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

[rightwinger]

Oh? You seem to forget North Africa, Sicily, and Italy. 1942 and 1943 respectively.

Good example

Could Patton and Montgomery have defeated Rommel if Rommel was fully supplied? Germany diverted his support to Russia and Yugoslavia.
Rommel didn’t lose, he ran out of gas.

Germany was overextended and had to make military trade offs
North Africa and Italy were part of that.

 

[rightwinger]

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

It appears you are not a product of any school system.

LOL

So says Mama Home Skool

Look at me, I is a Teecher!
Todays class is on Cut and Paste

 

[Correll]

Oh? You seem to forget North Africa, Sicily, and Italy. 1942 and 1943 respectively.

Good example

Could Patton and Montgomery have defeated Rommel if Rommel was fully supplied? Germany diverted his support to Russia and Yugoslavia.
Rommel didn’t lose, he ran out of gas.

Germany was overextended and had to make military trade offs
North Africa and Italy were part of that.

geez, suddenly, when it casts American enemies in a better light, suddenly, you remember how important supplies and resources are....

mmm, funny how that works....


hilariously so.

 

[Cellblock2429]

Everything I post is linked, sourced and documented,

But it's your opinions that are hot garbage. Of course, since you are too cowardly to state them outright, it has to be done for you.

Everything I post is linked, sourced and documented, while you, on the other hand are our best source of greenhouse gases.


I REALLY need a higher caliber of opposition.

Your cherry picked facts are just your cowardly way of relating your preference for nazis over marxists. Everyone knows this.

She unravels very quickly when challenged. her weekly creationism rants are USMB gold.

/—-/ Yet you refute nothing PC posts.

Well I dont really have to. She gets shot down every time.. I guess she passes for intelligent on the right but this thread is distasteful. Russians were fighting nazis while Americans were playing golf.

PC attacks FDR for holding off an allied invasion till June 1944 while the Soviets fought alone in 1940, 1941, 1942, 1943 and half of 1944. They did the fighting and dying against the Nazis.

FDR gave up 200,00 American lives in Europe while Stalin gave up 20 million and PC says we got a bad deal.

/——/ Without you, who else would stick up for Uncle Joe Stalin who murdered millions of his own people? Some people just can’t take a joke.

It is a case of choose your poison. Hitler or Stalin?

You and Political Chic obviously prefer a world under Hitler

/----/ The only difference between Hitler and Stalin is the Nazis had snapper uniforms.

 

[westwall]

Oh? You seem to forget North Africa, Sicily, and Italy. 1942 and 1943 respectively.

Good example

Could Patton and Montgomery have defeated Rommel if Rommel was fully supplied? Germany diverted his support to Russia and Yugoslavia.
Rommel didn’t lose, he ran out of gas.

Germany was overextended and had to make military trade offs
North Africa and Italy were part of that.

Rommel wasn't fully supplied because we kept sinking their supply ships. You purposely ignored the American invasions in the Med to support your weak ass claim.

Like I said, dumbwinger. I don't need to look this stuff up. I KNOW the history.

You better catch up.

 

[rightwinger]

So, FDR did not immediately jump to stalin's demands and throw American lives into a battle they were not prepared for, and you want to give him credit for that?

Umm...yea
He deserves credit.

Not only for building the Arsenal of Democracy, but for allowing an ally to do most of the fighting and dying for him.

 

[Correll]

Everything I post is linked, sourced and documented,

But it's your opinions that are hot garbage. Of course, since you are too cowardly to state them outright, it has to be done for you.

Everything I post is linked, sourced and documented, while you, on the other hand are our best source of greenhouse gases.


I REALLY need a higher caliber of opposition.

Your cherry picked facts are just your cowardly way of relating your preference for nazis over marxists. Everyone knows this.

She unravels very quickly when challenged. her weekly creationism rants are USMB gold.

/—-/ Yet you refute nothing PC posts.

Well I dont really have to. She gets shot down every time.. I guess she passes for intelligent on the right but this thread is distasteful. Russians were fighting nazis while Americans were playing golf.

PC attacks FDR for holding off an allied invasion till June 1944 while the Soviets fought alone in 1940, 1941, 1942, 1943 and half of 1944. They did the fighting and dying against the Nazis.

FDR gave up 200,00 American lives in Europe while Stalin gave up 20 million and PC says we got a bad deal.

/——/ Without you, who else would stick up for Uncle Joe Stalin who murdered millions of his own people? Some people just can’t take a joke.

It is a case of choose your poison. Hitler or Stalin?

You and Political Chic obviously prefer a world under Hitler

/----/ The only difference between Hitler and Stalin is the Nazis had snapper uniforms.

everyone looks better in black.

 

[rylah]

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!

 

[rightwinger]

Everything I post is linked, sourced and documented,

But it's your opinions that are hot garbage. Of course, since you are too cowardly to state them outright, it has to be done for you.

Everything I post is linked, sourced and documented, while you, on the other hand are our best source of greenhouse gases.


I REALLY need a higher caliber of opposition.

Your cherry picked facts are just your cowardly way of relating your preference for nazis over marxists. Everyone knows this.

She unravels very quickly when challenged. her weekly creationism rants are USMB gold.

/—-/ Yet you refute nothing PC posts.

Well I dont really have to. She gets shot down every time.. I guess she passes for intelligent on the right but this thread is distasteful. Russians were fighting nazis while Americans were playing golf.

PC attacks FDR for holding off an allied invasion till June 1944 while the Soviets fought alone in 1940, 1941, 1942, 1943 and half of 1944. They did the fighting and dying against the Nazis.

FDR gave up 200,00 American lives in Europe while Stalin gave up 20 million and PC says we got a bad deal.

/——/ Without you, who else would stick up for Uncle Joe Stalin who murdered millions of his own people? Some people just can’t take a joke.

It is a case of choose your poison. Hitler or Stalin?

You and Political Chic obviously prefer a world under Hitler

/----/ The only difference between Hitler and Stalin is the Nazis had snapper uniforms.

Probably true

But we sided with Stalin because we didn’t give a shit about Eastern Europe and wanted to rescue Western Europe.

Stalin was the lesser of two evils and not as much a threat to US interests

 

[PoliticalChic]

Everything I post is linked, sourced and documented,

But it's your opinions that are hot garbage. Of course, since you are too cowardly to state them outright, it has to be done for you.

Everything I post is linked, sourced and documented, while you, on the other hand are our best source of greenhouse gases.


I REALLY need a higher caliber of opposition.

Your cherry picked facts are just your cowardly way of relating your preference for nazis over marxists. Everyone knows this.

She unravels very quickly when challenged. her weekly creationism rants are USMB gold.

/—-/ Yet you refute nothing PC posts.

Well I dont really have to. She gets shot down every time.. I guess she passes for intelligent on the right but this thread is distasteful. Russians were fighting nazis while Americans were playing golf.

PC attacks FDR for holding off an allied invasion till June 1944 while the Soviets fought alone in 1940, 1941, 1942, 1943 and half of 1944. They did the fighting and dying against the Nazis.

FDR gave up 200,00 American lives in Europe while Stalin gave up 20 million and PC says we got a bad deal.

/——/ Without you, who else would stick up for Uncle Joe Stalin who murdered millions of his own people? Some people just can’t take a joke.

It is a case of choose your poison. Hitler or Stalin?

You and Political Chic obviously prefer a world under Hitler

/----/ The only difference between Hitler and Stalin is the Nazis had snapper uniforms.

Beyond the humor.....it's true.


. A year after Lenin's death, 1924, the NYTimes published a small article about a newly established party in Germany, the National Socialist Labor Party, which "...persists in believing that Lenin and Hitler can be compared or contrasted...Dr. Goebell's....assertion that Lenin was the greatest man second only to Hitler....and that the difference between communism and the Hitler faith was very slight...." November 27, 1925.

 

[Correll]

So, FDR did not immediately jump to stalin's demands and throw American lives into a battle they were not prepared for, and you want to give him credit for that?

Umm...yea
He deserves credit.

Not only for building the Arsenal of Democracy, but for allowing an ally to do most of the fighting and dying for him.

there is a level of performance that is just "meets expectations".

not sending in American forces before they are ready, is that. no merits, no demerits. nothing to brag about.


that "ally" was in that situation, solely because of that "ally's" actions, ie, allying with fucking hitler and starting wwii.

 

[Oz and the Orchestra]

in the scale of wwii, a similar nuking of Germany would have been completely acceptable to any reasonable person.
and yes, that would be far preferable to eastern europe not living under communism for 45 years, not to mention avoiding the terrible cost of the Cold War.

I can’t believe what a callous killer you are. You would rather nuke millions of people rather than have them live under communism for 45 years.

Hirohito saw the devastation of the bomb and quickly agreed to surrender. What makes you think Hitler would do the same?

Hitler already made it clear he was willing to fight to the last man to save his Nazi regime. He allowed the Soviets and US to slaughter German citizens even though it was obvious he had lost the war.

What makes you think a nuclear attack would have changed his mind?

change his mind or vaporize it, either way, the war would have ended, and western europe and eastern europe would have been liberated, like you said could not happen without stalin.

so, you're wrong.


your whining about the deaths is stupid, as the death toll in stopping the nazis would be, quite likely less, in that scenario, and certainly not more.

General Patton knew what the Bolsheviks were, and voiced his opinion loudly......that's why Stalin's BFF, Roosevelt, had him benched.


Patton saw the inevitability of a conflict with the Russians.

"It is a conflict that Patton believes will be fought soon. The Russians are moving to forcibly spread communism throughout the world, and Patton knows it. "They are a scurvy race and simply savages," he writes of the Russians in his journal. "We could beat the hell out of them."
"Patton," By Martin Blumenson, Kevin M. Hymel, p. 84


Can you imagine the chagrin in the Soviet-occupied Roosevelt administration???



The Red Army is relentless in its quest to control as much of Europe as possible, with Stalin taking full advantage of Dwight Eisenhower's timidity.The Russians are seizing more land, and more people are coming under their occupation.



Patton is incensed. "You cannot lay down with a diseased jackal," he recently insisted to a group of journalists."Neither can we ever do business with the Russians."


When Undersecretary of War Robert Patterson visited the Third Army, Patton openly lobbied for at least 30 percent of all American troops to remain in w:st="on">Europe, "Keeping our forces intact. Let's keep our boots polished, bayonets sharpened, and present a picture of force and strength to these people.



This is the only language they understand and respect. If you fail to do this, then I would like to say to you that we have had a victory over the Germans but have lost the war."




Even Patton's nemesis, British field marshal Montgomery, agrees: when accepting the surrender of German soldiers, he ordered his troops to stack the Wehrmacht rifles in such a way that they could easily be redistributed should the Germans and British need to defend themselves against a Russian advance."




Yet the Harvard-educated undersecretary Patterson thinks Patton is delusional. He advises Eisenhower, army chief of staff Gen. George C. Marshall, and President Harry Truman toclass=apple-converted-space> continue to view the Russians benevolently.class=apple-converted-space>



In time, of course, Patton's predictions will come true, and the world will have to live with the consequences of American gullibility

"Killing Patton," O'Reilly and Dugard, p. 259-260


Of course, Marshall, Hopkins, et al openly wanted the Soviets to control Europe....and said so.

we americans tend to short term thinking. we were facing the nazis and we were happy to have the russians fighting them too.


but the cost, ,was very, very high. half of europe and a new war, starting immediately after.

Not to mention the resultant neo-Marxism that infects our society and major party.

See you've totally ignored my question on Holocaust denial? Fine.

Don't make sense a Zionist denying the Holocaust but I'll put you down as a first I've come across, but then to be fair, not a lot you do say makes much sense.

You can put down whatever you want to.....You've been exposed as a liar and a fool.

Get lost.

Ha ha ha and what are you?

You seriously expect anyone to seriously believe the Soviets killed all 20 million of their own practically their entire losses in WWll?

What were the Nazi's doing outside Leningrad, Moscow and in Stalingrad -how did they get there?
Were they just sat on their ass watching the Soviets?

You seriously need to leave the cursor and go get treatment for your serious mental health issues.

Zionist Holocaust deny'er - I've never heard the like!

 

[rightwinger]

So, FDR did not immediately jump to stalin's demands and throw American lives into a battle they were not prepared for, and you want to give him credit for that?

Umm...yea
He deserves credit.

Not only for building the Arsenal of Democracy, but for allowing an ally to do most of the fighting and dying for him.

there is a level of performance that is just "meets expectations".

not sending in American forces before they are ready, is that. no merits, no demerits. nothing to brag about.


that "ally" was in that situation, solely because of that "ally's" actions, ie, allying with fucking hitler and starting wwii.

Like it or not, FDR played his hand expertly.

He executed wars in two major theaters and met his objectives in both.

You and PC wanted Hitler to win

 

[Correll]

So, FDR did not immediately jump to stalin's demands and throw American lives into a battle they were not prepared for, and you want to give him credit for that?

Umm...yea
He deserves credit.

Not only for building the Arsenal of Democracy, but for allowing an ally to do most of the fighting and dying for him.

there is a level of performance that is just "meets expectations".

not sending in American forces before they are ready, is that. no merits, no demerits. nothing to brag about.


that "ally" was in that situation, solely because of that "ally's" actions, ie, allying with fucking hitler and starting wwii.

Like it or not, FDR played his hand expertly.

He executed wars in two major theaters and met his objectives in both.

You and PC wanted Hitler to win

if you really believed your claim, ie that fdr did "expertly", you would have presented historical examples of his "expert handling" to bolster your claim.


instead you make an absurd godwin.


right there, you implicitly admit that you can't back up your claim, with historical facts.


you lose.


my point stands. fdr, at best, for most of the war, get a "meets expectation" with demerits for yalta and his fourth term.

 

[rightwinger]

So, FDR did not immediately jump to stalin's demands and throw American lives into a battle they were not prepared for, and you want to give him credit for that?

Umm...yea
He deserves credit.

Not only for building the Arsenal of Democracy, but for allowing an ally to do most of the fighting and dying for him.

there is a level of performance that is just "meets expectations".

not sending in American forces before they are ready, is that. no merits, no demerits. nothing to brag about.


that "ally" was in that situation, solely because of that "ally's" actions, ie, allying with fucking hitler and starting wwii.

Like it or not, FDR played his hand expertly.

He executed wars in two major theaters and met his objectives in both.

You and PC wanted Hitler to win

if you really believed your claim, ie that fdr did "expertly", you would have presented historical examples of his "expert handling" to bolster your claim.


instead you make an absurd godwin.


right there, you implicitly admit that you can't back up your claim, with historical facts.


you lose.


my point stands. fdr, at best, for most of the war, get a "meets expectation" with demerits for yalta and his fourth term.

Already explained how he built the Arsenal of Democracy which included two types of Atomic Bombs and played Stalin to get him to do most of the fighting against Hitler

What would you have done differently?

What would you have gotten at Yalta

 

[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.

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

It appears you are not a product of any school system.

Is that why you get so disrespectful having to evade my questions?

I gave you ample opportunity to answer several questions I posed.

You declined and changed the subject each time.

Now I yearn for your picture on a milk carton.

Wtf is going on?!!

Where all this poison suddenly coming from?

Then we hear complaints about how "militant secularists" are soulless mean zombies.

Forgive me, I know you are a Jewish member and ask purely through curiosity not criticism.
There are several other Jewish members and I can't help notice that any debate centred around the Holocaust you never comment on?

Did you never notice for example that Sunni Man posts a Holocaust denial video with every post?
His mate 'Political chic' refuses to admit she is a denier though she claims to be a Zionist.
You waffle on about "militant secularists" and completely ignore what i would have thought would be a burning issue for you. I'm sick and tired challenging umpteen anti-Semitic and Holocaust denial posts without any support from Jewish members.

Is it possible to be both a Zionist and a holocaust denier?
Why do you refuse to defend yourselves?

 

[Correll]

So, FDR did not immediately jump to stalin's demands and throw American lives into a battle they were not prepared for, and you want to give him credit for that?

Umm...yea
He deserves credit.

Not only for building the Arsenal of Democracy, but for allowing an ally to do most of the fighting and dying for him.

there is a level of performance that is just "meets expectations".

not sending in American forces before they are ready, is that. no merits, no demerits. nothing to brag about.


that "ally" was in that situation, solely because of that "ally's" actions, ie, allying with fucking hitler and starting wwii.

Like it or not, FDR played his hand expertly.

He executed wars in two major theaters and met his objectives in both.

You and PC wanted Hitler to win

if you really believed your claim, ie that fdr did "expertly", you would have presented historical examples of his "expert handling" to bolster your claim.


instead you make an absurd godwin.


right there, you implicitly admit that you can't back up your claim, with historical facts.


you lose.


my point stands. fdr, at best, for most of the war, get a "meets expectation" with demerits for yalta and his fourth term.

Already explained how he built the Arsenal of Democracy which included two types of Atomic Bombs and played Stalin to get him to do most of the fighting against Hitler

What would you have done differently?

1. America was an industrial powerhouse well before fdr. that we could build a lot of shit, had nothing to do with him.

2. what would i have done differently? recognized that germany was not likely to win, against the usa, the uk and russia. declare them not allies but co-belligerent and made any lend lease aid, contingent on promises and concessions.

3. promises that would be expected to be kept or would be enforced.

4. and made that clear to the American people. that marxist soviet union was nearly as clear a threat as their former ally, nazi germany.

 

[westwall]

So, FDR did not immediately jump to stalin's demands and throw American lives into a battle they were not prepared for, and you want to give him credit for that?

Umm...yea
He deserves credit.

Not only for building the Arsenal of Democracy, but for allowing an ally to do most of the fighting and dying for him.

George C. Marshall built the Arsenal of Democracy in spite of fdr's efforts to prevent it.

 

[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 heroic.

 

[westwall]

So, FDR did not immediately jump to stalin's demands and throw American lives into a battle they were not prepared for, and you want to give him credit for that?

Umm...yea
He deserves credit.

Not only for building the Arsenal of Democracy, but for allowing an ally to do most of the fighting and dying for him.

there is a level of performance that is just "meets expectations".

not sending in American forces before they are ready, is that. no merits, no demerits. nothing to brag about.


that "ally" was in that situation, solely because of that "ally's" actions, ie, allying with fucking hitler and starting wwii.

Like it or not, FDR played his hand expertly.

He executed wars in two major theaters and met his objectives in both.

You and PC wanted Hitler to win

Fdr actively worked to keep our military weak, even when it became obvious that a new war was coming. Marshall is the reason why we were able to ramp up production so fast. He worked quietly behind the scenes to keep companies alive that he knew would benefit the US military in the coming war.

It was FDR's inaction that allowed so many of our soldiers to be killed in such a short time.