NationStates Jolt Archive

I played a bit of Call of Duty 2 the other day, and it reminded me that during World War 2, Red Army soldiers were routinely expected to perform feats that would rate a Medal of Honor from an equivalent American soldier. Given that we've honoured "the unknown soldiers" of Belgium, France, Great Britain, and Rumania with Medals of Honor, do you think it would be appropriate to bestow a Medal of Honor with Oak Leaf Cluster to the Unknown Soldier from the Soviet Union?

Sorry, no poll. Internet is fucked, but I'm not gonna clutter up the page.

I played a bit of Call of Duty 2 the other day, and it reminded me that during World War 2, Red Army soldiers were routinely expected to perform feats that would rate a Medal of Honor from an equivalent American soldier. Given that we've honoured "the unknown soldiers" of Belgium, France, Great Britain, and Rumania with Medals of Honor, do you think it would be appropriate to bestow a Medal of Honor with Oak Leaf Cluster to the Unknown Soldier from the Soviet Union?

Sorry, no poll. Internet is fucked, but I'm not gonna clutter up the page.

Yes.

do you think it would be appropriate to bestow a Medal of Honor with Oak Leaf Cluster to the Unknown Soldier from the Soviet Union?

Absolutely.

You don't already?

I'm totally for this.

NO. Because I like to be the voice of dissent.

It seems difficult for me to say the Unknown Soldier from the Soviet Union should receive two Medals of Honor, because I don't think that Congress (I assume the award of the medal would be by special legislation) would be very eager to bestow an honor upon our decades-long enemies that only 19 Americans have ever earned. On the other hand, Belgian, French, British, and Rumanian soldiers hardly faced the same tyranny, horror, and hardship the Red Army did during World War 2.

But if so many of us seem to support this honor for them, why don't we all (Americans, anyway) write to our representatives and senators and ask them to support or sponsor a bill to get this done?

NO. Because I like to be the voice of dissent.

Playing Devil's Advocate for the sake of discussion, ay?

Playing Devil's Advocate for the sake of discussion, ay?
Playing Devil's Advocate usually requires presenting an argument :P

Playing Devil's Advocate usually requires presenting an argument :P

Good point.:p

If a bunch of American leftists on NationStates want this to happen it doesnt mean that the majority of America wants it to happen. Nation States has about 1million accounts(and alot of those accounts are double nations made by the same player) and out of those 1 million only a percentage is American. And besides we shouldnt honor any soviet soldier...a red army soldier was even worse than his German counterpart both morally and numericlly speaking(they commited more war crimes)

Also if the Soviet Union never existed in the first place then the nazis wouldve never came to power(remember because the Germans feared the red beast they choose to support Hitler) so screw those bolshevists. Nazis and Commies are different sides of the same coin.

Playing Devil's Advocate for the sake of discussion, ay?
It's what I do...

Playing Devil's Advocate usually requires presenting an argument :P
How I fear the logic of a man who misstypes the :p emoticon...

Arguement: The Medal of Honour is evil and anywho who's ever received one should be shot, even if they're already dead...

Only if the American Tomb of the unknown gets the Hero Of the Soviet Union.

Or the modern Russian equivalent.

Only if the American Tomb of the unknown gets the Hero Of the Soviet Union.

Or the modern Russian equivalent.
That's not a bad idea. Great photo op and what not.... wait, I'm DAing this... uh, no because communists are like Jews and everyone hates Jews...

Arguement: The Medal of Honour is evil and anywho who's ever received one should be shot, even if they're already dead...
What kind of evil? The One Ring sort of evil where it makes people lose all their hair and behave like jerks a lot, the Samara style evil where everyone who gets the medal dies within 7 days, the Cursed Wall-Clock style evil where people who get it are immediatly infected with a rash and a desire to consume human flesh, or the "W4R SUXX0RZ" evil where hippies get real upset at anyone venturing beyond their limited and incredibly silly naive universe?

If a bunch of American leftists on NationStates want this to happen it doesnt mean that the majority of America wants it to happen. Nation States has about 1million accounts(and alot of those accounts are double nations made by the same player) and out of those 1 million only a percentage is American. And besides we shouldnt honor any soviet soldier...a red army soldier was even worse than his German counterpart both morally and numericlly speaking(they commited more war crimes)

Also if the Soviet Union never existed in the first place then the nazis wouldve never came to power(remember because the Germans feared the red beast they choose to support Hitler) so screw those bolshevists. Nazis and Commies are different sides of the same coin.
I'm hardly a leftist, and I think honoring the Soviet unknown would be great :P

As for the morality of Soviet soldiers, they may have been majority Communist, but they were also conscripted, badly-equipped, ordered to perform unreasonably dangerous tasks, and threatened with summary execution if they disobeyed or retreated for any reason.

I haven't really heard of many war crimes committed by Soviet during World War 2, but I'm not incredulous. If you have any links to share, I'd appreciate it if you did

What kind of evil? The One Ring sort of evil where it makes people lose all their hair and behave like jerks a lot, the Samara style evil where everyone who gets the medal dies within 7 days, the Cursed Wall-Clock style evil where people who get it are immediatly infected with a rash and a desire to consume human flesh, or the "W4R SUXX0RZ" evil where hippies get real upset at anyone venturing beyond their limited and incredibly silly naive universe?
The kind of evil where someone has a doughnut, but when your try to get the doughnut, they hide it...

I'm hardly a leftist, and I think honoring the Soviet unknown would be great :P

As for the morality of Soviet soldiers, they may have been majority Communist, but they were also conscripted, badly-equipped, ordered to perform unreasonably dangerous tasks, and threatened with summary execution if they disobeyed or retreated for any reason.

I haven't really heard of many war crimes committed by Soviet during World War 2, but I'm not incredulous. If you have any links to share, I'd appreciate it if you did

The same could also be said of German soldiers of the time. They were asked to suffer many dangerous tasks, were usually outnumbered, and still kept fighting.

Now remember, I'm saying the German soldiers, not the SS, which is the the branch of the German Armed forces at that time which actually commited those crimes.

I haven't really heard of many war crimes committed by Soviet during World War 2, but I'm not incredulous. If you have any links to share, I'd appreciate it if you did
Oh, you shouldn't have asked...now he'll probably flood you. ;)
Rest assured that it happened, in Eastern Europe the Soviets were busy exterminating class enemies, and in Germany they were taking revenge.

The kind of evil where someone has a doughbut, but when your try to get the doughnut, they hide it...
*Shudders*
That's terrible. How could anyone be so cruel!? Being shot one time isn't enough for these medal people if they are capable of such animosity.
They must be shot twice!
In the groin!

[QUOTE=The South Islands]Only if the American Tomb of the unknown gets the Hero Of the Soviet Union.

This post originally asserted that the distinction of Hero of the Russian Federation includes the Order of Lenin, but this isn't true. So, this post is just a placeholder and a disclaimer :)

Do you really think any American would feel 'honored' to receive the Order of Lenin, which is included with the distinction of Hero of the Russian Federation? :P

I would.

I'd pin it to my man boobie.

Now remember, I'm saying the German soldiers, not the SS, which is the the branch of the German Armed forces at that time which actually commited those crimes.
I wish it were that easy, but the Wehrmacht was not free of blame either.

And also: The SS was not a part of the German Armed Forces, it was a seperate, Nazi-party organisation.

The same could also be said of German soldiers of the time. They were asked to suffer many dangerous tasks, were usually outnumbered, and still kept fighting.

Now remember, I'm saying the German soldiers, not the SS, which is the the branch of the German Armed forces at that time which actually commited those crimes.
But the German soldiers were consciously fighting to conquer Europe. Were the Soviet soldiers consciously fighting for anything but the defeat of their attacker?

I wish it were that easy, but the Wehrmacht was not free of blame either.

And also: The SS was not a part of the German Armed Forces, it was a seperate, Nazi-party organisation.


But it was employed as an armed force in an offensive context, thus part of the armed forces as a whole.


Of course, to negate any debats on nationality, I just think all soldiers who actually fought in a war should recieve such distinctions, espically the Unknown Soldier dedications.

But it was employed as an armed force in an offensive context, thus part of the armed forces as a whole.
Employed?

Well, they fought side by side, but the German Army and the SS were seperate organisations with seperate commands (usually), seperate ranking systems and seperate philosophies and goals.
The problem in the last few months was afterall that the army preserved much of its Prussian character and was thus more or less replaced with the Nazi "Fight until the End" SS.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wehrmacht
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS

I would.

I'd pin it to my man boobie.
You sure? Wikipedia says that the bribe required to receive this distinction (Hero of the United Federation of Planets) is only around $15,000 american. :/

And it turns out the Order of Lenin is obsolete. My bad.

You sure? Wikipedia says that the bribe required to receive this distinction is only around $15,000 american. :/

And it turns out the Order of Lenin is obsolete. My bad.

Why not?

I was probably a war hero in my previous lives.

If a bunch of American leftists on NationStates want this to happen it doesnt mean that the majority of America wants it to happen. Nation States has about 1million accounts(and alot of those accounts are double nations made by the same player) and out of those 1 million only a percentage is American. And besides we shouldnt honor any soviet soldier...a red army soldier was even worse than his German counterpart both morally and numericlly speaking(they commited more war crimes)

Also if the Soviet Union never existed in the first place then the nazis wouldve never came to power(remember because the Germans feared the red beast they choose to support Hitler) so screw those bolshevists. Nazis and Commies are different sides of the same coin.

First off, your point on Nationstates being worthless is moot. The question was "Should they", it's an open ended opinion question. Also, your generalization on "leftist" shows exactly how biased you are, and thus any point you make loses worth.

Remember, if it weren't for the Russians, Germany would have crushed both the Brits and America, all while barely breaking a sweat.

Secondly, you must seperate the Soldier from the General, so to speak. War crimes were committed by the Russians, yes. However the average soldier was not "amoral" in the least bit, and merely followed orders(sound familiar?). They were conscripts and "common" men. To categorize them as being immoral is to grossly generalize them, and shows a great bigotry. Certain soldiers were, but so were Americans. Of course, we can't hold ourselves to the standards of others, since we are so much better than everyone else. Of course.

Second, if you're going to pull the "Boulsheviks caused Hitler's election", I could very well pull a "France/Britain caused Hitler's election", or hell one could even blame the Jewish community using such asanine reasoning. Hitler would have been elected for one reason only-He was the ultimate politician. He told the majority of the people exactly what they wanted to hear when they needed to hear it. Also, I suppose it would be surprising if most of the Germans were not infact "Nazis" in the sense that we portray them. Most of them didn't even agree with much of what was being done to the Jews, and many had no problem with them.

Should the Russian soldiers be honoured? Yes. Many of them fought in conditions which are almost unbelievable by most Americans, giving thier lives to protect their homes. They fought just as hard with just as much valor and honour as the greatest of America. They should be honored. Medals of Honor, on the other hand, I personally believe should be given to the country of origin, I.E. America gives Medals to Americans, Britain to British, etc, etc.

Your bias is transparent.

Employed?


Employed, used, deployed. However you wish to say it, they were used as an armed force in the same context of the army so I group them as a member of the German Armed Forces out of simplicity. I then continue on to talking about the German Army in it's individual right.

Anyways, I would've thought the Soviets had enough Medals already...
http://www.videocosmos.com/first_cosmonauts/pictures/1-0285.jpg

Je-sus!

He's got more bling than 50 Cent and Flava-Flav!!!

Anyways, I would've thought the Soviets had enough Medals already...
http://www.videocosmos.com/first_cosmonauts/pictures/1-0285.jpg
holy shit i didn't know they had photos of the unknown soldier

holy shit i didn't know they had photos of the unknown soldier
Sort of kills some of the mystery of it, doesn't it? Its like discovering that the people who made stone-henge signed their initials at the bottom.

holy shit i didn't know they had photos of the unknown soldier
:p

Pretty much every veteran of the "Great Patriotic War" looks like that, because in an effort to make people happy, the Communist Party was always quick to hand out all sorts of medals. I have one authentic "celebrating the 25th anniversary of the defeat of the fascist beast"-medal, and another "20th anniversary of the German Democratic Republic".
Plus they got orders for every offensive, every battle they fought in.

There were two orders of the SS. The Waffen and the Gestapo. The Waffen were considered to be an Armed Forces similar to our Marines (though not as prestigious in history), an elite force of men that performed certain military operations. The Gestapo were the police force that was distinctly separate and largely responsible for many of the war crimes we know of today. Mind, also, that the Gestapo leader was Himmler, the most derranged man ever.

Next, concentration camps (which we view as completely immoral now) were run by both the regular army and the Waffen SS. Thus, it is fair to acertain that both were men "just following orders". Though their "orders" included the tossing of babies in the air and machine gunning them down, framing random Jews as people trying to escape solely to execute them, and looting even the gold teeth out of every Jew's head upon going into a concentration camp.

If we are to compare Stalin's police forces during WWII, we will see something far worse than anything Hitler produced with the Gestapo. Murdering of the masses that went largely unnoticed due to the war was common. Furthermore, while many of the troops were those faceless men who were sent forward and to retreat was to be shot, their counter-parts who were shooting them in the backs were also the same faceless men. How are those tactics honourable? They are not. I see no reason to award a soldier of the Red Army our Medal of Honour, nor the Oak Leaves. It's incredulous. No non-American should receive the Medal of Honour. Hell, only one American that wasn't in the armed forces has received one... I don't see why the Russians should be so special.

Why not?

I was probably a war hero in my previous lives.

Believe it or not, I was a T-34 crewman in the great war, one of my best friends in this life was in the same tank as me too, and one of my less-good friends was in the soviet higher ranks. I somehow wounded up in a german PoW camp, but was eventually liberated/escaped/etc, not sure. I lived through the 50's, but I'm not sure just when I died. I lived another live in africa in the 70's as a revolutionary, so I probably died in the late 50's or 60's.

That is, if you believe in past lives. I don't, but thats what I found out when I did this regression-stuff. It was freaky.

:p

Pretty much every veteran of the "Great Patriotic War" looks like that, because in an effort to make people happy, the Communist Party was always quick to hand out all sorts of medals. I have one authentic "celebrating the 25th anniversary of the defeat of the fascist beast"-medal, and another "20th anniversary of the German Democratic Republic".
Plus they got orders for every offensive, every battle they fought in.

Hehe...I'm reminded of a character I created for a contemporary RP
Retired Egyptian Air Force, with 5 decorations. Heavy for a Captain in peacetime, I think, but still not ludicrous :P

The Military Medal of Courage (I forget which class)
The Medal of War Wounded
The Medal of Training (forget the class)
The Medal of Exceptional Promotion
The Air Force Shooting Medal

No non-American should receive the Medal of Honour. Hell, only one American that wasn't in the armed forces has received one... I don't see why the Russians should be so special.
We've already given Medals of Honor to the unknowns of four countries, and 5 other foreign nationals. I think the country that won World War 2 deserves a shout-out :P

Heresy, I say. All in public interest. A waste of good medals.

There were two orders of the SS. The Waffen and the Gestapo. The Waffen were considered to be an Armed Forces similar to our Marines (though not as prestigious in history), an elite force of men that performed certain military operations.
German in the house..."The Waffen did something" does not make sense gramatically.
And there were many more sections of the SS than just two.

The Gestapo were the police force that was distinctly separate and largely responsible for many of the war crimes we know of today. Mind, also, that the Gestapo leader was Himmler, the most derranged man ever.
Himmler was head of the entire SS, not only the Gestapo.
SS means Schutzstaffel, and started up as a paramilitary organisation that was directly under the command of the NSDAP rather than the country, as were the Armed Forces. It started up alongside the SA as a domestic fighting force to basically get rid of Communists, Democrats and all the rest of it.
The Gestapo means "Geheime Staatspolizei" (Secret State Police) and was affiliated with the SS.

The war crimes were not committed by the Gestapo as such, as it was not the job of the Gestapo to walk around the front lines.
There was for example the Commissar-Order, which said that every political commissar of the Soviets was to be executed on sight - a war crime. Some generals refused to act on it, most didn't, both Wehrmacht and SS.

The Waffen-SS was the idea of getting rid of the army's Prussian heritage, and instead shape a new fighting force more in line with Nazi Political and Racial Ideology.
While they did serve as elite troops, and many units honourably, they were often ruthless in victory, and things such as the Malmedy Massacre were committed by normal Waffen-SS units.

And you can never forget the Totenkopf-SS units, which ran the camps and was otherwise busying itself with ethnic cleansing and the like. To my knowledge no concentration- or extermination camp was ever run by the Wehrmacht, although some PoW-Camps were, and on the eastern front that meant mass starvation (another war crime).

Well, they did fight the Nazis, die by the millions, only to be rewarded by returning home to a totalitarian police state. I mean, can you imagine any American doing that?

if nazi soldiers get one then sure otherwise no

I haven't really heard of many war crimes committed by Soviet during World War 2, but I'm not incredulous. If you have any links to share, I'd appreciate it if you did

Did the estimated 2,000,000 officially sanctioned rapes carried out by the Red Army as they invaded Germany escape your notice?

If you're talking about WW1, then absolutely. The Germans in WW1 faced nearly the same situation the Russians did in WW2, and they did not even know why they were fighting.

If you're talking about WW2, then no way. The German soldiers went into the war with an evil goal, whether they realized it or not. To award the Medal of Honor to soldiers who fought for an evil cause just doesn't sit well with me.

If you're talking about WW1, then absolutely. The Germans in WW1 faced nearly the same situation the Russians did in WW2, and they did not even know why they were fighting.

If you're talking about WW2, then no way. The German soldiers went into the war with an evil goal, whether they realized it or not. To award the Medal of Honor to soldiers who fought for an evil cause just doesn't sit well with me.

so because the germans were just doing their job you think their unworthy of any recognition, that their sacrifice doesnt deserve recognition
but the rape+ pillaging of Berlin does

also do you even know what the Red Army's goal was

yes absolutly.

also who gave them to the soldiers of roumania they were on the side of the nazis during world war two

Yes, I'm sure giving the Medal of Honor to our enemies during WWII will go over really well.

:rolleyes:

Did the estimated 2,000,000 officially sanctioned rapes carried out by the Red Army as they invaded Germany escape your notice?
Yes


so because the germans were just doing their job you think their unworthy of any recognition, that their sacrifice doesnt deserve recognition
No...it's because I'm not interested in bestowing my country's highest honor on people who volunteered to try and conquer a continent.

but the rape+ pillaging of Berlin does
I'm not saying we should recognize the Red Army soldiers because of war crimes. And it's not as though the Wehrmacht didn't commit an assload of its own...

also do you even know what the Red Army's goal was
I'd have to say it was to punish the Germans for backstabbing them, take Eastern Europe for the Union, and grab the rights to occupation zones. Am i rite?

Yes



No...it's because I'm not interested in bestowing my country's highest honor on people who volunteered to try and conquer a continent.


It's not as though the Wehrmacht didn't commit an assload of war crimes...


I'd have to say it was to punish the Germans for backstabbing them, take Eastern Europe for the Union, and grab the rights to occupation zones. Am i rite?


blindingly obvious that you havent picked up a single German history

hows your last point any different from waht the Germans went to war for

blindingly obvious that you havent picked up a single German history

hows your last point any different from waht the Germans went to war for
If you want to treat me with respect, I'll talk about it. But if you want to act as though I'm obligated to support Medals of Honor for German soldiers in this thread, you'll be talking to yourself. This thread is about Soviets.

If you want to treat me with respect, I'll talk about it. But if you want to act as though I'm obligated to support Medals of Honor for German soldiers in this thread, you'll be talking to yourself. This thread is about Soviets.


ok please tell me why the Soviet idea of seizing the land in Eastern Europe is any different to the exspansionist war launched by the Wehrmacht

The main difference is that the germans were on the other side from us and they lost.

also I support giving the russians a medel and not the germans mainly due to the fact as a disabled socialist whos ethnically jewish i'd probably have been killed a bit like a lot of my family were (the only way I could have made it worse would have to been gay and a gypsy as well)

Also if the Soviet Union never existed in the first place then the nazis wouldve never came to power(remember because the Germans feared the red beast they choose to support Hitler) so screw those bolshevists. Nazis and Commies are different sides of the same coin.

A vast and easily discredited over-simplification. Hitler owed his support more to the economic troubles of the great depression as well as the nationalist outrage towards the Treaty of Versailles of 1919(which happened before the Soviet Union was born in 1921).

Now, I am not saying that anti-Communism was not a factor but it was not a significant one by comparison to other sentiments.

But I digress....

The Red Army should be honoured for its role in bringing down Nazism in the Second World War and to show respect in such a way is not the same as applauding the subsequent use of the Red Army in the formation of the Iron Curtain.

The main difference is that the germans were on the other side from us and they lost.

also I support giving the russians a medel and not the germans mainly due to the fact as a disabled socialist whos ethnically jewish i'd probably have been killed a bit like a lot of my family were (the only way I could have made it worse would have to been gay and a gypsy as well)


late 18th and early 19th century massive Jewish pogroms millions died(many more than at nazi hands)and germany absorbed the second largest amount of Jewish refugees but of course the russians are the jews best pals

ok please tell me why the Soviet idea of seizing the land in Eastern Europe is any different to the exspansionist war launched by the Wehrmacht

The Soviet Union was attacked by Germany, thereby pulling into a war that Stalin did not want to really get into. The Russians didn't go to war for expansionist reasons, they went to war for defensive reasons. Expansionism came after they enterred the war.

ok please tell me why the Soviet idea of seizing the land in Eastern Europe is any different to the exspansionist war launched by the Wehrmacht
Thank you. Now I'll tell you exactly what makes the Soviet seizure of Eastern Europe morally acceptable and Germany's expansionist crusade repugnant: Nothing. Both were evil plans, but the Soviets were able to do their fighting under the legitimate umbrella of bringing Nazi Germany to its knees. Thus, no soldier was told that they were conquering Eastern Europe -- they were told they were defending their motherland from German invaders. And in doing so, the individual soldiers distinguished themselves by incredible bravery. The German soldiers knew what was going to happen when they achieved victory.

Basically, I'm not judging the actions of the government, but of the soldier, given the circumstances of his service and the knowledge he had while carrying it out.

The Soviet Union was attacked by Germany, thereby pulling into a war that Stalin did not want to really get into. The Russians didn't go to war for expansionist reasons, they went to war for defensive reasons. Expansionism came after they enterred the war.


Russia invaded the eastern part of poland after Germany conquered it, they were already involved, they just changed sides when Germany invaded

Russia invaded the eastern part of poland after Germany conquered it, they were already involved, they just changed sides when Germany invaded

A, true, however, Germany had broken it's non-aggression pact(Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact to be exact) with Russia. It wasn't ever on Germany's side, it wasn't in the war at all. Also, the Eastern part of Poland was given, in a sort, to Russia to keep Russia out of the war.

Why doesnt anyone else see something wrong in honoring an army that brutally conquered and enslaved half of europe,raping millions of women to death,committing genocide towards several asiatic races located in the south portion of the soviet union simply because they were considered "disloyal" to the soviet ideal of socialism.

I mean ok they defeated the nazis. But does that excuse the crimes that they commited before,during, and after the war? A criminal can kill another criminal but that doesnt make that criminal any better of a person for doing so...

I would have to agree with Patton when he wanted to start a war against the soviet union shortly after the war with Germany was over...

Why doesnt anyone else see something wrong in honoring an army that brutally conquered and enslaved half of europe,raping millions of women to death,committing genocide towards several asiatic races located in the south portion of the soviet union simply because they were considered "disloyal" to the soviet ideal of socialism.

I mean ok they defeated the nazis. But does that excuse the crimes that they commited before,during, and after the war? A criminal can kill another criminal but that doesnt make that criminal any better of a person for doing so...

I would have to agree with Patton when he wanted to start a war against the soviet union shortly after the war with Germany was over...
That's why we'd recognize the Unknown Soldier, and not all of them :P

only 19 Americans have ever earned.


19? I am sure it is more than that.

And yes we should honour the dead of the army that did more to win WWII than any other nation's.

20 million men dead. That is the kind of sacrifice we should respect, and work that it doesnt happen again.

Don't the Germans call the monument the "monument to the unknown rapist"?

EDIT: What makes the war crimes of the Soviets, out of a desire for revenge and the fact that Russian society oppressed women hugely, any more acceptable than the German "we're following orders to commit mass executions" crimes?

19? I am sure it is more than that.
I mean Medal of Honor with Oak Leaf Clusters :P

EDIT: What makes the war crimes of the Soviets, out of a desire for revenge and the fact that Russian society oppressed women hugely, any more acceptable than the German "we're following orders to commit mass executions" crimes?
The war crimes are irrelevant. We're talking about the bravery of soldiers fighting to protect their homeland versus the bravery of soldiers fighting to conquer Europe.

No, I don't want to hear about what the Soviets were really trying to do, because that doesn't matter to a conscript.

No, I don't want to hear about what the Soviets were really trying to do, because that doesn't matter to a conscript. Neither do I want to know about what the Nazis were really trying to do, because that doesn't matter to a conscript.

See?

Neither do I want to know about what the Nazis were really trying to do, because that doesn't matter to a conscript.

See?
If you are so enamored with honoring the unknown Wehrmacht soldier, make a thread about it. This is about Soviets. OK?

I mean ok they defeated the nazis. But does that excuse the crimes that they commited before,during, and after the war? A criminal can kill another criminal but that doesnt make that criminal any better of a person for doing so...
Because if you honour the Americans and British (generally the 'Allies') you have to honour the other side too. They all committed war crimes (The firebombing of Dresden by the RAF, the firebombing of Tokyo and other Japanese cities spring to mind firstly)- the only reason you didn't see a Russian, American or British General in the dock at Nuremburg was that they won. Winners write the history books.


I would have to agree with Patton when he wanted to start a war against the soviet union shortly after the war with Germany was over...
Well, Patton was known for his 'blood and guts' all right... not his brains. ;)

Maybe this sounds inapprehensible, but the fact is: if Hitler wouldn't attacked soviets in 1941 06 21, the whole Europe would speak russian today.In 1941 Stalin's invasion had been prepared, but russians did mistake when they located several divisions close to Romanian oil facilities, which were vitally important for Germany. Hitler just had no other choice but to attack first.

By the way, don't ever you wonder why Wermacht invaded Soviet Union so easily? The anwer is clear: soviet forces were preared for attack, not for defence. And what is the purpose to have such army, that is well prepared for a wide scale attack?

Nazism and communism are equal evils and they both have to be reprehented. And the history of WW2 means that one big bastard killed smaller bastard.

So why should the big bastard be honoured?

By the way, don't ever you wonder why Wermacht invaded Soviet Union so easily? The anwer is clear: soviet forces were preared for attack, not for defence. And what is the purpose to have such army, that is well prepared for a wide scale attack?


Emmm not really. Stalin had purged 90% of the Navy and Airforce of Officers and competent stategists, and about 80% of the Army in 1938/39. The remaining leaders warned Stalin repeatedly of Hitlers massing troops and his intentions but Stalin didn't believe Hitler would break the Non- Aggression Pact.

All sides committed atrocites. US and British too. We don't honour them- we don't honour the Russians.

Maybe this sounds inapprehensible, but the fact is: if Hitler wouldn't attacked soviets in 1941 06 21, the whole Europe would speak russian today.In 1941 Stalin's invasion had been prepared, but russians did mistake when they located several divisions close to Romanian oil facilities, which were vitally important for Germany. Hitler just had no other choice but to attack first.

By the way, don't ever you wonder why Wermacht invaded Soviet Union so easily? The anwer is clear: soviet forces were preared for attack, not for defence. And what is the purpose to have such army, that is well prepared for a wide scale attack?

Nazism and communism are equal evils and they both have to be reprehented. And the history of WW2 means that one big bastard killed smaller bastard.

So why should the big bastard be honoured?
Complete and utter BS.

persoanlly I think that the awrd should be givemn to soildiers of all ranks, from all nations that froght. There where icnredable feats of bravery from all sides in the war, (Stalingrad for the Soviets for example) and ththat should be reconsied. All nations commited war crimes as well. However the fact that a soildiers nation wanted to take over the world dosn't change the fact that soildier was brave, does it?

Oh, and the USSR wasn't communist, it was Stalinist, there has never been a true Communist state in the wrold.

Emmm not really. Stalin had purged 90% of the Navy and Airforce of Officers and competent stategists, and about 80% of the Army in 1938/39. The remaining leaders warned Stalin repeatedly of Hitlers massing troops and his intentions but Stalin didn't believe Hitler would break the Non- Aggression Pact.

All sides committed atrocites. US and British too. We don't honour them- we don't honour the Russians.

The purge was necessary for Stalin to accomplish his further plans. Those officers, who were killed, participated in the establishmentof communism after WW1. And the whole nation execrated them for cruel killings and punishments. Stalin knew, that russians will not fight led by their worst enemies. After the purge, new respectable leaders were placed in army.

if the red army should be honored for winning the war hitler should be honored for making the trains run on time

The purge was necessary for Stalin to accomplish his further plans. Those officers, who were killed, participated in the establishmentof communism after WW1. And the whole nation execrated them for cruel killings and punishments. Stalin knew, that russians will not fight led by their worst enemies. After the purge, new respectable leaders were placed in army.

as it were the history channel says the purges were the nazis tricking stalin into killing off most of the senior and a good chunk of the junior officers in the red army

if the red army should be honored for winning the war hitler should be honored for making the trains run on time

Musolini did that even better:)

NO WAY!!!!!! The Red army was just as bad as the Nazi army. They raped, stole from, and slaughtered the german CIVILIANS. They were not our allies, but simply fighting for a mutual cause. You want to honor the Russians, honor the ones that had the courage to flee from that hell hole they called the USSR, not that ones that destroyed the lives of german civilians.

NO WAY!!!!!! The Red army was just as bad as the Nazi army. They raped, stole from, and slaughtered the german CIVILIANS. They were not our allies, but simply fighting for a mutual cause. You want to honor the Russians, honor the ones that had the courage to flee from that hell hole they called the USSR, not that ones that destroyed the lives of german civilians.

agreed

They raped, stole from, and slaughtered the german CIVILIANS.

not to mention their own durring peace time

agreed

Good to know.:p

not to mention their own durring peace time

Yup. The Russians were animals, animals simply defending their cave.

Its so pathetic to see Communist apologists. Its just as bad as seeing Nazi apologists. It pisses me off.

Complete and utter BS.

Oh, and the USSR wasn't communist, it was Stalinist, there has never been a true Communist state in the wrold.

A turd by any other name is still a turd.

By the way, don't ever you wonder why Wermacht invaded Soviet Union so easily? The anwer is clear: soviet forces were preared for attack, not for defence. And what is the purpose to have such army, that is well prepared for a wide scale attack?
[quote]

Actually, largely it was due to incompetence, land, poorly equipped infantry, and strategy all bundled into one. Stalin should have not trusted Hitler as much as he did, and the "rush" tactic used by the infantry on many occasions accounted for huge losses. Poorly equipped infantry vs. German armor is not a good fight.

Also, your assertion on the Red Army being more for offense than defense may be slightly true, it must be asserted at how quickly Russia was able to change tactics. See Kursk or Stalingrad. Both were turned into almost impenetrable fortresses in a matter of mere weeks. You made the same mistake Hitler did here: You underestimated the Soviet's defensive capabilities.

Anywho, back to the point. The second reason why Germany was able to push so quickly through Russia was landmass. Russia is massive. It's hard to protect such a large mass of land.

And finally, the largest reason why Germany pushed so quickly through Russia: The Russians allowed it. They used a "Scorched Earth" policy: Retreating and destroying all useable resources. They allowed the German army to march forth quickly, and stopped them at Stalingrad. They then only had to wait for winter to come, and starve out the Germans. Compounded on that the fact that the Germans were ill-equipped for the winter, and the Winter is what defeated them. The Russian were brilliant in this tactic.
[QUOTE]
Nazism and communism are equal evils and they both have to be reprehented. And the history of WW2 means that one big bastard killed smaller bastard.

So why should the big bastard be honoured?

Ah, so general are we? Do you even know what communism is, or is your only knowledge of it lying in the Soviet Union and how it is evil? Point of order-True Communism and Stalinism are two vastly different things, almost polar opposites. Come back when you read up.

Ah, so general are we? Do you even know what communism is, or is your only knowledge of it lying in the Soviet Union and how it is evil? Point of order-True Communism and Stalinism are two vastly different things, almost polar opposites. Come back when you read up.

Doesnt matter. The Soviet Union was the Russians adaption of Communism as was Nazism the Germans adaptation of Fascism. Both not acted out exactly as they were created, but both still acted out.

NO WAY!!!!!! The Red army was just as bad as the Nazi army. They raped, stole from, and slaughtered the german CIVILIANS. They were not our allies, but simply fighting for a mutual cause. You want to honor the Russians, honor the ones that had the courage to flee from that hell hole they called the USSR, not that ones that destroyed the lives of german civilians.

What of those who were taken from their homes to be conscripted into an Army half the country away, only to be forced into a suicidal charge against German MG's and armor, all while having your "comrades" standing behind you ready to open fire on you if ran the other way. Most of these men(and women) were not the evil beasts you speak of, but conscripts.

Also, what of those who fought because they thought they were protecting their country? The ones who knew they were practically committing suicide by joining the Russian lines, but they still fought because they loved their country? Are these people evil?

If those people are evil, then what, may I ask, is good?

Doesnt matter. The Soviet Union was the Russians adaption of Communism as was Nazism the Germans adaptation of Fascism. Both not acted out exactly as they were created, but both still acting them out.

Actually, quite wrong. The Soviet Union had started as a Russian adaption of Communism, however Stalin perverted this by jailing and executed the actual Communists, and used his power for his own gains, not to further Communism.

What of those who were taken from their homes to be conscripted into an Army half the country away, only to be forced into a suicidal charge against German MG's and armor, all while having your "comrades" standing behind you ready to open fire on you if ran the other way. Most of these men(and women) were not the evil beasts you speak of, but conscripts.

Also, what of those who fought because they thought they were protecting their country? The ones who knew they were practically committing suicide by joining the Russian lines, but they still fought because they loved their country? Are these people evil?

If those people are evil, then what, may I ask, is good?

These are simply people defending their homes....as were the poles, the norwegians, the czecks, the ukrainians...Do we give all these people medals?...

Actually, quite wrong. The Soviet Union had started as a Russian adaption of Communism, however Stalin perverted this by jailing and executed the actual Communists, and used his power for his own gains, not to further Communism.

Again, doesnt matter...They still practiced their form of Communism. Notice how, everyone was still "equal", people couldnt "progress", they did not beleive in capitalism.....it was simply a communst dictatorship.....It doesnt matter if it wasnt Communist as Marx wrote it....Nothing EVER is acted out EXACTLY as it is planned.

These are simply people defending their homes....as were the poles, the norwegians, the czecks, the ukrainians...Do we give all these people medals?...

Look back a page or two: I said we should not give them medals. Medals of Honor should be bestowed upon those who are from this country, as should other variants bestowed by their country of origin. It just a shallow photo op, much of the time, when such is done.

However, many should be honored, none the less, for doing what they did. By just saying "Screw all those Red bastards", you are bundling apples with shit. There are many who fought with just as much honor and valor as the greatest Americans, and to bundle them with the truly evil bastards is a great dishonor and disgrace.

Again, doesnt matter...They still practiced their form of Communism. Notice how, everyone was still "equal", people couldnt "progress", they did not beleive in capitalism.....it was simply a communst dictatorship.....It doesnt matter if it wasnt Communist as Marx wrote it....Nothing EVER is acted out EXACTLY as it is planned.

Ah, I can see what you are saying, however, can you see mine. When choosing a candidate for a best representation of Communism, you can do better than the Soviet Union(Which was also more or less Fascist). Now, I'm not saying that Communism is the greatest system known to man-it's impractical and impossible on a large scale, however it is hardly the "evil" entity many make it out to be.

And the point is, it's not taht the Soviet Union wasn't exactly Communist, it's that Stalin made it so it wasn't Communist at all. He only played around with the ideas of "equality" and such to keep the people appeased. In truth, they were merely words, and never actually acted upon. Stalin turned "Communist Russia", into "Despotic Russia".

Look back a page or two: I said we should hot give them medals. Medals of Honor should be bestowed upon those who are from this country, as should other variants bestowed by their country of origin. It just a shallow photo op, much of the time, when such is done.

Ah, for this I'm sorry. I didnt see your post earlier, and I assumed we were on opposite sides....alright then.

However, many should be honored, none the less, for doing what they did. By just saying "Screw all those Red bastards", you are bundling apples with shit. There are many who fought with just as much honor and valor as the greatest Americans, and to bundle them with the truly evil bastards is a great dishonor and disgrace.

True...but we will never know how many were honorable, as opposed to us knowing that the majority of the Red army was a bunch of bastards. And since we cant pick and choose, I would rather we catagorize all of them (since the majority was) as evil, instead of catagorizing all of them (as the minority was) as honorable. The ones that were honorable will know that they acted so, and so will God, and that is a greater gift than any medal will ever provide.

Doesnt matter. The Soviet Union was the Russians adaption of Communism as was Nazism the Germans adaptation of Fascism. Both not acted out exactly as they were created, but both still acted out.


a sweeping generalisation with some truth


4/10

Ah, for this I'm sorry. I didnt see your post earlier, and I assumed we were on opposite sides....alright then.


I'm a quirky bastard. I'm all over the place with my views. Hard to keep track of the myself sometimes.


True...but we will never know how many were honorable, as opposed to us knowing that the majority of the Red army was a bunch of bastards. And since we cant pick and choose, I would rather we catagorize all of them (since the majority was) as evil, instead of catagorizing all of them (as the minority was) as honorable. The ones that were honorable will know that they acted so, and so will God, and that is a greater gift than any medal will ever provide.

I choose a more general method-Signify the importance of the army, while giving honor to those who fought with honor, while shaming those who shamed. I don't generalize all the Red Army as heroes, nor would I generalize them all as bastards. I recognize that many need to be honored, and I honor those(in general terms) that should.

Ah, I can see what you are saying, however, can you see mine. When choosing a candidate for a best representation of Communism, you can do better than the Soviet Union(Which was also more or less Fascist). Now, I'm not saying that Communism is the greatest system known to man-it's impractical and impossible on a large scale, however it is hardly the "evil" entity many make it out to be.

Oh but I do beleive Communism is evil. It is a prison. A prison of the mind, the ability, and of progress. It restricts humans from competing, and progessing. It assumes that people are equal, and not individuals. It totally throws away the word "unique", and assumes we are all cattle. And that, my friend, to me, is evil.

And the point is, it's not taht the Soviet Union wasn't exactly Communist, it's that Stalin made it so it wasn't Communist at all. He only played around with the ideas of "equality" and such to keep the people appeased. In truth, they were merely words, and never actually acted upon. Stalin turned "Communist Russia", into "Despotic Russia".

But 99% of the people were equal. They were equally starving, equally poor, equally without say in the government, equally without power, equally without freedom.............

Oh but I do beleive Communism is evil. It is a prison. A prison of the mind, the ability, and of progress. It restricts humans from competing, and progessing. It assumes that people are equal, and not individuals. It totally throws away the word "unique", and assumes we are all cattle. And that, my friend, to me, is evil.




damn this forum and its lack of clapping smileys

a sweeping generalisation with some truth


4/10

Hey, peanut gallery....either add some back up to your $.02 or dont add any currency at all.

damn this forum and its lack of clapping smileys

Lol....I'm glad my words are appreaciated. It makes me happy, thanks man.:D

Hey, peanut gallery....either add some back up to your $.02 or dont add any currency at all.

Lol, I take that back since you liked my comment. You can add all the change you want. :D

Hey, peanut gallery....either add some back up to your $.02 or dont add any currency at all.


ok then

Nazism is neither a 'definitive' Totalatarian or Fascist regime, nor is it a German version of either. It is a strangely unique phenomen, different from any other regime at the time but yet not out of place in Europe.

it can be at best described as 'unique form of Fascism' but its structure limits the relevance of such a title.

hows that for ya ;)

[QUOTE=Eastern Baltia]

By the way, don't ever you wonder why Wermacht invaded Soviet Union so easily? The anwer is clear: soviet forces were preared for attack, not for defence. And what is the purpose to have such army, that is well prepared for a wide scale attack?
[quote]

Actually, largely it was due to incompetence, land, poorly equipped infantry, and strategy all bundled into one. Stalin should have not trusted Hitler as much as he did, and the "rush" tactic used by the infantry on many occasions accounted for huge losses. Poorly equipped infantry vs. German armor is not a good fight.

Also, your assertion on the Red Army being more for offense than defense may be slightly true, it must be asserted at how quickly Russia was able to change tactics. See Kursk or Stalingrad. Both were turned into almost impenetrable fortresses in a matter of mere weeks. You made the same mistake Hitler did here: You underestimated the Soviet's defensive capabilities.

Anywho, back to the point. The second reason why Germany was able to push so quickly through Russia was landmass. Russia is massive. It's hard to protect such a large mass of land.

And finally, the largest reason why Germany pushed so quickly through Russia: The Russians allowed it. They used a "Scorched Earth" policy: Retreating and destroying all useable resources. They allowed the German army to march forth quickly, and stopped them at Stalingrad. They then only had to wait for winter to come, and starve out the Germans. Compounded on that the fact that the Germans were ill-equipped for the winter, and the Winter is what defeated them. The Russian were brilliant in this tactic.


Ah, so general are we? Do you even know what communism is, or is your only knowledge of it lying in the Soviet Union and how it is evil? Point of order-True Communism and Stalinism are two vastly different things, almost polar opposites. Come back when you read up.


First of all, I live in a country which was one of the biggest victims of Soviet Empire, and which started to destroy it.. Be sure, I know my nation's history very well and I know the differences between Stalinism and communism. There are quite few of them.
Soviet Union had four periods of existing: 1924-1953 it was, as you call, Stalinism. 1953-1964 in this year Stalin's personality cult was denunciated. Liberal economical reforms had been introduced. 1964-1985 in this period Stalin's cult had been reanimated. 1985-1991 new wave and collapse.

Stalinism were just a form of totalitarism. Soviet Union was totalitarian police state until 1988. Stalinism was just more brutal communism, with concentration camps, massive killings etc. They had the same economical ways, foreign relations and so other. I say communists because, Stalin was dictator of communist state and he clamed many times, that the main goal of communist party is to expand social revolution throughout the world.

However you are rather right. Real communism, that had been shaped by Marks didn't really exist. Russians were "building" it in their own way. So that is "practical" communism, because history proved that theoretical communism can't be created.

ok then

Nazism is neither a 'definitive' Totalatarian or Fascist regime, nor is it a German version of either. It is a strangely unique phenomen, different from any other regime at the time but yet not out of place in Europe.

it can be at best described as 'unique form of Fascism' but its structure limits the relevance of such a title.

hows that for ya ;)

Perfect. Stalinism is a "unique form of Communism".

Perfect. Stalinism is a "unique form of Communism".

There is no branch of True Communism. Stalinism is simply a rip-off, which shouldn't be compared with Communism.

There is no branch of True Communism. Stalinism is simply a rip-off, which shouldn't be compared with Communism.

You can call it whatever you want. In my eyes, and in the eyes of the majority, it was a type of communism. Compare it to whatever you like.

If a bunch of American leftists on NationStates want this to happen it doesnt mean that the majority of America wants it to happen. Nation States has about 1million accounts(and alot of those accounts are double nations made by the same player) and out of those 1 million only a percentage is American. And besides we shouldnt honor any soviet soldier...a red army soldier was even worse than his German counterpart both morally and numericlly speaking(they commited more war crimes)
Well technically speaking pretty much every army in WWII committed war crimes. It's got nothing to do with being a leftist and everything to do with honouring their sacrifice.

You can call it whatever you want. In my eyes, and in the eyes of the majority, it was a type of communism. Compare it to whatever you like.
That's rubbish. If Stalin had called himself Libertarian, and then had his propaganda system tell everyone in the world that he was a Libertarian, would it no longer be a lie?

Well technically speaking pretty much every army in WWII committed war crimes. It's got nothing to do with being a leftist and everything to do with honouring their sacrifice. The crimes committed by the other allies and even the Italians pale into nothing in comparison with the near-genocide and torture perpetuated by the Red Army.

The crimes committed by the other allies and even the Italians pale into nothing in comparison with the near-genocide and torture perpetuated by the Red Army.
As do their sacrifices. This is not an endorsement of Red Army atrocities which I do know about, but I don't see why the good patriotic soldiers who were in the Red Army should not be remembered.

The crimes committed by the other allies and even the Italians pale into nothing in comparison with the near-genocide and torture perpetuated by the Red Army.

Near-genocide??? They had freaking concentration camps in freaking siberia man. They had authorized killings. Over 40 million SOVIET CITIZENS were killed. If thats not genocide, well than I dont know what is.

As do their sacrifices. This is not an endorsement of Red Army atrocities which I do know about, but I don't see why the good patriotic soldiers who were in the Red Army should not be remembered.

Because they are overshadowed by the majority of their comrades, when the Red Army was killing, raping, stealing from, and enslaving civilians.

If a bunch of American leftists on NationStates want this to happen it doesnt mean that the majority of America wants it to happen. Nation States has about 1million accounts(and alot of those accounts are double nations made by the same player) and out of those 1 million only a percentage is American. And besides we shouldnt honor any soviet soldier...a red army soldier was even worse than his German counterpart both morally and numericlly speaking(they commited more war crimes)

Also if the Soviet Union never existed in the first place then the nazis wouldve never came to power(remember because the Germans feared the red beast they choose to support Hitler) so screw those bolshevists. Nazis and Commies are different sides of the same coin.

Hmm. You can tell this ones Republican. The fact remains that if it WERENT for the Commies then Russia would've been weak and as such unable to defend against a German assault and as such Germany would have been able to concentrate on Britain and then Walk all over the US, and considering the americans did Nothing practically during the beginning of the war except make a profit by selling arms and food your about as morally correct as those germans too! :D Now. Two sides of the same coin. How dare you. This is a typical Neo-Republican Propaganda response, i feel sorry for you as you have fallen victim to it. Ofcourse the Reds Should be honoured... well. The soldiers anyway. The govermentals should be strung up by the pants and screamed at. Apart from Cheringyov. Good man. Proper communist. Although it should be pointed out that the Red army were nearly all Convicts forced onto front lines "If you die or get injured, we wont kill you" pretty much summed it up.

Well, my family was as affected by the Soviet Advance as any other I think, so maybe it's time for me to say something serious.

The leadership of the USSR was abominable. That does not mean that every Russian soldier supported it, or could be held accountable for it. I wouldn't want every German soldier being blamed for the atrocities of the Nazi regime either.

Raping, pillaging and massacres did happen. Is it excusable? No. Is it understandable? Perhaps. Consider that the Nazis afterall started it, and the Soviet soldier was not automatically a monster because he acted on the hatred that had collected over all these years.

Not that I could picture myself doing the things that some of them did to my Great Aunt, but I have never been in their situation.

So should we honour the unknown Soviet soldier? Well, probably. If you actually read the accounts, the front line troops actually passed through Germany not harming civilians, but instead focussed on winning a war.
Time and time again you'll read that it was the later forces, the occupiers that started with the raping.

But the unknown soldier is a concept that stands for the good in them. We're not remembering British troops shooting German prisoners, or Allied bombers slaughtering hundreds of thousands of civilians. If we're going to exclude the Russians for their atrocities, the Western World too has to face some uncomfortable memories.

That being said, giving medals is a silly thing to do...and giving them to what essentially amounts to a statue is even sillier.

I'm not suggesting giving the Medal of Honor to the Red Army or the Soviet Union. I'm suggesting it be awarded to the Unknown Soldier, whose actions we can never know. In his anonymity is all the valor of the Soviet conscript, because the point of an Unknown Soldier is to embody valor sacrifice, not war crimes. The Red Army conscripts suffered a hell of a lot of sacrifices, and very often lost their lives in heroic suicide missions. This is why I think Ivan rates the MOH :P

But the unknown soldier is a concept that stands for the good in them. We're not remembering British troops shooting German prisoners, or Allied bombers slaughtering hundreds of thousands of civilians. If we're going to exclude the Russians for their atrocities, the Western World too has to face some uncomfortable memories.

That being said, giving medals is a silly thing to do...and giving them to what essentially amounts to a statue is even sillier.

*standing ovation*

Ofcourse the Reds Should be honoured... well. The soldiers anyway. The govermentals should be strung up by the pants and screamed at.

so joe stalin killed and raped all those German civilians by his lonesome? if you are a soldier and your unit starts to kill, rape and torture people you have a responsibility to turn your rifle on the criminals even if they are from your country

do you think it would be appropriate to bestow a Medal of Honor with Oak Leaf Cluster to the Unknown Soldier from the Soviet Union?Yes, for reasons both sentimental and political. Yes.

Excellent idea.

Too bad there's no poll.

so joe stalin killed and raped all those German civilians by his lonesome? if you are a soldier and your unit starts to kill, rape and torture people you have a responsibility to turn your rifle on the criminals even if they are from your country
Oh please...didn't happen any of the times the soldiers of other countries committed such acts. You're not seriously expecting the peasants of Russia to be any more virtuous than the US Americals (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Lai).
You wouldn't shoot your best friend and army mate for killing someone you hold to be responsible for atrocities committed against your own people.

so joe stalin killed and raped all those German civilians by his lonesome? if you are a soldier and your unit starts to kill, rape and torture people you have a responsibility to turn your rifle on the criminals even if they are from your country

Dresden, Tokyo, Hiroshima, Nagasaki.... did they turn their guns on their own men after that? No. Everyone committed attrocites of varying horror. It was Total War- it should not be surprising to you.

You wouldn't shoot your best friend and army mate for killing someone you hold to be responsible for atrocities committed against your own people.

I assure you I would

I assure you I would
Is that so?
Remind me never to go to war with you...

Absolutely!!!

I would love a chance to use my M44 or M91/30 Nagant in a FPS. This is what made me happy about Battlefield Vietnam!

Oh but I do beleive Communism is evil. It is a prison. A prison of the mind, the ability, and of progress. It restricts humans from competing, and progessing. It assumes that people are equal, and not individuals. It totally throws away the word "unique", and assumes we are all cattle. And that, my friend, to me, is evil.


That's a matter of both scale, psycology, and ideal.

First off, Communism is very effective on a SMALL scale. Tribes in Africa, Mid-East/Near East etc. have used Communism(their way of life mimics True Communism) for hundreds, if not thousands, of years. It's very effective to ensuring the survival of small groups. Even after being introduced to the outside world, they still use their way of life. In such cases, a more "capitalist" way of life would simply destroy them, as they cannot and do not want to change, as it would either destroy them completely, or destroy their culture.

Psycologically, it has to do with both theoretical and realistic Communism. Theoretically, under "True Communism", it is not a "prison" so to speak, as you are not controlled at all. It assumes that people work solely for the greater good, and that people would "naturally assume" needed roles. It would also require that all people accept it naturally, and not forced to accept it. It would need the people to be ambitious not for oneself, but for all people.

Realistically, the necessary traits of a True Communism can not be met, nor can they be expected to meet. People are far to different to be expected to accept this, and greed is common(and not necessarily an evil thing) among people. People are ambitious for personal reasons, not in the help mankind sense. And finally, people do not "naturally assume" anything. This has lead to the perversion of the ideal, which admittedly is impossible to achieve.

Is Communism evil? No. The ideals of Communism are unrealistic. Can Communism be adapted into something good? Yes, I believe it can. However, it is easily perverted, as people are all to willing to accept propaganda, and must be led, so to speak. There will always be inequality because people want and need it.


But 99% of the people were equal. They were equally starving, equally poor, equally without say in the government, equally without power, equally without freedom.............

Not exactly the "Equality" propaganda used, but mostly correct. This, however, isn't a good arguement as to what Communist equality means, just how easily it is perverted.