Russians: Reflection on Stalin Monuments and 20M Deaths

[Andromeda321]

Good God, can people really forget twenty million deaths so quickly? Russians, what's wrong with you?!?
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=574&e=2&u=/nm/russia_stalin_dc

 

[Locrian]

It's interesting, the more I study WW2 russian front, the more the entire affair seems like a giant game played between two uneducated children - except that every foolish or just plain stupid mistake one makes cost hundreds of thousands of lives. Stalin could have saved vast amounts of recources had he been even marginally sane, a little bit educated, or slightly trusting of the men under his command whose job it was to win wars. The same goes for Hitler.

I'm with you Andromeda. Why anyone would erect a monument to Stalin is beyond me.

 

[wasteofo2]

Haven't you guys heard about what Putin is doing lately? It's blatently Stalinistic; bassically controling the press, jailing dissidents and political opponents (I don't think he's had anyone murdered yet, but he pretty much controls the media as well, so who would even know?), deciding it was best that he appoint members of the legislature and local governors, having the state take over large parts of the oil industry and other industries.

It's funny that him erecting statues of his idol gets attention, but the fact that he's dissolving the free press, the free market, free elections and freedom of speech doesn't seem to bother too many people.

 

[tumor]

Haven't you guys heard about what Putin is doing lately? It's blatently Stalinistic; bassically controling the press, jailing dissidents and political opponents (I don't think he's had anyone murdered yet, but he pretty much controls the media as well,

Putin is doing what is right for Russia.Did you checked lately what is Bush doing in USA ? and abroad.

 

[tumor]

It's interesting, the more I study WW2 russian front, the more the entire affair seems like a giant game played between two uneducated children - except that every foolish or just plain stupid mistake one makes cost hundreds of thousands of lives. Stalin could have saved vast amounts of recources had he been even marginally sane, a little bit educated, or slightly trusting of the men under his command whose job it was to win wars. The same goes for Hitler.

I'm with you Andromeda. Why anyone would erect a monument to Stalin is beyond me.

Who else played this game of yours ? not Russia and Germany alone.
USA and UK due to stupidity of their leaders lost thousands of soldiers,not to mention killing hundreds of thousands civilians in bombing raids on Germany and nuking innocent Japanese.
You better study harder! and don't post this garbage of yours !

 

[wasteofo2]

Putin is doing what is right for Russia.Did you checked lately what is Bush doing in USA ? and abroad.

How do you call jailing political opponents and essentially crushing democracy and going back to Stalinist policies what's right for Russia? Do you think Stalin was right for Russia?

And yeah, I have checked lately what Bush is doing in the USA and abroad, he's doing lots of different things. Which of these things that he's doing are you referring to?

 

[Andromeda321]

tumor, please don't tell me you think that the acts of the Russians and Germans during the WWII were on par with those of the US/ allied forces. War is hell, both sides made mistakes, and no one will dispute it but there is an unquestionable difference between democracy and a dictator. Particularly when that dictator goes around killing his own people for his own satanic reasons!

 

[tumor]

tumor, please don't tell me you think that the acts of the Russians and Germans during the WWII were on par with those of the US/ allied forces. War is hell, both sides made mistakes, and no one will dispute it but there is an unquestionable difference between democracy and a dictator. Particularly when that dictator goes around killing his own people for his own satanic reasons!

How would you call droping two nuclear bombs on defensless cities,I call this war crime on par with crimes of Stalin and Hitler.
And by the way, US, British and French greedy politics after WW1 gave birth to nationalistic movement of Hitler in Germany.

 

[tumor]

How do you call jailing political opponents and essentially crushing democracy and going back to Stalinist policies what's right for Russia? Do you think Stalin was right for Russia?

And yeah, I have checked lately what Bush is doing in the USA and abroad, he's doing lots of different things. Which of these things that he's doing are you referring to?

You better watch your own backyard while Bush and Co is screwing America. Russia will be fine.

I'm referring to Bush attacking two nations who were no danger to the USA at all.Were you sleeping over last 2 years or what ?

 

[russ_watters]

How would you call droping two nuclear bombs on defensless cities,I call this war crime on par with crimes of Stalin and Hitler.

Do you really want to compare kill ratios? Hitler and Stalin each killed an order of magnitude more people than all the allies put together. Stalin killed something like 25 million of his own people for reasons of economics!

Simply put, those two are among the most evil and murderous men the world has ever seen. They are not comparable to Bush (didn't you already try that and fail...?).

And by the way, US, British and French greedy politics after WW1 gave birth to nationalistic movement of Hitler in Germany.

Thats an uttter perversion of history. Nationalism was the driving force in international politics for centuries before WWI and it should't be surprising (nor was it wrong) to want to punish Germany for starting WWI. What IS unique is the change made after WWII (first suggested by Wilson after WWI) which led to the downfall of nationalism. Nationalism pre-dated the US, but the US is responsible for its downfall.

 

[wasteofo2]

You better watch your own backyard while Bush and Co is screwing America. Russia will be fine.

Care to elaborate on why a developing Stalinistic dictatorship in Russia will lead to Russia being fine? Last time I checked it lead to mass murder, mass starvation, slave-labor camps, rampant poverty and a generally mismanaged mess of an empire.

And guess what: because I'm against Stalin, it does NOT mean I'm pro Bush. I'm very much opposed to George Bush's policies and decisions, including the decision to become so buddy-buddy with Russia and make no fuss about the fact that Putin will become the next Stalin if allowed to do so.

There are actually people in this world who are not Bush supporters, and at the same time, not Communists. Both Communists and Bush supporters seem to have trouble understanding this fact...

I'm referring to Bush attacking two nations who were no danger to the USA at all.Were you sleeping over last 2 years or what ?

George Bush has done a lot of things, I didn't want to jump to any conclusions about what you were referring to, since you only said "Did you checked lately what is Bush doing in USA ? and abroad."

George Bush sucks balls, and the fact that he isn't protesting Putin's actions, and infact is doing some of the same things, and is responsible for some of Putin's actions makes it even worse.

Fortunately, in America, we have a political system that wouldn't easily allow someone like Bush to act like Putin, I just hope George Bush doesn't go further to dismantle this system. It's funny how you're defending Putin and attacking Bush, when Bush is so fond of Putin and there are so many parallells to be drawn between the two men.

 

[tumor]

Why are you so concerned with Russia all of sudden ? maybe because you watched last night on TV propaganda program on Evil Putin ?
Why not start picking on China and its leaders who killed twice or 10 times more of its own citizens ? Oh yes, China is our friend right now, better not to jeopardize trade with Chinese on which USA so depends.

 

[wasteofo2]

Why are you so concerned with Russia all of sudden ? maybe because you watched last night on TV propaganda program on Evil Putin ?
Why not start picking on China and its leaders who killed twice or 10 times more of its own citizens ? Oh yes, China is our friend right now, better not to jeopardize trade with Chinese on which USA so depends.

No, I didn't watch a program on Russia last night, American television media rarely mentions anything about Russia, partially (I believe) because Bush is such great buddies with Putin that we need to keep Russia appearing not so bad, and the media is complicent with this notion. I'm so concerned about Russia because: A) Putin is turning into Stalin, and B) There's a goddamned thread about the Russian Government's (which essentially means Vladamir Putin's) pro-stalinism. I reiterate; why are you so Pro-Putin and seemingly Pro-Stalin?

I'm not a fan of the Chinese government, and if there were a thread about the chinese government, I'd voice my dissaproval as well. But how about this: next time someone starts a thread about how China, I'll chime in and talk about it with you, but for now, let's talk about Russia and why you're defnding Putin's consolidation of power into himself and crushing of democracy.

 

[Andromeda321]

Why are you so concerned with Russia all of sudden ?

What makes you think I suddenly care about Russia "all of a sudden?" Do you know me or have any indication as to what I follow in politics? No you don't.
Anyway, is it so very horrible that people start paying attention right now if this becomes a way for them to start paying attention to the world around them? Or is it better to just wallow in apathy because hey, everyone's guilty of killing people. It is not a good thing that China killed more people then Stalin but that does not make Stalin a good person: he still killed twenty million people. This is not a small amount to be glossed over like you seem to think it is, and merely pointing the finger at someone else does not make it go away.

 

[Smurf]

It's funny that him erecting statues of his idol gets attention, but the fact that he's dissolving the free press, the free market, free elections and freedom of speech doesn't seem to bother too many people.

Just like Bush then.

You better watch your own backyard while Bush and Co is screwing America. Russia will be fine.

I'm referring to Bush attacking two nations who were no danger to the USA at all.Were you sleeping over last 2 years or what ?

Tumor, is there any country you don't hate?

 

[fourier jr]

Do you really want to compare kill ratios? Hitler and Stalin each killed an order of magnitude more people than all the allies put together. Stalin killed something like 25 million of his own people for reasons of economics!

Simply put, those two are among the most evil and murderous men the world has ever seen. They are not comparable to Bush (didn't you already try that and fail...?).

the only independent asian justice at the tokyo trial, an indian, said that basically the only crimes in the pacific that compared to the crimes of the nazis were the dropping of the two atom bombs. that was radhabinod pal, who used the existing international law of the day, rather than make things up as he went along. (like the allies did) prime minister tojo asked during the trial why his crimes were any worse than bombing hiroshima & nagasaki, but the trial was stopped and his comment was sticken from the official record. that's not what i say, that's the new york times in 1999. you can find reams of documentation of other evil stuff the US has done, both at home and abroad. this includes stuff like testing chemical/biological weapons on its own people (& Canadians too), providing materials encouragement & manuals etc for torture, stealing the stasi's (east germany's intelligence agency) top-secret archives & not giving them back, etc etc. the US has done plenty of stuff that compares with the stuff the soviet union had done since WWII. if you sum up what the US has done since WWII it's pretty appalling. i haven't even mentioned vietnam...

Nationalism was the driving force in international politics for centuries before WWI and it should't be surprising (nor was it wrong) to want to punish Germany for starting WWI. What IS unique is the change made after WWII (first suggested by Wilson after WWI) which led to the downfall of nationalism. Nationalism pre-dated the US, but the US is responsible for its downfall.

cheney, wolfowitz, rumsfeld, libby, etc aren't nationalists? that's news to me


in fact,

To prevent alterations in the United States economy, the Council had, in the words of Winfield Reifler, "gone on to discover what 'elbow room' the American economy needed to survive without major readjustments." This living space had to have the basic raw materials needed for the nation's industry as well as the "fewest possible stresses making for its own disintegration, such as unwieldly export surpluses or severe shortages of consumer goods." The extensive studies and discussions of the Council groups determined that, as a minimum, most of the non-German world, the "Grand Area" was needed for "elbow room." In its final form it consisted of the western hemisphere, the United Kingdom, and remainder of the British Commonwealth & Empire, the Dutch East Indies, China and Japan itself.

-- Imperial Brain Trust, p. 136 quoting memorandum E-B34, July 24, 1941, Council on Foreign Relations War-Peace Studies

sounds like nazi talk to me...

 

[Smurf]

the US has done plenty of stuff that compares with the stuff the soviet union had done since WWII. if you sum up what the US has done since WWII it's pretty appalling. i haven't even mentioned vietnam...

In essence the cold war was almost a partnership between the two superpowers using the crimes of the other to frighten their own populations into obedience. The USSR died and the USA survived, which one won?

 

[PerennialII]

Quote:
Nationalism was the driving force in international politics for centuries before WWI and it should't be surprising (nor was it wrong) to want to punish Germany for starting WWI. What IS unique is the change made after WWII (first suggested by Wilson after WWI) which led to the downfall of nationalism. Nationalism pre-dated the US, but the US is responsible for its downfall.


cheney, wolfowitz, rumsfeld, libby, etc aren't nationalists? that's news to me

Nationalism dead ... only if it were so. Punishing a losing nation after it has lost a war is equivalent to seeding a long distrust and the next conflict (note the usage of the word NATION), in one way or another.

 

[Locrian]

Haven't you guys heard about what Putin is doing lately?

Yes, I commented on those things too a while back.

 

[Locrian]

Who else played this game of yours ? You better study harder! and don't post this garbage of yours !

Actually, US losses were small compared to german and russian losses. There were some tactical mistakes, but nothing on the order of Hitler's siege of stalingrad or Stalin's refusal to believe Hitler would invade.

You better study harder! and don't post this garbage of yours !

 

[russ_watters]

Nationalism dead ... only if it were so. Punishing a losing nation after it has lost a war is equivalent to seeding a long distrust and the next conflict (note the usage of the word NATION), in one way or another.

I'm not sure I understand what you are saying: You do know that punishing a losing nation is not the way its done anymore, right? I mean - why do you think we're still in Iraq and Afghanistan? What was the Marshall Plan all about?

Re: the atom bomb. Its not what people keep saying it is: it is little more than a really big bomb - and all sides dropped a lot of bombs and the two a-bombs were not uniquely destructive. Now, you may say that Japan killed very few American civilians. That's true, but why? The reason is they didn't have access to any American civilians to kill!. To see how Japan stacks up, you need to see what they did to China - Japan killed more Chinese in several incidents than were killed in the a-bomb blasts. Altogether, the Japanese killed upwards of 10 million civilians - ten times as many as they lost.

http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat1.htm

Also, though I'm sure this will start the debate again, the a-bombs did end the war - and in so doing, ended the deaths.

 

[selfAdjoint]

I'm not sure I understand what you are saying: You do know that punishing a losing nation is not the way its done anymore, right? I mean - why do you think we're still in Iraq and Afghanistan? What was the Marshall Plan all about?

Tell me again Russ, why ARE we in Iraq? And if you say it's to bring them democracy, when are we going to start? If you took a vote today, as indicated by the polls there, it would overwhelmingly be for us to leave.

 

[russ_watters]

Tell me again Russ, why ARE we in Iraq? And if you say it's to bring them democracy, when are we going to start?

I'm not even sure where to begin. SA, you do know they are having an election next week, right? You do know we are actively rebuilding the country, right? Start?? When did we stop?!?

You tell me, what do you think we are still doing there?

If you took a vote today, as indicated by the polls there, it would overwhelmingly be for us to leave.

A vote of who and what is your point? If you mean a vote of the Iraqis, I'm not sure you're right, but in any case, the Germans weren't really happy to have us there in 1946 either. But we did rebuild their country and we did set up a democratic government there, and it turned out quite well. We are trying to do the same thing in Iraq (whether we will succeed or not is another issue entirely).

 

[Locrian]

Now, you may say that Japan killed very few American civilians. That's true, but why? The reason is they didn't have access to any American civilians to kill!.

This is an important point. It should be noted that the jappanese did what they could to reach american civilians, even trying such strange contraptions as bombs tied to baloons. If memory serves me, they managed to hit a school somewhere rather deep into the west coast. This was significantly before the US reached the japanese mainland.

The way the Japanese treated pow's of all kinds is really worth doing plenty of reading on. Their actions at nanking as well.

(PS to Russ: Mostly because you mentioned it, the urge to get into the A-bomb vs Napalm won the war debate is almost overwhelming, but I'll control myself!)

 

[PerennialII]

Quote:
Originally Posted by PerennialII
Nationalism dead ... only if it were so. Punishing a losing nation after it has lost a war is equivalent to seeding a long distrust and the next conflict (note the usage of the word NATION), in one way or another.
I'm not sure I understand what you are saying: You do know that punishing a losing nation is not the way its done anymore, right? I mean - why do you think we're still in Iraq and Afghanistan? What was the Marshall Plan all about?

I'm all for saying that the aftermath of WW2 was handled properly as far as the western hemisphere is concerned, but I'm willing to draw an arrow from WW1 -> WW2 due to the punishment mentality that arose after WW1. And I do think that the rise of nationalism in Germany afterwards was promoted by the Versailles treaty, which was considered unjust (anyways, I'd interpret it such that Germany was isolated, which contributed to the build up for the rise of nationalism).

 

[selfAdjoint]

I'm not even sure where to begin. SA, you do know they are having an election next week, right? You do know we are actively rebuilding the country, right? Start?? When did we stop?!?

An election decreed by the US that is being boycotted by the Sunnis, and which the Kurds and Shiites expect will allow them to carve up the country. Real exporting of freedom, there!

You tell me, what do you think we are still doing there? A vote of who and what is your point? If you mean a vote of the Iraqis, I'm not sure you're right, but in any case, the Germans weren't really happy to have us there in 1946 either. But we did rebuild their country and we did set up a democratic government there, and it turned out quite well. We are trying to do the same thing in Iraq (whether we will succeed or not is another issue entirely).

Always the false comparisons to 1945 Germany. There wasn't a nationwide insurrection in Germany, only a handful of low intensity incidents. No parallel at all. The poll I meantioned was announced yesterday, look it up.

 

[kat]

A quick google news google doesn't show a recent Iraqi poll...can you provide a little more info..a link, something..please? (very interested in reading it)

 

[selfAdjoint]

A quick google news google doesn't show a recent Iraqi poll...can you provide a little more info..a link, something..please? (very interested in reading it)

I can't find it again either. I visit a number of sites every day, and I did see the poll described. But revisiting the archives of the most likely candidates turned up empty. Sorry.

 

[russ_watters]

An election decreed by the US that is being boycotted by the Sunnis, and which the Kurds and Shiites expect will allow them to carve up the country. Real exporting of freedom, there!

Make a point, SA, don't dance around it: you tell me what we are doing there if not trying to build a stable, prosperous nation. And I'm well aware that things aren't going well, but that's not the same as not trying.

Always the false comparisons to 1945 Germany. There wasn't a nationwide insurrection in Germany, only a handful of low intensity incidents. No parallel at all.

So you're saying our motives were different? Again, don't dance around it - you tell me - what was our motive then and what is it today?

 

[kat]

I can't find it again either. I visit a number of sites every day, and I did see the poll described. But revisiting the archives of the most likely candidates turned up empty. Sorry.

Thanks for the honest response and the attempt to find it. My interest in responding with the request for info to your comment:

And if you say it's to bring them democracy, when are we going to start? If you took a vote today, as indicated by the polls there, it would overwhelmingly be for us to leave.

Was not to make an "Ah HA!" moment but an interest to read the poll you were referring to because, as we all know, without viewing the actual questioneer and getting the real statistics as opposed to reading a reporters or bloggers or someone elses view of those statistics can be two very different sources of information. The polls I have read reference to, (and again..with no look at the actual polling questions and numbers..it's not worth a whole heck of a lot...) recently done..unlike Coles reference to a poll from a year ago..showed a majority of Iraqi's were strongly committed to voting, despite the violence and a majority wanting the american coalition to stay...for now.