Soviet loses were their troops killed by Stalin’s own forces. One reason they lost 20 million, while we lost 415,000 was due to the value that America placed on human life, and the lack of same interest by Bolsheviks: they don’t care about human life, a characteristic absorbed and propounded by the current Democrat Party.



3. "Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"
Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin

And.....

World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans. Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.

And.....

"In 1945 Zhukov is reported to have said to US General Dwight D. Eisenhower, "If we come to a minefield, our infantry attacks exactly as it were not there." The shear weight of numbers eventually drove the Germans back, along with the Soviet leadership's determination not to relent, whatever the cost."

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

www.moreorless.net.au

Tom Clancy has a hero combat soldier exclaim his opinion about the thugs who ran the Soviet Union, the communists:

"Misha waved his hand, looking in annoyance at the way it shook. "I have never had much respect for the chekisti. When I was leading my men, they were there-behind us. They were very efficient at shooting prisoners-prisoners that real soldiers had taken. They were also rather good at murdering people who'd been forced to retreat. I even remember one case where a chekist lieutenant took command of a tank troop and led it into a fucking swamp. At least the Germans I killed were men, fighting men. I hated them, but I could respect them for the soldiers they were. Your kind, on the other hand… perhaps we simple soldiers never really understood who the enemy was. Sometimes I wonder who has killed more Russians, the Germans-or people like you?" “The Cardinal of the Kremlin,”p. 383



So those ‘great loses’ were not at the hands of the Germans, they were by their own leaders. Someone should have told Roosevelt.

Oh…wait….they did!

Love is blind.

Ha ha ha - you stupid twisted imbecile.

You just can't resist it can you? Taking the well documented historical record WWll and twisting,restructuring, airbrushing and wholly misrepresenting it. All because your extreme right wing views, fondness of the Nazi's and hatred of communism you feel compels you.

"1.An interesting and significant month, August."

Isn't it! You then outline the allied achievements in liberating North Western Europe even including the Free French, de Gaulle and a few officers who basically flew from London to Paris backed by the allies. Wow!

You obviously have absolutely no knowledge of Geography-

" Did you see any mention of Soviet troops there?"

Ha ha.......NO, Did you expect me to?

Perhaps it might be because the soviets were over 500 miles away having liberated - Crimea, Hungary, Belarus, Ukraine, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland single handedly, and were approaching Germany's eastern border.

The only possible way they could have been in France, Holland etc, is if they had already occupied Germany in which case the war would be over.

I am quite shocked by your ignorance!

Need to be somewhere now, but don't run away as I haven't even started your thrashing and have much to add.

How ignorant of you for saying this:

"Perhaps it might be because the soviets were over 500 miles away having liberated - Crimea, Hungary, Belarus, Ukraine, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland single handedly, and were approaching Germany's eastern border."

The Soviet Union was Russia and their conquered territories. So drop the term "soviets" and refer to them as what they are: Russians. The Russians conquered Crimea, Hungary, Belarus, Ukraine, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, and Poland and installed puppet governments. There was no voluntary union on the part of the conquered territories.

.

The Soviet Union was the Republics I mentioned bar Poland.

Your contradicting yourself!

"The Soviet Union was Russia and their conquered territories. So drop the term "soviets" and refer to them as what they are: Russians".

Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

Those Republics adopted the Red Flag hammer & sickle. Whether there was popular support at least initially I don't know. but that is beside the point. The Nazi's had invaded them and the point I made to 'political chic' who asked - "Why did the Soviets play no part in liberating France, Holland etc." (yes, -I can't believe she asked it either) was because they were busy liberating their former Soviet Republics from the Nazi's and were hundreds of miles away on the other side of Germany.

Hope this helps!

Let me make it simple for you - the Russians didn't liberate anyone.

.

 

[Indeependent]

...

There is no honor or credit due to the Soviet Union because they lost 20 million in the war. The glorification of the role that the Soviets played in WWII is unfounded, and almost entirely due to the neo-Marxist influence in our society due to Democrats/Liberals/Progressives doing public relations for them, as they share the same values and aims.

First: most of the Soviet loses were their troops killed by Stalin’s own forces. One reason they lost 20 million, while we lost 415,000 was due to the value that America placed on human life, and the lack of same interest by Bolsheviks: they don’t care about human life, a characteristic absorbed and propounded by the current Democrat Party.

...

well, this is completely true, and a major and even possibly the primary factor,

it is worth noting that having the war in your country, as opposed to on the other side of an ocean, is going to increase civilian deaths. (America is blessed)

a better, fairer, comparison might be, comparing soviet losses to french or polish losses.


on the other hand, it is also worth noting that the soviet union did start wwii as an ally of hitler and only switched sides when hitler betrayed them, not because the soviets had any problem with anything he was doing.

To see where the honor belongs you have to separate the party and the people.

See post #4. Take notes on it.

Doesn't effect my post at all. Don't the people of Russia/SU deserve credit for their bravery? Being Soviet citizens is a historical fact that can't be changed barring a "memory hole".

Many Russians had no choice.
Stalin sent them into battle without weapons and told them to take the rifles of German soldiers after they froze to death.
Stalin was a POS.

 

[PoliticalChic]

...

There is no honor or credit due to the Soviet Union because they lost 20 million in the war. The glorification of the role that the Soviets played in WWII is unfounded, and almost entirely due to the neo-Marxist influence in our society due to Democrats/Liberals/Progressives doing public relations for them, as they share the same values and aims.

First: most of the Soviet loses were their troops killed by Stalin’s own forces. One reason they lost 20 million, while we lost 415,000 was due to the value that America placed on human life, and the lack of same interest by Bolsheviks: they don’t care about human life, a characteristic absorbed and propounded by the current Democrat Party.

...

well, this is completely true, and a major and even possibly the primary factor,

it is worth noting that having the war in your country, as opposed to on the other side of an ocean, is going to increase civilian deaths. (America is blessed)

a better, fairer, comparison might be, comparing soviet losses to french or polish losses.


on the other hand, it is also worth noting that the soviet union did start wwii as an ally of hitler and only switched sides when hitler betrayed them, not because the soviets had any problem with anything he was doing.

To see where the honor belongs you have to separate the party and the people.

See post #4. Take notes on it.

Doesn't effect my post at all. Don't the people of Russia/SU deserve credit for their bravery? Being Soviet citizens is a historical fact that can't be changed barring a "memory hole".

Many Russians had no choice.
Stalin sent them into battle without weapons and told them to take the rifles of German soldiers after they froze to death.
Stalin was a POS.

This was earlier in the thread:

3. "Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"

Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin



And.....



World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans. Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.



And.....



"In 1945 Zhukov is reported to have said to US General Dwight D. Eisenhower, "If we come to a minefield, our infantry attacks exactly as it were not there." The shear weight of numbers eventually drove the Germans back, along with the Soviet leadership's determination not to relent, whatever the cost."

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

www.moreorless.net.au

Tom Clancy has a hero combat soldier exclaim his opinion about the thugs who ran the Soviet Union, the communists:



"Misha waved his hand, looking in annoyance at the way it shook. "I have never had much respect for the chekisti. When I was leading my men, they were there-behind us. They were very efficient at shooting prisoners-prisoners that real soldiers had taken. They were also rather good at murdering people who'd been forced to retreat. I even remember one case where a chekist lieutenant took command of a tank troop and led it into a fucking swamp. At least the Germans I killed were men, fighting men. I hated them, but I could respect them for the soldiers they were. Your kind, on the other hand… perhaps we simple soldiers never really understood who the enemy was. Sometimes I wonder who has killed more Russians, the Germans-or people like you?" “The Cardinal of the Kremlin,”p. 383







So those ‘great loses’ were not at the hands of the Germans, they were by their own leaders. Someone should have told Roosevelt.



Oh…wait….they did!



Love is blind.

 

[westwall]

the deal we got was a crap deal. fdr deserves no credit for it. he should never had run for that fourth term.

How was it a crap deal when FDR got Stalin to do most of the fighting and dying for four years?

We saved Western Europe with minimal casualties. The Soviets got Eastern Europe in return for tens of millions of casualties.

fdr had nothing to do with that. that was all hitler. he invaded stalinist russia and forced them to fight.

until that, stalin was happy to have peace and trade and hugs with nazi germany.


yes, we saved western europe with minimal casualties. and set up the next big conflict as we did it.


short term thinking.

FDR was fine with Hitler taking other countries. He never met a dictator he didn't like.

Munich Agreement, (September 30, 1938), settlement reached by Germany, Great Britain, France, and Italy that permitted German annexation of the Sudetenland in western Czechoslovakia. After his success in absorbing Austria into Germany proper in March 1938, Adolf Hitler looked covetously at Czechoslovakia, Munich Agreement | Definition, Summary, & Significance







At the Munich conference where Europe sold out Czechoslovakia, even though France had a treaty to go to war to preserve Czechoslovakia…..Chamberlain was about to appease Hitler….and FDR sent this message to Chamberlain:



MUNICH MESSAGE FROM U.S. BARED; Roosevelt Sent Encouraging 'Good Man' to Chamberlain Day Before Conference

MUNICH MESSAGE FROM U.S. BARED; Roosevelt Sent Encouraging 'Good Man' to Chamberlain Day Before Conference (Published 1955)

Documents on US foreign relations in '38, pub by State Dept, include P Gilbert rept on Anschluss, noting strong Austrian support for move

mobile.nytimes.com

"Munich." The lesson of appeasement—that giving in to aggression just invites more aggression—has calcified into dogma. Neville Chamberlain's name has become code for a weak-kneed, caviling politician, just as Winston Churchill has become the beau ideal of indomitable leadership.

When Chamberlain first announced, after returning from signing his deal with Hitler at Munich in 1938, that "peace is at hand," FDR sent Chamberlain a telegram: "Good man," it said. "I am not a bit upset over the final result," FDR wrote the U.S. ambassador to Italy. When Hitler began to chew up the rest of Europe in 1939, FDR temporized and maneuvered to build political support for intervention among his decidedly isolationist countrymen. Indeed, the United States did not declare war on Germany until Germany declared war on the United States in December 1941, four days after Pearl Harbor." Presidents and the Mythology of Munich

The war propaganda in support of the Marxists has never abated, and has led America to a precipice. Now, the truth.


1.An interesting and significant month, August.

August 20–25, 1944
Allied troops reach Paris. On August 25, Free French forces, supported by Allied troops, enter the French capital. By September, the Allies reach the German border; by December, virtually all of France, most of Belgium, and part of the southern Netherlands are liberated. World War II: Timeline.

Did you see any mention of Soviet troops there?


2. Government school propaganda provides two beliefs about the Soviets in WWII.

a. That they deserve gratitude and honor for their valiant efforts and great loses in the war

b. U.S. war propaganda had painted pipesmoking "Uncle Joe Stalin" as a friendly fellow, and the liberal propaganda left people to thinking of Communist Party members as lovable idealists.

Really???

There is no honor or credit due to the Soviet Union because they lost 20 million in the war. The glorification of the role that the Soviets played in WWII is unfounded, and almost entirely due to the neo-Marxist influence in our society due to Democrats/Liberals/Progressives doing public relations for them, as they share the same values and aims.

First: most of the Soviet loses were their troops killed by Stalin’s own forces. One reason they lost 20 million, while we lost 415,000 was due to the value that America placed on human life, and the lack of same interest by Bolsheviks: they don’t care about human life, a characteristic absorbed and propounded by the current Democrat Party.



3. "Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"
Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin

And.....

World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans. Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.

And.....

"In 1945 Zhukov is reported to have said to US General Dwight D. Eisenhower, "If we come to a minefield, our infantry attacks exactly as it were not there." The shear weight of numbers eventually drove the Germans back, along with the Soviet leadership's determination not to relent, whatever the cost."

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

www.moreorless.net.au

Tom Clancy has a hero combat soldier exclaim his opinion about the thugs who ran the Soviet Union, the communists:

"Misha waved his hand, looking in annoyance at the way it shook. "I have never had much respect for the chekisti. When I was leading my men, they were there-behind us. They were very efficient at shooting prisoners-prisoners that real soldiers had taken. They were also rather good at murdering people who'd been forced to retreat. I even remember one case where a chekist lieutenant took command of a tank troop and led it into a fucking swamp. At least the Germans I killed were men, fighting men. I hated them, but I could respect them for the soldiers they were. Your kind, on the other hand… perhaps we simple soldiers never really understood who the enemy was. Sometimes I wonder who has killed more Russians, the Germans-or people like you?" “The Cardinal of the Kremlin,”p. 383



So those ‘great loses’ were not at the hands of the Germans, they were by their own leaders. Someone should have told Roosevelt.

Oh…wait….they did!

Love is blind.

Most of what You write is well researched and I like reading it,
but this is just a bunch disgraceful rubbish.

Yes the Russians were shooting their own not to retreat,
but the Russians, common Soviet folk fought HEROICALLY!

It's beyond disrespectful to present the cause of their death like that,
no better than the vulgar leftist one-sided propaganda.

The Soviets would round up a village, march them at gunpoint to a battlefield, and make them run at german machinegun nests to run them out of bullets.

Brave? No, not really. They were going to be shot either way. They just hoped the death by the Germans would be quicker.

Were there Soviet soldiers who were brave? Absolutely. But to declare that everyone was brave is a lie. A lie based on propaganda.

So you go to the other pathetic extreme to excuse this kind of disrespect...
This is just rubbish for the arrogant who have no memory of war on their soil.

They fought BRAVELY AS A NATION, no need to split hairs, have some basic man's honor.

Where does this need to overcompensate so extremely come from?

2. Government school propaganda provides two beliefs about the Soviets in WWII.



a. That they deserve gratitude and honor for their valiant efforts and great loses in the war



b. U.S. war propaganda had painted pipesmoking "Uncle Joe Stalin" as a friendly fellow, and the liberal propaganda left people to thinking of Communist Party members as lovable idealists.



Really???



There is no honor or credit due to the Soviet Union because they lost 20 million in the war. The glorification of the role that the Soviets played in WWII is unfounded, and almost entirely due to the neo-Marxist influence in our society due to Democrats/Liberals/Progressives doing public relations for them, as they share the same values and aims.



First: most of the Soviet loses were their troops killed by Stalin’s own forces. One reason they lost 20 million, while we lost 415,000 was due to the value that America placed on human life, and the lack of same interest by Bolsheviks: they don’t care about human life, a characteristic absorbed and propounded by the current Democrat Party.







3. "Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"

Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin



And.....



World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans. Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.



And.....



"In 1945 Zhukov is reported to have said to US General Dwight D. Eisenhower, "If we come to a minefield, our infantry attacks exactly as it were not there." The shear weight of numbers eventually drove the Germans back, along with the Soviet leadership's determination not to relent, whatever the cost."

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

www.moreorless.net.au

Tom Clancy has a hero combat soldier exclaim his opinion about the thugs who ran the Soviet Union, the communists:



"Misha waved his hand, looking in annoyance at the way it shook. "I have never had much respect for the chekisti. When I was leading my men, they were there-behind us. They were very efficient at shooting prisoners-prisoners that real soldiers had taken. They were also rather good at murdering people who'd been forced to retreat. I even remember one case where a chekist lieutenant took command of a tank troop and led it into a fucking swamp. At least the Germans I killed were men, fighting men. I hated them, but I could respect them for the soldiers they were. Your kind, on the other hand… perhaps we simple soldiers never really understood who the enemy was. Sometimes I wonder who has killed more Russians, the Germans-or people like you?" “The Cardinal of the Kremlin,”p. 383







So those ‘great loses’ were not at the hands of the Germans, they were by their own leaders. Someone should have told Roosevelt.



Oh…wait….they did!



Love is blind.

You see the world in black and white.

I'm not a product of Your American school systems.

You should AT LEAST get out there and try communicate with Russian veterans.

But unfortunately too late,
arrogance will prevail.

That's why in spite bringing the USSR down,
the Soviet ideology won in America.

I have. I have been to several celebrations on Mamayev Kurgan. I have walked the grain silo in Stalingrad with the soldiers who fought there.

You?

Family, who captured Berlin,
field spy unit, from the age of 17 in war,
didn't hold anything but a pen and paper before.

Then returned to ruined home all skin and bones,
brought up his family in honor and even adopted orphans.

True heroes, true men,
with strong women behind them.

This thread is a disgrace!

Your fathers sacrifice aside, the reason why his home was a ruin was because his government didn't give a shit about him.

And, no. This thread is not a disgrace. Heroism is knowingly placing yourself in harm's way in the clear knowledge that you probably won't survive the experience, yet you do it anyway to save your friends, fellow soldiers, or family.

Merely surviving an incredibly unpleasant experience is a wonderful thing, but it ain't herouc.

They didn't just "survive unpleasant experience"
but moved on and defeated the reich.

They even defeated America, ideologically from within,
but You refused to look or listen when people told You decades ago.

"They even defeated America, ideologically from within, "


Are you claiming that they were Marxists, and you are proud of how this ideology has corrupted America?

Leninists, Marxists, Stalinists ...You name it.
Why do I have to be 'proud' about something for pointing out?

My constant contention throughout our exchange is that -

they all filled a void in American society,
and instead of minimal intellectual introspection,
all I get is a bunch of nervous infantile defensive reactions.

All suggesting denial is vast,
and problem is even worse.

IF they were a real threat, as you admit they were, attacking them, then and now, would be the healthy and smart response.

I don't know how You reach such 'complex' conclusions,
but in Israel we say "if granny had rollerblades..."

you're talking about how marxist from europe came here and defeated us by filling a vacuum of ideas.

then and now, honestly and harshly judging the idea and the people on their merits or lack there of, would have been then, and is now, a fine defense against that type of thing.

marxists, no matter how good of a job they might have done fighting nazis, are still bad guys and should be treated as such.


not glorified like rw wants to. not invited to immigrate there, or join our universities. or worse yet, governments.

Ideas are mobile enough to move without immigration.
Soviets subverted the American society.

When USSR fell,
it was already too late.

Russians know Americans well,
can't say the opposite.

Oh, you're wrong. The Republic hasn't fallen yet. The Soviet Union collapsed, but evil people do evil things. Evil people are being constantly bred.

You can't get rid of them, you can only control them for short periods at a time.

Hope I'm wrong.

We talk different things - You only see it when a country falls,
I'm talking about ideological subversion, when a critical generational mass reached.

That happened what, already 2 generations ago?
Folks keep drawing Russian caricatures...

Yes, the education system has been subverted. But the Republic can still be saved. I am betting that we do.

There is no doubt the Soviet Union failed.
I think though even you republicans now accept Marxism is a superior ideology and the search for a new form of Marxism is on and it could possibly/probably break through in the US.

Were all hoping!

Marxism is superior in making dead people. That is the only thing it is better at.

 

[Correll]

the deal we got was a crap deal. fdr deserves no credit for it. he should never had run for that fourth term.

How was it a crap deal when FDR got Stalin to do most of the fighting and dying for four years?

We saved Western Europe with minimal casualties. The Soviets got Eastern Europe in return for tens of millions of casualties.

fdr had nothing to do with that. that was all hitler. he invaded stalinist russia and forced them to fight.

until that, stalin was happy to have peace and trade and hugs with nazi germany.


yes, we saved western europe with minimal casualties. and set up the next big conflict as we did it.


short term thinking.

FDR was fine with Hitler taking other countries. He never met a dictator he didn't like.

Munich Agreement, (September 30, 1938), settlement reached by Germany, Great Britain, France, and Italy that permitted German annexation of the Sudetenland in western Czechoslovakia. After his success in absorbing Austria into Germany proper in March 1938, Adolf Hitler looked covetously at Czechoslovakia, Munich Agreement | Definition, Summary, & Significance







At the Munich conference where Europe sold out Czechoslovakia, even though France had a treaty to go to war to preserve Czechoslovakia…..Chamberlain was about to appease Hitler….and FDR sent this message to Chamberlain:



MUNICH MESSAGE FROM U.S. BARED; Roosevelt Sent Encouraging 'Good Man' to Chamberlain Day Before Conference

MUNICH MESSAGE FROM U.S. BARED; Roosevelt Sent Encouraging 'Good Man' to Chamberlain Day Before Conference (Published 1955)

Documents on US foreign relations in '38, pub by State Dept, include P Gilbert rept on Anschluss, noting strong Austrian support for move

mobile.nytimes.com

"Munich." The lesson of appeasement—that giving in to aggression just invites more aggression—has calcified into dogma. Neville Chamberlain's name has become code for a weak-kneed, caviling politician, just as Winston Churchill has become the beau ideal of indomitable leadership.

When Chamberlain first announced, after returning from signing his deal with Hitler at Munich in 1938, that "peace is at hand," FDR sent Chamberlain a telegram: "Good man," it said. "I am not a bit upset over the final result," FDR wrote the U.S. ambassador to Italy. When Hitler began to chew up the rest of Europe in 1939, FDR temporized and maneuvered to build political support for intervention among his decidedly isolationist countrymen. Indeed, the United States did not declare war on Germany until Germany declared war on the United States in December 1941, four days after Pearl Harbor." Presidents and the Mythology of Munich

The war propaganda in support of the Marxists has never abated, and has led America to a precipice. Now, the truth.


1.An interesting and significant month, August.

August 20–25, 1944
Allied troops reach Paris. On August 25, Free French forces, supported by Allied troops, enter the French capital. By September, the Allies reach the German border; by December, virtually all of France, most of Belgium, and part of the southern Netherlands are liberated. World War II: Timeline.

Did you see any mention of Soviet troops there?


2. Government school propaganda provides two beliefs about the Soviets in WWII.

a. That they deserve gratitude and honor for their valiant efforts and great loses in the war

b. U.S. war propaganda had painted pipesmoking "Uncle Joe Stalin" as a friendly fellow, and the liberal propaganda left people to thinking of Communist Party members as lovable idealists.

Really???

There is no honor or credit due to the Soviet Union because they lost 20 million in the war. The glorification of the role that the Soviets played in WWII is unfounded, and almost entirely due to the neo-Marxist influence in our society due to Democrats/Liberals/Progressives doing public relations for them, as they share the same values and aims.

First: most of the Soviet loses were their troops killed by Stalin’s own forces. One reason they lost 20 million, while we lost 415,000 was due to the value that America placed on human life, and the lack of same interest by Bolsheviks: they don’t care about human life, a characteristic absorbed and propounded by the current Democrat Party.



3. "Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"
Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin

And.....

World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans. Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.

And.....

"In 1945 Zhukov is reported to have said to US General Dwight D. Eisenhower, "If we come to a minefield, our infantry attacks exactly as it were not there." The shear weight of numbers eventually drove the Germans back, along with the Soviet leadership's determination not to relent, whatever the cost."

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

www.moreorless.net.au

Tom Clancy has a hero combat soldier exclaim his opinion about the thugs who ran the Soviet Union, the communists:

"Misha waved his hand, looking in annoyance at the way it shook. "I have never had much respect for the chekisti. When I was leading my men, they were there-behind us. They were very efficient at shooting prisoners-prisoners that real soldiers had taken. They were also rather good at murdering people who'd been forced to retreat. I even remember one case where a chekist lieutenant took command of a tank troop and led it into a fucking swamp. At least the Germans I killed were men, fighting men. I hated them, but I could respect them for the soldiers they were. Your kind, on the other hand… perhaps we simple soldiers never really understood who the enemy was. Sometimes I wonder who has killed more Russians, the Germans-or people like you?" “The Cardinal of the Kremlin,”p. 383



So those ‘great loses’ were not at the hands of the Germans, they were by their own leaders. Someone should have told Roosevelt.

Oh…wait….they did!

Love is blind.

Most of what You write is well researched and I like reading it,
but this is just a bunch disgraceful rubbish.

Yes the Russians were shooting their own not to retreat,
but the Russians, common Soviet folk fought HEROICALLY!

It's beyond disrespectful to present the cause of their death like that,
no better than the vulgar leftist one-sided propaganda.

The Soviets would round up a village, march them at gunpoint to a battlefield, and make them run at german machinegun nests to run them out of bullets.

Brave? No, not really. They were going to be shot either way. They just hoped the death by the Germans would be quicker.

Were there Soviet soldiers who were brave? Absolutely. But to declare that everyone was brave is a lie. A lie based on propaganda.

So you go to the other pathetic extreme to excuse this kind of disrespect...
This is just rubbish for the arrogant who have no memory of war on their soil.

They fought BRAVELY AS A NATION, no need to split hairs, have some basic man's honor.

Where does this need to overcompensate so extremely come from?

2. Government school propaganda provides two beliefs about the Soviets in WWII.



a. That they deserve gratitude and honor for their valiant efforts and great loses in the war



b. U.S. war propaganda had painted pipesmoking "Uncle Joe Stalin" as a friendly fellow, and the liberal propaganda left people to thinking of Communist Party members as lovable idealists.



Really???



There is no honor or credit due to the Soviet Union because they lost 20 million in the war. The glorification of the role that the Soviets played in WWII is unfounded, and almost entirely due to the neo-Marxist influence in our society due to Democrats/Liberals/Progressives doing public relations for them, as they share the same values and aims.



First: most of the Soviet loses were their troops killed by Stalin’s own forces. One reason they lost 20 million, while we lost 415,000 was due to the value that America placed on human life, and the lack of same interest by Bolsheviks: they don’t care about human life, a characteristic absorbed and propounded by the current Democrat Party.







3. "Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"

Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin



And.....



World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans. Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.



And.....



"In 1945 Zhukov is reported to have said to US General Dwight D. Eisenhower, "If we come to a minefield, our infantry attacks exactly as it were not there." The shear weight of numbers eventually drove the Germans back, along with the Soviet leadership's determination not to relent, whatever the cost."

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

www.moreorless.net.au

Tom Clancy has a hero combat soldier exclaim his opinion about the thugs who ran the Soviet Union, the communists:



"Misha waved his hand, looking in annoyance at the way it shook. "I have never had much respect for the chekisti. When I was leading my men, they were there-behind us. They were very efficient at shooting prisoners-prisoners that real soldiers had taken. They were also rather good at murdering people who'd been forced to retreat. I even remember one case where a chekist lieutenant took command of a tank troop and led it into a fucking swamp. At least the Germans I killed were men, fighting men. I hated them, but I could respect them for the soldiers they were. Your kind, on the other hand… perhaps we simple soldiers never really understood who the enemy was. Sometimes I wonder who has killed more Russians, the Germans-or people like you?" “The Cardinal of the Kremlin,”p. 383







So those ‘great loses’ were not at the hands of the Germans, they were by their own leaders. Someone should have told Roosevelt.



Oh…wait….they did!



Love is blind.

You see the world in black and white.

I'm not a product of Your American school systems.

You should AT LEAST get out there and try communicate with Russian veterans.

But unfortunately too late,
arrogance will prevail.

That's why in spite bringing the USSR down,
the Soviet ideology won in America.

I have. I have been to several celebrations on Mamayev Kurgan. I have walked the grain silo in Stalingrad with the soldiers who fought there.

You?

Family, who captured Berlin,
field spy unit, from the age of 17 in war,
didn't hold anything but a pen and paper before.

Then returned to ruined home all skin and bones,
brought up his family in honor and even adopted orphans.

True heroes, true men,
with strong women behind them.

This thread is a disgrace!

Your fathers sacrifice aside, the reason why his home was a ruin was because his government didn't give a shit about him.

And, no. This thread is not a disgrace. Heroism is knowingly placing yourself in harm's way in the clear knowledge that you probably won't survive the experience, yet you do it anyway to save your friends, fellow soldiers, or family.

Merely surviving an incredibly unpleasant experience is a wonderful thing, but it ain't herouc.

They didn't just "survive unpleasant experience"
but moved on and defeated the reich.

They even defeated America, ideologically from within,
but You refused to look or listen when people told You decades ago.

"They even defeated America, ideologically from within, "


Are you claiming that they were Marxists, and you are proud of how this ideology has corrupted America?

Leninists, Marxists, Stalinists ...You name it.
Why do I have to be 'proud' about something for pointing out?

My constant contention throughout our exchange is that -

they all filled a void in American society,
and instead of minimal intellectual introspection,
all I get is a bunch of nervous infantile defensive reactions.

All suggesting denial is vast,
and problem is even worse.

IF they were a real threat, as you admit they were, attacking them, then and now, would be the healthy and smart response.

I don't know how You reach such 'complex' conclusions,
but in Israel we say "if granny had rollerblades..."

you're talking about how marxist from europe came here and defeated us by filling a vacuum of ideas.

then and now, honestly and harshly judging the idea and the people on their merits or lack there of, would have been then, and is now, a fine defense against that type of thing.

marxists, no matter how good of a job they might have done fighting nazis, are still bad guys and should be treated as such.


not glorified like rw wants to. not invited to immigrate there, or join our universities. or worse yet, governments.

Ideas are mobile enough to move without immigration.
Soviets subverted the American society.

When USSR fell,
it was already too late.

Russians know Americans well,
can't say the opposite.

and if we were not smart enough to be defensive and harsh to them then, time to start now.


you state that we were attacked and defeated by these people/ideas at the same time you are calling us out for being defensive.


one of us is not making much sense.

 

[Correll]

the deal we got was a crap deal. fdr deserves no credit for it. he should never had run for that fourth term.

How was it a crap deal when FDR got Stalin to do most of the fighting and dying for four years?

We saved Western Europe with minimal casualties. The Soviets got Eastern Europe in return for tens of millions of casualties.

fdr had nothing to do with that. that was all hitler. he invaded stalinist russia and forced them to fight.

until that, stalin was happy to have peace and trade and hugs with nazi germany.


yes, we saved western europe with minimal casualties. and set up the next big conflict as we did it.


short term thinking.

FDR was fine with Hitler taking other countries. He never met a dictator he didn't like.

Munich Agreement, (September 30, 1938), settlement reached by Germany, Great Britain, France, and Italy that permitted German annexation of the Sudetenland in western Czechoslovakia. After his success in absorbing Austria into Germany proper in March 1938, Adolf Hitler looked covetously at Czechoslovakia, Munich Agreement | Definition, Summary, & Significance







At the Munich conference where Europe sold out Czechoslovakia, even though France had a treaty to go to war to preserve Czechoslovakia…..Chamberlain was about to appease Hitler….and FDR sent this message to Chamberlain:



MUNICH MESSAGE FROM U.S. BARED; Roosevelt Sent Encouraging 'Good Man' to Chamberlain Day Before Conference

MUNICH MESSAGE FROM U.S. BARED; Roosevelt Sent Encouraging 'Good Man' to Chamberlain Day Before Conference (Published 1955)

Documents on US foreign relations in '38, pub by State Dept, include P Gilbert rept on Anschluss, noting strong Austrian support for move

mobile.nytimes.com

"Munich." The lesson of appeasement—that giving in to aggression just invites more aggression—has calcified into dogma. Neville Chamberlain's name has become code for a weak-kneed, caviling politician, just as Winston Churchill has become the beau ideal of indomitable leadership.

When Chamberlain first announced, after returning from signing his deal with Hitler at Munich in 1938, that "peace is at hand," FDR sent Chamberlain a telegram: "Good man," it said. "I am not a bit upset over the final result," FDR wrote the U.S. ambassador to Italy. When Hitler began to chew up the rest of Europe in 1939, FDR temporized and maneuvered to build political support for intervention among his decidedly isolationist countrymen. Indeed, the United States did not declare war on Germany until Germany declared war on the United States in December 1941, four days after Pearl Harbor." Presidents and the Mythology of Munich

The war propaganda in support of the Marxists has never abated, and has led America to a precipice. Now, the truth.


1.An interesting and significant month, August.

August 20–25, 1944
Allied troops reach Paris. On August 25, Free French forces, supported by Allied troops, enter the French capital. By September, the Allies reach the German border; by December, virtually all of France, most of Belgium, and part of the southern Netherlands are liberated. World War II: Timeline.

Did you see any mention of Soviet troops there?


2. Government school propaganda provides two beliefs about the Soviets in WWII.

a. That they deserve gratitude and honor for their valiant efforts and great loses in the war

b. U.S. war propaganda had painted pipesmoking "Uncle Joe Stalin" as a friendly fellow, and the liberal propaganda left people to thinking of Communist Party members as lovable idealists.

Really???

There is no honor or credit due to the Soviet Union because they lost 20 million in the war. The glorification of the role that the Soviets played in WWII is unfounded, and almost entirely due to the neo-Marxist influence in our society due to Democrats/Liberals/Progressives doing public relations for them, as they share the same values and aims.

First: most of the Soviet loses were their troops killed by Stalin’s own forces. One reason they lost 20 million, while we lost 415,000 was due to the value that America placed on human life, and the lack of same interest by Bolsheviks: they don’t care about human life, a characteristic absorbed and propounded by the current Democrat Party.



3. "Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"
Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin

And.....

World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans. Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.

And.....

"In 1945 Zhukov is reported to have said to US General Dwight D. Eisenhower, "If we come to a minefield, our infantry attacks exactly as it were not there." The shear weight of numbers eventually drove the Germans back, along with the Soviet leadership's determination not to relent, whatever the cost."

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

www.moreorless.net.au

Tom Clancy has a hero combat soldier exclaim his opinion about the thugs who ran the Soviet Union, the communists:

"Misha waved his hand, looking in annoyance at the way it shook. "I have never had much respect for the chekisti. When I was leading my men, they were there-behind us. They were very efficient at shooting prisoners-prisoners that real soldiers had taken. They were also rather good at murdering people who'd been forced to retreat. I even remember one case where a chekist lieutenant took command of a tank troop and led it into a fucking swamp. At least the Germans I killed were men, fighting men. I hated them, but I could respect them for the soldiers they were. Your kind, on the other hand… perhaps we simple soldiers never really understood who the enemy was. Sometimes I wonder who has killed more Russians, the Germans-or people like you?" “The Cardinal of the Kremlin,”p. 383



So those ‘great loses’ were not at the hands of the Germans, they were by their own leaders. Someone should have told Roosevelt.

Oh…wait….they did!

Love is blind.

Most of what You write is well researched and I like reading it,
but this is just a bunch disgraceful rubbish.

Yes the Russians were shooting their own not to retreat,
but the Russians, common Soviet folk fought HEROICALLY!

It's beyond disrespectful to present the cause of their death like that,
no better than the vulgar leftist one-sided propaganda.

The Soviets would round up a village, march them at gunpoint to a battlefield, and make them run at german machinegun nests to run them out of bullets.

Brave? No, not really. They were going to be shot either way. They just hoped the death by the Germans would be quicker.

Were there Soviet soldiers who were brave? Absolutely. But to declare that everyone was brave is a lie. A lie based on propaganda.

So you go to the other pathetic extreme to excuse this kind of disrespect...
This is just rubbish for the arrogant who have no memory of war on their soil.

They fought BRAVELY AS A NATION, no need to split hairs, have some basic man's honor.

Where does this need to overcompensate so extremely come from?

2. Government school propaganda provides two beliefs about the Soviets in WWII.



a. That they deserve gratitude and honor for their valiant efforts and great loses in the war



b. U.S. war propaganda had painted pipesmoking "Uncle Joe Stalin" as a friendly fellow, and the liberal propaganda left people to thinking of Communist Party members as lovable idealists.



Really???



There is no honor or credit due to the Soviet Union because they lost 20 million in the war. The glorification of the role that the Soviets played in WWII is unfounded, and almost entirely due to the neo-Marxist influence in our society due to Democrats/Liberals/Progressives doing public relations for them, as they share the same values and aims.



First: most of the Soviet loses were their troops killed by Stalin’s own forces. One reason they lost 20 million, while we lost 415,000 was due to the value that America placed on human life, and the lack of same interest by Bolsheviks: they don’t care about human life, a characteristic absorbed and propounded by the current Democrat Party.







3. "Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"

Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin



And.....



World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans. Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.



And.....



"In 1945 Zhukov is reported to have said to US General Dwight D. Eisenhower, "If we come to a minefield, our infantry attacks exactly as it were not there." The shear weight of numbers eventually drove the Germans back, along with the Soviet leadership's determination not to relent, whatever the cost."

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

www.moreorless.net.au

Tom Clancy has a hero combat soldier exclaim his opinion about the thugs who ran the Soviet Union, the communists:



"Misha waved his hand, looking in annoyance at the way it shook. "I have never had much respect for the chekisti. When I was leading my men, they were there-behind us. They were very efficient at shooting prisoners-prisoners that real soldiers had taken. They were also rather good at murdering people who'd been forced to retreat. I even remember one case where a chekist lieutenant took command of a tank troop and led it into a fucking swamp. At least the Germans I killed were men, fighting men. I hated them, but I could respect them for the soldiers they were. Your kind, on the other hand… perhaps we simple soldiers never really understood who the enemy was. Sometimes I wonder who has killed more Russians, the Germans-or people like you?" “The Cardinal of the Kremlin,”p. 383







So those ‘great loses’ were not at the hands of the Germans, they were by their own leaders. Someone should have told Roosevelt.



Oh…wait….they did!



Love is blind.

You see the world in black and white.

I'm not a product of Your American school systems.

You should AT LEAST get out there and try communicate with Russian veterans.

But unfortunately too late,
arrogance will prevail.

That's why in spite bringing the USSR down,
the Soviet ideology won in America.

I have. I have been to several celebrations on Mamayev Kurgan. I have walked the grain silo in Stalingrad with the soldiers who fought there.

You?

Family, who captured Berlin,
field spy unit, from the age of 17 in war,
didn't hold anything but a pen and paper before.

Then returned to ruined home all skin and bones,
brought up his family in honor and even adopted orphans.

True heroes, true men,
with strong women behind them.

This thread is a disgrace!

Your fathers sacrifice aside, the reason why his home was a ruin was because his government didn't give a shit about him.

And, no. This thread is not a disgrace. Heroism is knowingly placing yourself in harm's way in the clear knowledge that you probably won't survive the experience, yet you do it anyway to save your friends, fellow soldiers, or family.

Merely surviving an incredibly unpleasant experience is a wonderful thing, but it ain't herouc.

They didn't just "survive unpleasant experience"
but moved on and defeated the reich.

They even defeated America, ideologically from within,
but You refused to look or listen when people told You decades ago.

"They even defeated America, ideologically from within, "


Are you claiming that they were Marxists, and you are proud of how this ideology has corrupted America?

Leninists, Marxists, Stalinists ...You name it.
Why do I have to be 'proud' about something for pointing out?

My constant contention throughout our exchange is that -

they all filled a void in American society,
and instead of minimal intellectual introspection,
all I get is a bunch of nervous infantile defensive reactions.

All suggesting denial is vast,
and problem is even worse.

IF they were a real threat, as you admit they were, attacking them, then and now, would be the healthy and smart response.

I don't know how You reach such 'complex' conclusions,
but in Israel we say "if granny had rollerblades..."

you're talking about how marxist from europe came here and defeated us by filling a vacuum of ideas.

then and now, honestly and harshly judging the idea and the people on their merits or lack there of, would have been then, and is now, a fine defense against that type of thing.

marxists, no matter how good of a job they might have done fighting nazis, are still bad guys and should be treated as such.


not glorified like rw wants to. not invited to immigrate there, or join our universities. or worse yet, governments.

Ideas are mobile enough to move without immigration.
Soviets subverted the American society.

When USSR fell,
it was already too late.

Russians know Americans well,
can't say the opposite.

Oh, you're wrong. The Republic hasn't fallen yet. The Soviet Union collapsed, but evil people do evil things. Evil people are being constantly bred.

You can't get rid of them, you can only control them for short periods at a time.

Hope I'm wrong.

We talk different things - You only see it when a country falls,
I'm talking about ideological subversion, when a critical generational mass reached.

That happened what, already 2 generations ago?
Folks keep drawing Russian caricatures...

Yes, the education system has been subverted. But the Republic can still be saved. I am betting that we do.

There is no doubt the Soviet Union failed.
I think though even you republicans now accept Marxism is a superior ideology and the search for a new form of Marxism is on and it could possibly/probably break through in the US.

Were all hoping!

we realize no such thing. we reject you and your works.

 

[PoliticalChic]

the deal we got was a crap deal. fdr deserves no credit for it. he should never had run for that fourth term.

How was it a crap deal when FDR got Stalin to do most of the fighting and dying for four years?

We saved Western Europe with minimal casualties. The Soviets got Eastern Europe in return for tens of millions of casualties.

fdr had nothing to do with that. that was all hitler. he invaded stalinist russia and forced them to fight.

until that, stalin was happy to have peace and trade and hugs with nazi germany.


yes, we saved western europe with minimal casualties. and set up the next big conflict as we did it.


short term thinking.

FDR was fine with Hitler taking other countries. He never met a dictator he didn't like.

Munich Agreement, (September 30, 1938), settlement reached by Germany, Great Britain, France, and Italy that permitted German annexation of the Sudetenland in western Czechoslovakia. After his success in absorbing Austria into Germany proper in March 1938, Adolf Hitler looked covetously at Czechoslovakia, Munich Agreement | Definition, Summary, & Significance







At the Munich conference where Europe sold out Czechoslovakia, even though France had a treaty to go to war to preserve Czechoslovakia…..Chamberlain was about to appease Hitler….and FDR sent this message to Chamberlain:



MUNICH MESSAGE FROM U.S. BARED; Roosevelt Sent Encouraging 'Good Man' to Chamberlain Day Before Conference

MUNICH MESSAGE FROM U.S. BARED; Roosevelt Sent Encouraging 'Good Man' to Chamberlain Day Before Conference (Published 1955)

Documents on US foreign relations in '38, pub by State Dept, include P Gilbert rept on Anschluss, noting strong Austrian support for move

mobile.nytimes.com

"Munich." The lesson of appeasement—that giving in to aggression just invites more aggression—has calcified into dogma. Neville Chamberlain's name has become code for a weak-kneed, caviling politician, just as Winston Churchill has become the beau ideal of indomitable leadership.

When Chamberlain first announced, after returning from signing his deal with Hitler at Munich in 1938, that "peace is at hand," FDR sent Chamberlain a telegram: "Good man," it said. "I am not a bit upset over the final result," FDR wrote the U.S. ambassador to Italy. When Hitler began to chew up the rest of Europe in 1939, FDR temporized and maneuvered to build political support for intervention among his decidedly isolationist countrymen. Indeed, the United States did not declare war on Germany until Germany declared war on the United States in December 1941, four days after Pearl Harbor." Presidents and the Mythology of Munich

The war propaganda in support of the Marxists has never abated, and has led America to a precipice. Now, the truth.


1.An interesting and significant month, August.

August 20–25, 1944
Allied troops reach Paris. On August 25, Free French forces, supported by Allied troops, enter the French capital. By September, the Allies reach the German border; by December, virtually all of France, most of Belgium, and part of the southern Netherlands are liberated. World War II: Timeline.

Did you see any mention of Soviet troops there?


2. Government school propaganda provides two beliefs about the Soviets in WWII.

a. That they deserve gratitude and honor for their valiant efforts and great loses in the war

b. U.S. war propaganda had painted pipesmoking "Uncle Joe Stalin" as a friendly fellow, and the liberal propaganda left people to thinking of Communist Party members as lovable idealists.

Really???

There is no honor or credit due to the Soviet Union because they lost 20 million in the war. The glorification of the role that the Soviets played in WWII is unfounded, and almost entirely due to the neo-Marxist influence in our society due to Democrats/Liberals/Progressives doing public relations for them, as they share the same values and aims.

First: most of the Soviet loses were their troops killed by Stalin’s own forces. One reason they lost 20 million, while we lost 415,000 was due to the value that America placed on human life, and the lack of same interest by Bolsheviks: they don’t care about human life, a characteristic absorbed and propounded by the current Democrat Party.



3. "Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"
Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin

And.....

World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans. Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.

And.....

"In 1945 Zhukov is reported to have said to US General Dwight D. Eisenhower, "If we come to a minefield, our infantry attacks exactly as it were not there." The shear weight of numbers eventually drove the Germans back, along with the Soviet leadership's determination not to relent, whatever the cost."

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

www.moreorless.net.au

Tom Clancy has a hero combat soldier exclaim his opinion about the thugs who ran the Soviet Union, the communists:

"Misha waved his hand, looking in annoyance at the way it shook. "I have never had much respect for the chekisti. When I was leading my men, they were there-behind us. They were very efficient at shooting prisoners-prisoners that real soldiers had taken. They were also rather good at murdering people who'd been forced to retreat. I even remember one case where a chekist lieutenant took command of a tank troop and led it into a fucking swamp. At least the Germans I killed were men, fighting men. I hated them, but I could respect them for the soldiers they were. Your kind, on the other hand… perhaps we simple soldiers never really understood who the enemy was. Sometimes I wonder who has killed more Russians, the Germans-or people like you?" “The Cardinal of the Kremlin,”p. 383



So those ‘great loses’ were not at the hands of the Germans, they were by their own leaders. Someone should have told Roosevelt.

Oh…wait….they did!

Love is blind.

Most of what You write is well researched and I like reading it,
but this is just a bunch disgraceful rubbish.

Yes the Russians were shooting their own not to retreat,
but the Russians, common Soviet folk fought HEROICALLY!

It's beyond disrespectful to present the cause of their death like that,
no better than the vulgar leftist one-sided propaganda.

The Soviets would round up a village, march them at gunpoint to a battlefield, and make them run at german machinegun nests to run them out of bullets.

Brave? No, not really. They were going to be shot either way. They just hoped the death by the Germans would be quicker.

Were there Soviet soldiers who were brave? Absolutely. But to declare that everyone was brave is a lie. A lie based on propaganda.

So you go to the other pathetic extreme to excuse this kind of disrespect...
This is just rubbish for the arrogant who have no memory of war on their soil.

They fought BRAVELY AS A NATION, no need to split hairs, have some basic man's honor.

Where does this need to overcompensate so extremely come from?

2. Government school propaganda provides two beliefs about the Soviets in WWII.



a. That they deserve gratitude and honor for their valiant efforts and great loses in the war



b. U.S. war propaganda had painted pipesmoking "Uncle Joe Stalin" as a friendly fellow, and the liberal propaganda left people to thinking of Communist Party members as lovable idealists.



Really???



There is no honor or credit due to the Soviet Union because they lost 20 million in the war. The glorification of the role that the Soviets played in WWII is unfounded, and almost entirely due to the neo-Marxist influence in our society due to Democrats/Liberals/Progressives doing public relations for them, as they share the same values and aims.



First: most of the Soviet loses were their troops killed by Stalin’s own forces. One reason they lost 20 million, while we lost 415,000 was due to the value that America placed on human life, and the lack of same interest by Bolsheviks: they don’t care about human life, a characteristic absorbed and propounded by the current Democrat Party.







3. "Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"

Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin



And.....



World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans. Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.



And.....



"In 1945 Zhukov is reported to have said to US General Dwight D. Eisenhower, "If we come to a minefield, our infantry attacks exactly as it were not there." The shear weight of numbers eventually drove the Germans back, along with the Soviet leadership's determination not to relent, whatever the cost."

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

www.moreorless.net.au

Tom Clancy has a hero combat soldier exclaim his opinion about the thugs who ran the Soviet Union, the communists:



"Misha waved his hand, looking in annoyance at the way it shook. "I have never had much respect for the chekisti. When I was leading my men, they were there-behind us. They were very efficient at shooting prisoners-prisoners that real soldiers had taken. They were also rather good at murdering people who'd been forced to retreat. I even remember one case where a chekist lieutenant took command of a tank troop and led it into a fucking swamp. At least the Germans I killed were men, fighting men. I hated them, but I could respect them for the soldiers they were. Your kind, on the other hand… perhaps we simple soldiers never really understood who the enemy was. Sometimes I wonder who has killed more Russians, the Germans-or people like you?" “The Cardinal of the Kremlin,”p. 383







So those ‘great loses’ were not at the hands of the Germans, they were by their own leaders. Someone should have told Roosevelt.



Oh…wait….they did!



Love is blind.

You see the world in black and white.

I'm not a product of Your American school systems.

You should AT LEAST get out there and try communicate with Russian veterans.

But unfortunately too late,
arrogance will prevail.

That's why in spite bringing the USSR down,
the Soviet ideology won in America.

I have. I have been to several celebrations on Mamayev Kurgan. I have walked the grain silo in Stalingrad with the soldiers who fought there.

You?

Family, who captured Berlin,
field spy unit, from the age of 17 in war,
didn't hold anything but a pen and paper before.

Then returned to ruined home all skin and bones,
brought up his family in honor and even adopted orphans.

True heroes, true men,
with strong women behind them.

This thread is a disgrace!

Your fathers sacrifice aside, the reason why his home was a ruin was because his government didn't give a shit about him.

And, no. This thread is not a disgrace. Heroism is knowingly placing yourself in harm's way in the clear knowledge that you probably won't survive the experience, yet you do it anyway to save your friends, fellow soldiers, or family.

Merely surviving an incredibly unpleasant experience is a wonderful thing, but it ain't herouc.

They didn't just "survive unpleasant experience"
but moved on and defeated the reich.

They even defeated America, ideologically from within,
but You refused to look or listen when people told You decades ago.

"They even defeated America, ideologically from within, "


Are you claiming that they were Marxists, and you are proud of how this ideology has corrupted America?

Leninists, Marxists, Stalinists ...You name it.
Why do I have to be 'proud' about something for pointing out?

My constant contention throughout our exchange is that -

they all filled a void in American society,
and instead of minimal intellectual introspection,
all I get is a bunch of nervous infantile defensive reactions.

All suggesting denial is vast,
and problem is even worse.

IF they were a real threat, as you admit they were, attacking them, then and now, would be the healthy and smart response.

I don't know how You reach such 'complex' conclusions,
but in Israel we say "if granny had rollerblades..."

you're talking about how marxist from europe came here and defeated us by filling a vacuum of ideas.

then and now, honestly and harshly judging the idea and the people on their merits or lack there of, would have been then, and is now, a fine defense against that type of thing.

marxists, no matter how good of a job they might have done fighting nazis, are still bad guys and should be treated as such.


not glorified like rw wants to. not invited to immigrate there, or join our universities. or worse yet, governments.

Ideas are mobile enough to move without immigration.
Soviets subverted the American society.

When USSR fell,
it was already too late.

Russians know Americans well,
can't say the opposite.

Oh, you're wrong. The Republic hasn't fallen yet. The Soviet Union collapsed, but evil people do evil things. Evil people are being constantly bred.

You can't get rid of them, you can only control them for short periods at a time.

Hope I'm wrong.

We talk different things - You only see it when a country falls,
I'm talking about ideological subversion, when a critical generational mass reached.

That happened what, already 2 generations ago?
Folks keep drawing Russian caricatures...

Yes, the education system has been subverted. But the Republic can still be saved. I am betting that we do.

There is no doubt the Soviet Union failed.
I think though even you republicans now accept Marxism is a superior ideology and the search for a new form of Marxism is on and it could possibly/probably break through in the US.

Were all hoping!

we realize no such thing. we reject you and your works.

That one is the poster child for government schooling.

 

[Oz and the Orchestra]

The war propaganda in support of the Marxists has never abated, and has led America to a precipice. Now, the truth.


1.An interesting and significant month, August.

August 20–25, 1944
Allied troops reach Paris. On August 25, Free French forces, supported by Allied troops, enter the French capital. By September, the Allies reach the German border; by December, virtually all of France, most of Belgium, and part of the southern Netherlands are liberated. World War II: Timeline.

Did you see any mention of Soviet troops there?


2. Government school propaganda provides two beliefs about the Soviets in WWII.

a. That they deserve gratitude and honor for their valiant efforts and great loses in the war

b. U.S. war propaganda had painted pipesmoking "Uncle Joe Stalin" as a friendly fellow, and the liberal propaganda left people to thinking of Communist Party members as lovable idealists.

Really???

There is no honor or credit due to the Soviet Union because they lost 20 million in the war. The glorification of the role that the Soviets played in WWII is unfounded, and almost entirely due to the neo-Marxist influence in our society due to Democrats/Liberals/Progressives doing public relations for them, as they share the same values and aims.

First: most of the Soviet loses were their troops killed by Stalin’s own forces. One reason they lost 20 million, while we lost 415,000 was due to the value that America placed on human life, and the lack of same interest by Bolsheviks: they don’t care about human life, a characteristic absorbed and propounded by the current Democrat Party.



3. "Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"
Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin

And.....

World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans. Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.

And.....

"In 1945 Zhukov is reported to have said to US General Dwight D. Eisenhower, "If we come to a minefield, our infantry attacks exactly as it were not there." The shear weight of numbers eventually drove the Germans back, along with the Soviet leadership's determination not to relent, whatever the cost."

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

www.moreorless.net.au

Tom Clancy has a hero combat soldier exclaim his opinion about the thugs who ran the Soviet Union, the communists:

"Misha waved his hand, looking in annoyance at the way it shook. "I have never had much respect for the chekisti. When I was leading my men, they were there-behind us. They were very efficient at shooting prisoners-prisoners that real soldiers had taken. They were also rather good at murdering people who'd been forced to retreat. I even remember one case where a chekist lieutenant took command of a tank troop and led it into a fucking swamp. At least the Germans I killed were men, fighting men. I hated them, but I could respect them for the soldiers they were. Your kind, on the other hand… perhaps we simple soldiers never really understood who the enemy was. Sometimes I wonder who has killed more Russians, the Germans-or people like you?" “The Cardinal of the Kremlin,”p. 383



So those ‘great loses’ were not at the hands of the Germans, they were by their own leaders. Someone should have told Roosevelt.

Oh…wait….they did!

Love is blind.

Ha ha ha - you stupid twisted imbecile.

You just can't resist it can you? Taking the well documented historical record WWll and twisting,restructuring, airbrushing and wholly misrepresenting it. All because your extreme right wing views, fondness of the Nazi's and hatred of communism you feel compels you.

"1.An interesting and significant month, August."

Isn't it! You then outline the allied achievements in liberating North Western Europe even including the Free French, de Gaulle and a few officers who basically flew from London to Paris backed by the allies. Wow!

You obviously have absolutely no knowledge of Geography-

" Did you see any mention of Soviet troops there?"

Ha ha.......NO, Did you expect me to?

Perhaps it might be because the soviets were over 500 miles away having liberated - Crimea, Hungary, Belarus, Ukraine, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland single handedly, and were approaching Germany's eastern border.

The only possible way they could have been in France, Holland etc, is if they had already occupied Germany in which case the war would be over.

I am quite shocked by your ignorance!

Need to be somewhere now, but don't run away as I haven't even started your thrashing and have much to add.

How ignorant of you for saying this:

"Perhaps it might be because the soviets were over 500 miles away having liberated - Crimea, Hungary, Belarus, Ukraine, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland single handedly, and were approaching Germany's eastern border."

The Soviet Union was Russia and their conquered territories. So drop the term "soviets" and refer to them as what they are: Russians. The Russians conquered Crimea, Hungary, Belarus, Ukraine, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, and Poland and installed puppet governments. There was no voluntary union on the part of the conquered territories.

.

The Soviet Union was the Republics I mentioned bar Poland.

Your contradicting yourself!

"The Soviet Union was Russia and their conquered territories. So drop the term "soviets" and refer to them as what they are: Russians".

Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

Those Republics adopted the Red Flag hammer & sickle. Whether there was popular support at least initially I don't know. but that is beside the point. The Nazi's had invaded them and the point I made to 'political chic' who asked - "Why did the Soviets play no part in liberating France, Holland etc." (yes, -I can't believe she asked it either) was because they were busy liberating their former Soviet Republics from the Nazi's and were hundreds of miles away on the other side of Germany.

Hope this helps!

Let me make it simple for you - the Russians didn't liberate anyone.

.

Lets make it even simpler for you - the Soviets did loads of liberating.

Your head is clearly up your ass!

 

[Correll]

The war propaganda in support of the Marxists has never abated, and has led America to a precipice. Now, the truth.


1.An interesting and significant month, August.

August 20–25, 1944
Allied troops reach Paris. On August 25, Free French forces, supported by Allied troops, enter the French capital. By September, the Allies reach the German border; by December, virtually all of France, most of Belgium, and part of the southern Netherlands are liberated. World War II: Timeline.

Did you see any mention of Soviet troops there?


2. Government school propaganda provides two beliefs about the Soviets in WWII.

a. That they deserve gratitude and honor for their valiant efforts and great loses in the war

b. U.S. war propaganda had painted pipesmoking "Uncle Joe Stalin" as a friendly fellow, and the liberal propaganda left people to thinking of Communist Party members as lovable idealists.

Really???

There is no honor or credit due to the Soviet Union because they lost 20 million in the war. The glorification of the role that the Soviets played in WWII is unfounded, and almost entirely due to the neo-Marxist influence in our society due to Democrats/Liberals/Progressives doing public relations for them, as they share the same values and aims.

First: most of the Soviet loses were their troops killed by Stalin’s own forces. One reason they lost 20 million, while we lost 415,000 was due to the value that America placed on human life, and the lack of same interest by Bolsheviks: they don’t care about human life, a characteristic absorbed and propounded by the current Democrat Party.



3. "Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"
Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin

And.....

World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans. Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.

And.....

"In 1945 Zhukov is reported to have said to US General Dwight D. Eisenhower, "If we come to a minefield, our infantry attacks exactly as it were not there." The shear weight of numbers eventually drove the Germans back, along with the Soviet leadership's determination not to relent, whatever the cost."

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

www.moreorless.net.au

Tom Clancy has a hero combat soldier exclaim his opinion about the thugs who ran the Soviet Union, the communists:

"Misha waved his hand, looking in annoyance at the way it shook. "I have never had much respect for the chekisti. When I was leading my men, they were there-behind us. They were very efficient at shooting prisoners-prisoners that real soldiers had taken. They were also rather good at murdering people who'd been forced to retreat. I even remember one case where a chekist lieutenant took command of a tank troop and led it into a fucking swamp. At least the Germans I killed were men, fighting men. I hated them, but I could respect them for the soldiers they were. Your kind, on the other hand… perhaps we simple soldiers never really understood who the enemy was. Sometimes I wonder who has killed more Russians, the Germans-or people like you?" “The Cardinal of the Kremlin,”p. 383



So those ‘great loses’ were not at the hands of the Germans, they were by their own leaders. Someone should have told Roosevelt.

Oh…wait….they did!

Love is blind.

Ha ha ha - you stupid twisted imbecile.

You just can't resist it can you? Taking the well documented historical record WWll and twisting,restructuring, airbrushing and wholly misrepresenting it. All because your extreme right wing views, fondness of the Nazi's and hatred of communism you feel compels you.

"1.An interesting and significant month, August."

Isn't it! You then outline the allied achievements in liberating North Western Europe even including the Free French, de Gaulle and a few officers who basically flew from London to Paris backed by the allies. Wow!

You obviously have absolutely no knowledge of Geography-

" Did you see any mention of Soviet troops there?"

Ha ha.......NO, Did you expect me to?

Perhaps it might be because the soviets were over 500 miles away having liberated - Crimea, Hungary, Belarus, Ukraine, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland single handedly, and were approaching Germany's eastern border.

The only possible way they could have been in France, Holland etc, is if they had already occupied Germany in which case the war would be over.

I am quite shocked by your ignorance!

Need to be somewhere now, but don't run away as I haven't even started your thrashing and have much to add.

How ignorant of you for saying this:

"Perhaps it might be because the soviets were over 500 miles away having liberated - Crimea, Hungary, Belarus, Ukraine, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland single handedly, and were approaching Germany's eastern border."

The Soviet Union was Russia and their conquered territories. So drop the term "soviets" and refer to them as what they are: Russians. The Russians conquered Crimea, Hungary, Belarus, Ukraine, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, and Poland and installed puppet governments. There was no voluntary union on the part of the conquered territories.

.

The Soviet Union was the Republics I mentioned bar Poland.

Your contradicting yourself!

"The Soviet Union was Russia and their conquered territories. So drop the term "soviets" and refer to them as what they are: Russians".

Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

Those Republics adopted the Red Flag hammer & sickle. Whether there was popular support at least initially I don't know. but that is beside the point. The Nazi's had invaded them and the point I made to 'political chic' who asked - "Why did the Soviets play no part in liberating France, Holland etc." (yes, -I can't believe she asked it either) was because they were busy liberating their former Soviet Republics from the Nazi's and were hundreds of miles away on the other side of Germany.

Hope this helps!

Let me make it simple for you - the Russians didn't liberate anyone.

.

Lets make it even simpler for you - the Soviets did loads of liberating.

Your head is clearly up your ass!

exchanging oppression by nazis for oppression by stalinists, is not being liberated.

 

[Decus]

The war propaganda in support of the Marxists has never abated, and has led America to a precipice. Now, the truth.


1.An interesting and significant month, August.

August 20–25, 1944
Allied troops reach Paris. On August 25, Free French forces, supported by Allied troops, enter the French capital. By September, the Allies reach the German border; by December, virtually all of France, most of Belgium, and part of the southern Netherlands are liberated. World War II: Timeline.

Did you see any mention of Soviet troops there?


2. Government school propaganda provides two beliefs about the Soviets in WWII.

a. That they deserve gratitude and honor for their valiant efforts and great loses in the war

b. U.S. war propaganda had painted pipesmoking "Uncle Joe Stalin" as a friendly fellow, and the liberal propaganda left people to thinking of Communist Party members as lovable idealists.

Really???

There is no honor or credit due to the Soviet Union because they lost 20 million in the war. The glorification of the role that the Soviets played in WWII is unfounded, and almost entirely due to the neo-Marxist influence in our society due to Democrats/Liberals/Progressives doing public relations for them, as they share the same values and aims.

First: most of the Soviet loses were their troops killed by Stalin’s own forces. One reason they lost 20 million, while we lost 415,000 was due to the value that America placed on human life, and the lack of same interest by Bolsheviks: they don’t care about human life, a characteristic absorbed and propounded by the current Democrat Party.



3. "Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"
Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin

And.....

World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans. Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.

And.....

"In 1945 Zhukov is reported to have said to US General Dwight D. Eisenhower, "If we come to a minefield, our infantry attacks exactly as it were not there." The shear weight of numbers eventually drove the Germans back, along with the Soviet leadership's determination not to relent, whatever the cost."

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

www.moreorless.net.au

Tom Clancy has a hero combat soldier exclaim his opinion about the thugs who ran the Soviet Union, the communists:

"Misha waved his hand, looking in annoyance at the way it shook. "I have never had much respect for the chekisti. When I was leading my men, they were there-behind us. They were very efficient at shooting prisoners-prisoners that real soldiers had taken. They were also rather good at murdering people who'd been forced to retreat. I even remember one case where a chekist lieutenant took command of a tank troop and led it into a fucking swamp. At least the Germans I killed were men, fighting men. I hated them, but I could respect them for the soldiers they were. Your kind, on the other hand… perhaps we simple soldiers never really understood who the enemy was. Sometimes I wonder who has killed more Russians, the Germans-or people like you?" “The Cardinal of the Kremlin,”p. 383



So those ‘great loses’ were not at the hands of the Germans, they were by their own leaders. Someone should have told Roosevelt.

Oh…wait….they did!

Love is blind.

Ha ha ha - you stupid twisted imbecile.

You just can't resist it can you? Taking the well documented historical record WWll and twisting,restructuring, airbrushing and wholly misrepresenting it. All because your extreme right wing views, fondness of the Nazi's and hatred of communism you feel compels you.

"1.An interesting and significant month, August."

Isn't it! You then outline the allied achievements in liberating North Western Europe even including the Free French, de Gaulle and a few officers who basically flew from London to Paris backed by the allies. Wow!

You obviously have absolutely no knowledge of Geography-

" Did you see any mention of Soviet troops there?"

Ha ha.......NO, Did you expect me to?

Perhaps it might be because the soviets were over 500 miles away having liberated - Crimea, Hungary, Belarus, Ukraine, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland single handedly, and were approaching Germany's eastern border.

The only possible way they could have been in France, Holland etc, is if they had already occupied Germany in which case the war would be over.

I am quite shocked by your ignorance!

Need to be somewhere now, but don't run away as I haven't even started your thrashing and have much to add.

How ignorant of you for saying this:

"Perhaps it might be because the soviets were over 500 miles away having liberated - Crimea, Hungary, Belarus, Ukraine, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland single handedly, and were approaching Germany's eastern border."

The Soviet Union was Russia and their conquered territories. So drop the term "soviets" and refer to them as what they are: Russians. The Russians conquered Crimea, Hungary, Belarus, Ukraine, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, and Poland and installed puppet governments. There was no voluntary union on the part of the conquered territories.

.

The Soviet Union was the Republics I mentioned bar Poland.

Your contradicting yourself!

"The Soviet Union was Russia and their conquered territories. So drop the term "soviets" and refer to them as what they are: Russians".

Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

Those Republics adopted the Red Flag hammer & sickle. Whether there was popular support at least initially I don't know. but that is beside the point. The Nazi's had invaded them and the point I made to 'political chic' who asked - "Why did the Soviets play no part in liberating France, Holland etc." (yes, -I can't believe she asked it either) was because they were busy liberating their former Soviet Republics from the Nazi's and were hundreds of miles away on the other side of Germany.

Hope this helps!

Let me make it simple for you - the Russians didn't liberate anyone.

.

Lets make it even simpler for you - the Soviets did loads of liberating.

Your head is clearly up your ass!

Liberated is a term that cannot be applied to what the Russians did. The Russians simply fought to acquire territory from the Nazis. One occupier replaced by another.

.

 

[Oz and the Orchestra]

...

There is no honor or credit due to the Soviet Union because they lost 20 million in the war. The glorification of the role that the Soviets played in WWII is unfounded, and almost entirely due to the neo-Marxist influence in our society due to Democrats/Liberals/Progressives doing public relations for them, as they share the same values and aims.

First: most of the Soviet loses were their troops killed by Stalin’s own forces. One reason they lost 20 million, while we lost 415,000 was due to the value that America placed on human life, and the lack of same interest by Bolsheviks: they don’t care about human life, a characteristic absorbed and propounded by the current Democrat Party.

...

well, this is completely true, and a major and even possibly the primary factor,

it is worth noting that having the war in your country, as opposed to on the other side of an ocean, is going to increase civilian deaths. (America is blessed)

a better, fairer, comparison might be, comparing soviet losses to french or polish losses.


on the other hand, it is also worth noting that the soviet union did start wwii as an ally of hitler and only switched sides when hitler betrayed them, not because the soviets had any problem with anything he was doing.

To see where the honor belongs you have to separate the party and the people.

See post #4. Take notes on it.

Doesn't effect my post at all. Don't the people of Russia/SU deserve credit for their bravery? Being Soviet citizens is a historical fact that can't be changed barring a "memory hole".

Many Russians had no choice.
Stalin sent them into battle without weapons and told them to take the rifles of German soldiers after they froze to death.
Stalin was a POS.

This was earlier in the thread:

3. "Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"

Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin



And.....



World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans. Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.



And.....



"In 1945 Zhukov is reported to have said to US General Dwight D. Eisenhower, "If we come to a minefield, our infantry attacks exactly as it were not there." The shear weight of numbers eventually drove the Germans back, along with the Soviet leadership's determination not to relent, whatever the cost."

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

www.moreorless.net.au

Tom Clancy has a hero combat soldier exclaim his opinion about the thugs who ran the Soviet Union, the communists:



"Misha waved his hand, looking in annoyance at the way it shook. "I have never had much respect for the chekisti. When I was leading my men, they were there-behind us. They were very efficient at shooting prisoners-prisoners that real soldiers had taken. They were also rather good at murdering people who'd been forced to retreat. I even remember one case where a chekist lieutenant took command of a tank troop and led it into a fucking swamp. At least the Germans I killed were men, fighting men. I hated them, but I could respect them for the soldiers they were. Your kind, on the other hand… perhaps we simple soldiers never really understood who the enemy was. Sometimes I wonder who has killed more Russians, the Germans-or people like you?" “The Cardinal of the Kremlin,”p. 383







So those ‘great loses’ were not at the hands of the Germans, they were by their own leaders. Someone should have told Roosevelt.



Oh…wait….they did!



Love is blind.

2This was earlier in the thread:

3. "Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"

Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"

As I already pointed out the article refers to 20 million killed in the purges, gulags, etc in the 20's & 30's and has nothing to do with WWll.

And to 'westwall' Why do you give 'political fruitcake' the thumbs up for this post?

Are you seriously saying the Nazi's killed "very few" Soviets?
And (just as a matter of interest) are you also a Holocaust denier?

Id think carefully before replying your credibility is at stake.

 

[westwall]

The war propaganda in support of the Marxists has never abated, and has led America to a precipice. Now, the truth.


1.An interesting and significant month, August.

August 20–25, 1944
Allied troops reach Paris. On August 25, Free French forces, supported by Allied troops, enter the French capital. By September, the Allies reach the German border; by December, virtually all of France, most of Belgium, and part of the southern Netherlands are liberated. World War II: Timeline.

Did you see any mention of Soviet troops there?


2. Government school propaganda provides two beliefs about the Soviets in WWII.

a. That they deserve gratitude and honor for their valiant efforts and great loses in the war

b. U.S. war propaganda had painted pipesmoking "Uncle Joe Stalin" as a friendly fellow, and the liberal propaganda left people to thinking of Communist Party members as lovable idealists.

Really???

There is no honor or credit due to the Soviet Union because they lost 20 million in the war. The glorification of the role that the Soviets played in WWII is unfounded, and almost entirely due to the neo-Marxist influence in our society due to Democrats/Liberals/Progressives doing public relations for them, as they share the same values and aims.

First: most of the Soviet loses were their troops killed by Stalin’s own forces. One reason they lost 20 million, while we lost 415,000 was due to the value that America placed on human life, and the lack of same interest by Bolsheviks: they don’t care about human life, a characteristic absorbed and propounded by the current Democrat Party.



3. "Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"
Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin

And.....

World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans. Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.

And.....

"In 1945 Zhukov is reported to have said to US General Dwight D. Eisenhower, "If we come to a minefield, our infantry attacks exactly as it were not there." The shear weight of numbers eventually drove the Germans back, along with the Soviet leadership's determination not to relent, whatever the cost."

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

www.moreorless.net.au

Tom Clancy has a hero combat soldier exclaim his opinion about the thugs who ran the Soviet Union, the communists:

"Misha waved his hand, looking in annoyance at the way it shook. "I have never had much respect for the chekisti. When I was leading my men, they were there-behind us. They were very efficient at shooting prisoners-prisoners that real soldiers had taken. They were also rather good at murdering people who'd been forced to retreat. I even remember one case where a chekist lieutenant took command of a tank troop and led it into a fucking swamp. At least the Germans I killed were men, fighting men. I hated them, but I could respect them for the soldiers they were. Your kind, on the other hand… perhaps we simple soldiers never really understood who the enemy was. Sometimes I wonder who has killed more Russians, the Germans-or people like you?" “The Cardinal of the Kremlin,”p. 383



So those ‘great loses’ were not at the hands of the Germans, they were by their own leaders. Someone should have told Roosevelt.

Oh…wait….they did!

Love is blind.

Ha ha ha - you stupid twisted imbecile.

You just can't resist it can you? Taking the well documented historical record WWll and twisting,restructuring, airbrushing and wholly misrepresenting it. All because your extreme right wing views, fondness of the Nazi's and hatred of communism you feel compels you.

"1.An interesting and significant month, August."

Isn't it! You then outline the allied achievements in liberating North Western Europe even including the Free French, de Gaulle and a few officers who basically flew from London to Paris backed by the allies. Wow!

You obviously have absolutely no knowledge of Geography-

" Did you see any mention of Soviet troops there?"

Ha ha.......NO, Did you expect me to?

Perhaps it might be because the soviets were over 500 miles away having liberated - Crimea, Hungary, Belarus, Ukraine, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland single handedly, and were approaching Germany's eastern border.

The only possible way they could have been in France, Holland etc, is if they had already occupied Germany in which case the war would be over.

I am quite shocked by your ignorance!

Need to be somewhere now, but don't run away as I haven't even started your thrashing and have much to add.

How ignorant of you for saying this:

"Perhaps it might be because the soviets were over 500 miles away having liberated - Crimea, Hungary, Belarus, Ukraine, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland single handedly, and were approaching Germany's eastern border."

The Soviet Union was Russia and their conquered territories. So drop the term "soviets" and refer to them as what they are: Russians. The Russians conquered Crimea, Hungary, Belarus, Ukraine, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, and Poland and installed puppet governments. There was no voluntary union on the part of the conquered territories.

.

The Soviet Union was the Republics I mentioned bar Poland.

Your contradicting yourself!

"The Soviet Union was Russia and their conquered territories. So drop the term "soviets" and refer to them as what they are: Russians".

Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

Those Republics adopted the Red Flag hammer & sickle. Whether there was popular support at least initially I don't know. but that is beside the point. The Nazi's had invaded them and the point I made to 'political chic' who asked - "Why did the Soviets play no part in liberating France, Holland etc." (yes, -I can't believe she asked it either) was because they were busy liberating their former Soviet Republics from the Nazi's and were hundreds of miles away on the other side of Germany.

Hope this helps!

Let me make it simple for you - the Russians didn't liberate anyone.

.

Lets make it even simpler for you - the Soviets did loads of liberating.

Your head is clearly up your ass!

Yeah, they "liberated" and then sent those poor people to the gulag. One of the most heroic soldiers the Soviets had fought for weeks in Brest litovsk after the Germans had moved on. He was all alone in the citadel there. He fought until finally a german was able to drop a grenade on him which screwed him up enough to enable them to capture him. he gets sent to a POW camp and then, when he survives that, and is "liberated" they Soviets sent him to the gulag because he had been "tainted by the West"

That's how despicable those marxist scumbags are.,

 

[westwall]

...

There is no honor or credit due to the Soviet Union because they lost 20 million in the war. The glorification of the role that the Soviets played in WWII is unfounded, and almost entirely due to the neo-Marxist influence in our society due to Democrats/Liberals/Progressives doing public relations for them, as they share the same values and aims.

First: most of the Soviet loses were their troops killed by Stalin’s own forces. One reason they lost 20 million, while we lost 415,000 was due to the value that America placed on human life, and the lack of same interest by Bolsheviks: they don’t care about human life, a characteristic absorbed and propounded by the current Democrat Party.

...

well, this is completely true, and a major and even possibly the primary factor,

it is worth noting that having the war in your country, as opposed to on the other side of an ocean, is going to increase civilian deaths. (America is blessed)

a better, fairer, comparison might be, comparing soviet losses to french or polish losses.


on the other hand, it is also worth noting that the soviet union did start wwii as an ally of hitler and only switched sides when hitler betrayed them, not because the soviets had any problem with anything he was doing.

To see where the honor belongs you have to separate the party and the people.

See post #4. Take notes on it.

Doesn't effect my post at all. Don't the people of Russia/SU deserve credit for their bravery? Being Soviet citizens is a historical fact that can't be changed barring a "memory hole".

Many Russians had no choice.
Stalin sent them into battle without weapons and told them to take the rifles of German soldiers after they froze to death.
Stalin was a POS.

This was earlier in the thread:

3. "Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"

Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin



And.....



World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans. Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.



And.....



"In 1945 Zhukov is reported to have said to US General Dwight D. Eisenhower, "If we come to a minefield, our infantry attacks exactly as it were not there." The shear weight of numbers eventually drove the Germans back, along with the Soviet leadership's determination not to relent, whatever the cost."

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

www.moreorless.net.au

Tom Clancy has a hero combat soldier exclaim his opinion about the thugs who ran the Soviet Union, the communists:



"Misha waved his hand, looking in annoyance at the way it shook. "I have never had much respect for the chekisti. When I was leading my men, they were there-behind us. They were very efficient at shooting prisoners-prisoners that real soldiers had taken. They were also rather good at murdering people who'd been forced to retreat. I even remember one case where a chekist lieutenant took command of a tank troop and led it into a fucking swamp. At least the Germans I killed were men, fighting men. I hated them, but I could respect them for the soldiers they were. Your kind, on the other hand… perhaps we simple soldiers never really understood who the enemy was. Sometimes I wonder who has killed more Russians, the Germans-or people like you?" “The Cardinal of the Kremlin,”p. 383







So those ‘great loses’ were not at the hands of the Germans, they were by their own leaders. Someone should have told Roosevelt.



Oh…wait….they did!



Love is blind.

2This was earlier in the thread:

3. "Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"

Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"

As I already pointed out the article refers to 20 million killed in the purges, gulags, etc in the 20's & 30's and has nothing to do with WWll.

And to 'westwall' Why do you give 'political fruitcake' the thumbs up for this post?

Are you seriously saying the Nazi's killed "very few" Soviets?
And (just as a matter of interest) are you also a Holocaust denier?

Id think carefully before replying your credibility is at stake.

No, the gulags killed at least 60 million. Like I said, marxism is only real good at making people dead.

 

[Oz and the Orchestra]

The war propaganda in support of the Marxists has never abated, and has led America to a precipice. Now, the truth.


1.An interesting and significant month, August.

August 20–25, 1944
Allied troops reach Paris. On August 25, Free French forces, supported by Allied troops, enter the French capital. By September, the Allies reach the German border; by December, virtually all of France, most of Belgium, and part of the southern Netherlands are liberated. World War II: Timeline.

Did you see any mention of Soviet troops there?


2. Government school propaganda provides two beliefs about the Soviets in WWII.

a. That they deserve gratitude and honor for their valiant efforts and great loses in the war

b. U.S. war propaganda had painted pipesmoking "Uncle Joe Stalin" as a friendly fellow, and the liberal propaganda left people to thinking of Communist Party members as lovable idealists.

Really???

There is no honor or credit due to the Soviet Union because they lost 20 million in the war. The glorification of the role that the Soviets played in WWII is unfounded, and almost entirely due to the neo-Marxist influence in our society due to Democrats/Liberals/Progressives doing public relations for them, as they share the same values and aims.

First: most of the Soviet loses were their troops killed by Stalin’s own forces. One reason they lost 20 million, while we lost 415,000 was due to the value that America placed on human life, and the lack of same interest by Bolsheviks: they don’t care about human life, a characteristic absorbed and propounded by the current Democrat Party.



3. "Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"
Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin

And.....

World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans. Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.

And.....

"In 1945 Zhukov is reported to have said to US General Dwight D. Eisenhower, "If we come to a minefield, our infantry attacks exactly as it were not there." The shear weight of numbers eventually drove the Germans back, along with the Soviet leadership's determination not to relent, whatever the cost."

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

www.moreorless.net.au

Tom Clancy has a hero combat soldier exclaim his opinion about the thugs who ran the Soviet Union, the communists:

"Misha waved his hand, looking in annoyance at the way it shook. "I have never had much respect for the chekisti. When I was leading my men, they were there-behind us. They were very efficient at shooting prisoners-prisoners that real soldiers had taken. They were also rather good at murdering people who'd been forced to retreat. I even remember one case where a chekist lieutenant took command of a tank troop and led it into a fucking swamp. At least the Germans I killed were men, fighting men. I hated them, but I could respect them for the soldiers they were. Your kind, on the other hand… perhaps we simple soldiers never really understood who the enemy was. Sometimes I wonder who has killed more Russians, the Germans-or people like you?" “The Cardinal of the Kremlin,”p. 383



So those ‘great loses’ were not at the hands of the Germans, they were by their own leaders. Someone should have told Roosevelt.

Oh…wait….they did!

Love is blind.

Ha ha ha - you stupid twisted imbecile.

You just can't resist it can you? Taking the well documented historical record WWll and twisting,restructuring, airbrushing and wholly misrepresenting it. All because your extreme right wing views, fondness of the Nazi's and hatred of communism you feel compels you.

"1.An interesting and significant month, August."

Isn't it! You then outline the allied achievements in liberating North Western Europe even including the Free French, de Gaulle and a few officers who basically flew from London to Paris backed by the allies. Wow!

You obviously have absolutely no knowledge of Geography-

" Did you see any mention of Soviet troops there?"

Ha ha.......NO, Did you expect me to?

Perhaps it might be because the soviets were over 500 miles away having liberated - Crimea, Hungary, Belarus, Ukraine, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland single handedly, and were approaching Germany's eastern border.

The only possible way they could have been in France, Holland etc, is if they had already occupied Germany in which case the war would be over.

I am quite shocked by your ignorance!

Need to be somewhere now, but don't run away as I haven't even started your thrashing and have much to add.

How ignorant of you for saying this:

"Perhaps it might be because the soviets were over 500 miles away having liberated - Crimea, Hungary, Belarus, Ukraine, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland single handedly, and were approaching Germany's eastern border."

The Soviet Union was Russia and their conquered territories. So drop the term "soviets" and refer to them as what they are: Russians. The Russians conquered Crimea, Hungary, Belarus, Ukraine, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, and Poland and installed puppet governments. There was no voluntary union on the part of the conquered territories.

.

The Soviet Union was the Republics I mentioned bar Poland.

Your contradicting yourself!

"The Soviet Union was Russia and their conquered territories. So drop the term "soviets" and refer to them as what they are: Russians".

Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

Those Republics adopted the Red Flag hammer & sickle. Whether there was popular support at least initially I don't know. but that is beside the point. The Nazi's had invaded them and the point I made to 'political chic' who asked - "Why did the Soviets play no part in liberating France, Holland etc." (yes, -I can't believe she asked it either) was because they were busy liberating their former Soviet Republics from the Nazi's and were hundreds of miles away on the other side of Germany.

Hope this helps!

Let me make it simple for you - the Russians didn't liberate anyone.

.

Lets make it even simpler for you - the Soviets did loads of liberating.

Your head is clearly up your ass!

Liberated is a term that cannot be applied to what the Russians did. The Russians simply fought to acquire territory from the Nazis. One occupier replaced by another.

.

Aren't you jumping ahead a bit?
Prior to WWll the Republics we are referring to where all part of the USSR.

Did you never notice during countless Olympics. Ukrainian, Belorussian, Georgian athletes etc standing proudly and smiling on the rostrum with their medals under the Soviet flag to the strains of the Soviet anthem?

 

[Oz and the Orchestra]

...

There is no honor or credit due to the Soviet Union because they lost 20 million in the war. The glorification of the role that the Soviets played in WWII is unfounded, and almost entirely due to the neo-Marxist influence in our society due to Democrats/Liberals/Progressives doing public relations for them, as they share the same values and aims.

First: most of the Soviet loses were their troops killed by Stalin’s own forces. One reason they lost 20 million, while we lost 415,000 was due to the value that America placed on human life, and the lack of same interest by Bolsheviks: they don’t care about human life, a characteristic absorbed and propounded by the current Democrat Party.

...

well, this is completely true, and a major and even possibly the primary factor,

it is worth noting that having the war in your country, as opposed to on the other side of an ocean, is going to increase civilian deaths. (America is blessed)

a better, fairer, comparison might be, comparing soviet losses to french or polish losses.


on the other hand, it is also worth noting that the soviet union did start wwii as an ally of hitler and only switched sides when hitler betrayed them, not because the soviets had any problem with anything he was doing.

To see where the honor belongs you have to separate the party and the people.

See post #4. Take notes on it.

Doesn't effect my post at all. Don't the people of Russia/SU deserve credit for their bravery? Being Soviet citizens is a historical fact that can't be changed barring a "memory hole".

Many Russians had no choice.
Stalin sent them into battle without weapons and told them to take the rifles of German soldiers after they froze to death.
Stalin was a POS.

This was earlier in the thread:

3. "Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"

Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin



And.....



World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans. Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.



And.....



"In 1945 Zhukov is reported to have said to US General Dwight D. Eisenhower, "If we come to a minefield, our infantry attacks exactly as it were not there." The shear weight of numbers eventually drove the Germans back, along with the Soviet leadership's determination not to relent, whatever the cost."

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

www.moreorless.net.au

Tom Clancy has a hero combat soldier exclaim his opinion about the thugs who ran the Soviet Union, the communists:



"Misha waved his hand, looking in annoyance at the way it shook. "I have never had much respect for the chekisti. When I was leading my men, they were there-behind us. They were very efficient at shooting prisoners-prisoners that real soldiers had taken. They were also rather good at murdering people who'd been forced to retreat. I even remember one case where a chekist lieutenant took command of a tank troop and led it into a fucking swamp. At least the Germans I killed were men, fighting men. I hated them, but I could respect them for the soldiers they were. Your kind, on the other hand… perhaps we simple soldiers never really understood who the enemy was. Sometimes I wonder who has killed more Russians, the Germans-or people like you?" “The Cardinal of the Kremlin,”p. 383







So those ‘great loses’ were not at the hands of the Germans, they were by their own leaders. Someone should have told Roosevelt.



Oh…wait….they did!



Love is blind.

2This was earlier in the thread:

3. "Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"

Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"

As I already pointed out the article refers to 20 million killed in the purges, gulags, etc in the 20's & 30's and has nothing to do with WWll.

And to 'westwall' Why do you give 'political fruitcake' the thumbs up for this post?

Are you seriously saying the Nazi's killed "very few" Soviets?
And (just as a matter of interest) are you also a Holocaust denier?

Id think carefully before replying your credibility is at stake.

No, the gulags killed at least 60 million. Like I said, marxism is only real good at making people dead.

So you refuse to answer my questions!

 

[westwall]

...

There is no honor or credit due to the Soviet Union because they lost 20 million in the war. The glorification of the role that the Soviets played in WWII is unfounded, and almost entirely due to the neo-Marxist influence in our society due to Democrats/Liberals/Progressives doing public relations for them, as they share the same values and aims.

First: most of the Soviet loses were their troops killed by Stalin’s own forces. One reason they lost 20 million, while we lost 415,000 was due to the value that America placed on human life, and the lack of same interest by Bolsheviks: they don’t care about human life, a characteristic absorbed and propounded by the current Democrat Party.

...

well, this is completely true, and a major and even possibly the primary factor,

it is worth noting that having the war in your country, as opposed to on the other side of an ocean, is going to increase civilian deaths. (America is blessed)

a better, fairer, comparison might be, comparing soviet losses to french or polish losses.


on the other hand, it is also worth noting that the soviet union did start wwii as an ally of hitler and only switched sides when hitler betrayed them, not because the soviets had any problem with anything he was doing.

To see where the honor belongs you have to separate the party and the people.

See post #4. Take notes on it.

Doesn't effect my post at all. Don't the people of Russia/SU deserve credit for their bravery? Being Soviet citizens is a historical fact that can't be changed barring a "memory hole".

Many Russians had no choice.
Stalin sent them into battle without weapons and told them to take the rifles of German soldiers after they froze to death.
Stalin was a POS.

This was earlier in the thread:

3. "Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"

Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin



And.....



World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans. Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.



And.....



"In 1945 Zhukov is reported to have said to US General Dwight D. Eisenhower, "If we come to a minefield, our infantry attacks exactly as it were not there." The shear weight of numbers eventually drove the Germans back, along with the Soviet leadership's determination not to relent, whatever the cost."

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century

www.moreorless.net.au

Tom Clancy has a hero combat soldier exclaim his opinion about the thugs who ran the Soviet Union, the communists:



"Misha waved his hand, looking in annoyance at the way it shook. "I have never had much respect for the chekisti. When I was leading my men, they were there-behind us. They were very efficient at shooting prisoners-prisoners that real soldiers had taken. They were also rather good at murdering people who'd been forced to retreat. I even remember one case where a chekist lieutenant took command of a tank troop and led it into a fucking swamp. At least the Germans I killed were men, fighting men. I hated them, but I could respect them for the soldiers they were. Your kind, on the other hand… perhaps we simple soldiers never really understood who the enemy was. Sometimes I wonder who has killed more Russians, the Germans-or people like you?" “The Cardinal of the Kremlin,”p. 383







So those ‘great loses’ were not at the hands of the Germans, they were by their own leaders. Someone should have told Roosevelt.



Oh…wait….they did!



Love is blind.

2This was earlier in the thread:

3. "Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"

Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"

As I already pointed out the article refers to 20 million killed in the purges, gulags, etc in the 20's & 30's and has nothing to do with WWll.

And to 'westwall' Why do you give 'political fruitcake' the thumbs up for this post?

Are you seriously saying the Nazi's killed "very few" Soviets?
And (just as a matter of interest) are you also a Holocaust denier?

Id think carefully before replying your credibility is at stake.

No, the gulags killed at least 60 million. Like I said, marxism is only real good at making people dead.

So you refuse to answer my questions!

I didn't see your questions. So, in order, The German Wehrmacht killed a lot of soldiers and civilians. Millions. Just not 27 million. Conservatively I would say they are responsible for at least 7.5 million Soviet casualties. Maybe as many as 10 million.

The holocaust absolutely happened and my credibility is just fine, thank you. Yours, not so much.