I've read what you said, KrazyKraut, but have no time to answer to you, sorry. I'll do it later, ok?
Upvote
0
Russian Propaganda
- Thread starter DraKon2k
- Start date
KrazyKraut said:
Where do you take these figures from? 16 million Ukrainians and 4 million people of all the other nationalities of the Soviet Union? What about the people who died from hunger in Povolzhye region, weren't they mostly Russians? During Golodomor, wasn't the chief Comissar a Ukrainian himself?...
Upvote
0
Pff, the Finns were bound to lose in the end, you all know that. But Russian losses were enormous compared to the Finnish. It was an embarrassment to say the least. But still they won, yes. And forced a peace onto the Finns that crippled Finnish economy by taking away much of Finland's industrialized territory. But of course it was all just for safety reasons
Upvote
0
I'm just a little weary of all the people who (brainwashed by Cold War propaganda) are blaming 'Russians" for all the crimes against humanity commited from 1917 to 1991. It's racism. Call the guys in power at the time (wherever - Russia, Ukraine etc) Bolsheviks, Communists, Marxists, radical left or whatever but using the word "Russian" in this context is pure racism.
Upvote
0
I said during the famine 80 per cent of the victims were Ukrainians. To quote wikipedia:Droog said:
But I mostly got my information from a book called "Famine in Ukraine, 1932-1933" from Serbyn/Krawchenko. I did a work on that topic once. And what's the deal with the chief commissar being a Ukrainian? Germany's puppet states also had heads coming from the respective country. That doesn't change the fact that the famine was caused by the Russian collectivization. Also it should be noted that Stalin forbid the migration of Ukranians into other Soviet areas and on top of that EXPORTED approximately 3.5 million tons of grain during the period '32-'33.
Now where did I do that? Besides it's widely accepted that "the Germans" are responsible for the Thrid Reich. If that is the case, I could say "the Russians" are equally responsible for the crimes commited by the Stalinist regime. But I'm attacking Stalin and the Communist party, not the Russian people.Droog said:
Last edited:
Upvote
0
KrazyKraut said:
For the last time, not RUSSIAN, but BOLSHEVIK or COMMUNIST. It's not that well-fed Arian Russians attacked Ukraine, all this turmoil was the result of the "radical left" of many nationalities coming to power in many parts of what used to be the Russian Empire.
Upvote
0
KrazyKraut said:
Why not Lenin then? Let me assure you there were plenty more people butchered because Comissars' actions in 1917-1928 then in 1928-1953. Is it because they were mostly ethnic Russians so it's not touching your heart in any way?
Upvote
0
Because we were discussing Stalinist Russia as opposed to the contemporary Third Reich. Lenin was earlier. And I doubt more people died under Lenin than under Stalin. Sources please, I'd be interested. I can imagine many murders during the revolution, but i doubt they exceed the death toll of the purges, famines and gulags under Stalin. And why would I care for Ukrainians more than for Russians? Don't even try to push me into the racist corner.
Upvote
0
Droog said:wtf do you mean Russians f*cked up in Finnish War? Russians got almost all they wanted, correct? At much heavier price that they hoped for, but they did? Otherwise I wouldn't be fishing on the lakes of Karelian Isthmus....
Russians planned to take whole country. it failed.
Upvote
0
KrazyKraut said:
Hunger in Russian Povolzhye and in Ukraine in 1930-ies was the result of the same event , Communist Revolution that spead across the former Russian Empire, where Communists were people of many different nationalities. Just like the Civil War in early 1920-ies:
"Russian Civil War" from Wiki.
(They are not even talking about mass murders commited by political police that took place AFTER the Civil War, but BEFORE Stalin came to power)
"At the end of the Civil War, Soviet Russia was exhausted and near ruin. The droughts of 1920 and 1921 and the 1921 famine worsened the disaster. The war had taken an estimated 15 million lives, including at least one million soldiers of the Russian Red Army who died in battle. Fifty thousand Russian Communists were killed by the counter-revolutionary Whites. Millions more were also killed by widespread starvation, epidemics, wholesale massacres by both sides, and even pogroms against Jews in Ukraine and southern Russia"
Upvote
0
Wowow, first of all this was a civil war. Not that those deaths aren't tragic, but it's not comparable to systematic executions, murder through work in the gulags or man-made famine. Second, 15 million is still less than 20 million.
Third, don't act as if the famines in Ukrainia just happened out of nothing like an epidemia or as if it was caused solely by the Ukrainians that supported the collectivization. There was a strong nationalistic movement in Ukrainia, threatening the Soviet influence. Thus Stalin ordered elimination of the entire cultural elite, leaving Ukrainia with no other choice but to tie itself closer to Russia. The famine was artificially inducted and artificially impaired through the migration laws and grain export, ordered by politburo.
Third, don't act as if the famines in Ukrainia just happened out of nothing like an epidemia or as if it was caused solely by the Ukrainians that supported the collectivization. There was a strong nationalistic movement in Ukrainia, threatening the Soviet influence. Thus Stalin ordered elimination of the entire cultural elite, leaving Ukrainia with no other choice but to tie itself closer to Russia. The famine was artificially inducted and artificially impaired through the migration laws and grain export, ordered by politburo.
Upvote
0
KrazyKraut said:
Quite the opposite, systematic executions out of courtwere a commonplace in the 1920-ies (even after the Civil War), and under Stalin's rule the practice of eliminating of political opponents at least received some fig leaf of judicial proceedings. I'm not even talking about hostage-taking and mass murders by the Che-Ka that were widespread.
Second, I repeat, it's the multinational Communist government of Ukraine (supported of course by fellow Bolsheviks in Moscow)who is to blame for the famine. Comissars in Ukraine were prosecuting Ukrainian farmers. Comissars in Russia were prosecuting Russian farmers.
Civil War or not, all these murders by commissars, gulags, famine (everywhere - in Russia, Ukraine were commited in the name of political ideas, not nationalist.
Upvote
0
The orders for the collectivizations were issued either directly from the politburo in Moscow or at least according to guidelines given out by the politburo. Same goes for the executions of clergy, intellectuals etc. The migration-prohibit came DIRECTLY from Stalin. The roots are in Russia, whether you like that or not. Don't eve act as if Ukraine was in any way a souvereign country. The, as you call, it "multinational government of Ukraine" was nothing but the prolonged arm of the Soviet CPSU directed by Moscow. It's like saying the Nazis in Germany weren't responsible for what happened in Vichy-France.Droog said:
Upvote
0
[5.SS]Strother said:Can we get back on topic and post some funny propaganda pictures
This has gone to history talk (but), which is more intresting than funny pics
Upvote
0
Maybe they don't teach us well in our school, I don't know, but did French government shot all officers? Or maybe Churchill ordered to imprison his generals before Dunkirk? France lost all its territory in five months, if I remember correctly, with all those officers. Why? Because they used ww1 tactic, because it had bad weapons (especially tanks and planes). The same goes to Soviet union. Repressed officers are only one of the reasons of Red Army's defeats in 41. In fact, I can just imagine, how would things appear if we did not have Stalin at that time (see: every country of the Western Europe during 1939-1945). Stalin got the country with few tractors, weak army and destroyed industry after Civil war and left it with the strongest army in the world, A-bombs and he took SU directly to the border of conquering the space. In my opinion, that is a quite an advance. The repressions were a must (and then again, you can call me red barbarian), because people believed in communism's bright future, but there were whites left and other anti-communists. So they were repressed, just like any opposition of any government of any country in the Europe of that time. It's not good, but it happened. It happened also in other countries, let's say, Poland, but no one, and I mean - no one, says nothing about it, they only blame SU in the crimes against humanity.
The biggest Stalin's achievement is that he managed to take all the power in his hands, because that what country really needed at that bloody time. I often hear bad opinions about penal battalions, about "No retreat" order. France had none of them and in the end they were under Germany. Those things were necessary and period. And oh, stopping the biggest advance of the strongest army in the history with literally nothing (we had no planes, no tanks, no radios, nothing after 22nd of June) - I can't say that we f*cked up this time.
I wonder, do you know that Stalin was Georgian?..
During the starvation, not only Ukrainians died, people all around the Union were suffering as well: in Kazachstan, in Povolzhye region etc. Russians died, Ukrainians died, Armenians died - all of us suffered.
The aim of soviets was to make all people equal and they managed to achieve a little piece of it in 60-70s. Whereas Reich aim was to make Arians rulers of the, at least, Europe and to annihilate the bigger part of us, untermenschen, and to make slaves of those who would survive. And if your country would win, I bet I wouldn't exist at all. The fascist's politic took your country almost directly to the edge of extinction, and Stalin's politic took us directly to the 9th of May. If Stalin was a cruel monster, as you say, why did he order to help your nation with food and rebuilding destroyed houses, when we took Berlin?
2Droog. Respect, mate.
Upvote
0
I love Soviet propaganda art. I like the style of the posters, but I also really like the general imagery. I'm just a big Russophile, really. ^_^
This is on my bedroom wall:
This is on my bedroom wall:
Upvote
0
What does France have to do with this? Oh right, nothing.Bolt said:
French tanks were superior to German PzKpfwI through III. The dominant was PzII, inferior to the French tanks. French airforce had some pretty good planes too. It was the strategy that killed them.
So the logic is instead of developing new tactics and teaching them to your officers you kill all of them? And don't even act as if Stalin killed them because of their outdated tactics. He killed them to get rid of possible oppostion and to replace them with yesmen. Not to even mention they were the ones to blame for the blamage in the winter war because they used outdated tactics.
This sickens me the most. It's the same logic Neonazis have: "We were strong again, those few million dead were a necessity" Tough words for someone who never lived under oppression.
Repressed is a very mild word for something I would rather call murder. And please tell me how opposition in "any Western country" at that time was oppressed. How were the oppositions in Great Britain, the USA, France, Holland, Denmark etc oppressed in the 1930-50s?
If you read what I posted above you see that they indeed all suffered, but not all to the same extent.
No time now, I'll comment the rest later.
Upvote
0
Wow, now why you don't read what I've written?
I said about France as an example - they did not kill their high staff, but lost and lost very fast. So don't say that if Stalin didn't oppress (spelling is right?) his high staff, 41 would never happen.
Again, I want to emphasize: yes, Red Army lost a lot of good soldiers during the oppression time, and that's the worst part of SU history in my opinion, but it's NOT THE ONLY reason why we had heavy losses during first months of war.
You tell me that if not oppression, we could easily fight back germans right at 41.
I said about France as an example - they did not kill their high staff, but lost and lost very fast. So don't say that if Stalin didn't oppress (spelling is right?) his high staff, 41 would never happen.
Well, I said that they lost because they used ww1 fighting tactic, didn't I?
Again, I want to emphasize: yes, Red Army lost a lot of good soldiers during the oppression time, and that's the worst part of SU history in my opinion, but it's NOT THE ONLY reason why we had heavy losses during first months of war.
Please read above. I did not say they were shot/imprisoned because of the old tactics. They were shot because Stalin was paranoiac. But things were so bad for us in the 41 because Red Army also used (just like France) outdated tactics.
How about Italy, Spain, Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Greece, Yugolsavia and Albania? There were no oppressions in those countries, right? And I don't know the correct term in English, but I think it's called "Witch hunting" - what happened in USA after the war.
Upvote
0