Which Leader Was Worse????????

[joea]

Originally Posted by Type941

you're a child for making such a poll and I truly feel sorry for you. To put it nicely.

Stalin slayed and sent to death millions of russians so that europe can be free from Hitler, threw millions at taking Berlin when the others kind of waited, and you are basically demeaning all those russians who died fighting by putting them under stalin's 'generic' body count. Get a fekin clue.

With a view you have I don't think you actually deserve a reasonable answer, but what the heck. Might as well ask whose mustache was nicer - Stalin's or Hitler's. that's how dumb the logic is based on your 'body count'.

Cool, another response pointing out the pointlessness of this poll. Did I tell you I really dig your mods Type 941? Course got something to say about your post, agree with the first and last paragraphs, but only partly the second.

First of, I said my piece about the originator of this poll but can reiterate my opinion on the stupidity of the poll and the misleading numbers and way the poll questions were phrased. In also saw Sixpack’s post who misunderstood my phrase “only 6 million Jews� didn’t mean to belittle the Jewish victims, just wondering if anyone looked at the link I posted about the “other holocaust�. Heck Mr. “Topp� said in his first post “Stalin killed 27 million Jews, Gypsies and others� … wow, Stalin like many of his subjects was not fond of Jews but he didn’t kill people based on their ethnicity, but for political reasons. Even a devoted Bolshevik could be purged and many were. Hitler was more predatory in that he attacked and occupied many more countries in a much shorter time than any of his opponents. Stalin just took whatever fell into his lap as a buffer zone, sad for the nations concerned and stupid in that the way the USSR imposed those satellite regimes contributed to the Cold War, but in no way were as many people killed outside of the USSR as the Nazis killed outside of Germany.

I must point out though Type 941, your continued beating of the same drum about the Soviets winning alone is getting tiresome. Maybe we need a new thread. First of all I am a member if this forum:
http://<a href="http://www.armchairg...7e19&f=135</a>

of this site http://rkkaww2.armchairgeneral.com/

I did some corrections of a translation of one Russian member and got a lot of stuff in return, including a Soviet war film called “They Fought for the Motherland.� I am reading an old book called “Russia at War� by Alexander Werth, very good book on the war from the Russian side including the common people, soldiers etc. as well as books by Glantz and a lot of translated material from Soviet/Russian authors. So I know a fair amount of what the Soviets contributed. Plus the Russian members I met there have a more open attitude. Still I think your little remark about “others kind of waited� is an insult to Allied soldiers who fought in Italy, North Africa, the sailors in the Atlantic, and the airmen who fought the Luftwaffe. Oh and Britain and the Commonwealth fought alone too from mid 1940 til summer and winter 1941. The reasons may have been valid or not (for the Non-aggression pact) but this attempt to gain time, and a lot of the high casualties were a result of Stalin’s purge of the army and promotion of sycophants who used clumsy tactics in the early part of the war. At least good leaders like Zhukov and Konev were put in place afterwards….and allowed to do their job, unlike Von Manstein and Guderian who had to listen to the “Austrian Corporal.�

Alos while the Germans could not touch the factories in the US or (after a heroic Soviet effort moving them) the Urals or Central Asia, and they could hit the Soviet railways close to the front, they put a considerable effort in trying to cut the North Atlantic. All those u-boats could have become tanks, and those 50000 u-boat men, small compared to the millions of soldats in Russia, would nevertheless as an elite force been worth the training and resources of a lot more panzercrew. The air campaign is more controversial but, did pull LW units and 88 guns, did delay production of more advanced weapons, did not stop production of tested weapons but dispersed the production, which was then affected by transport attacks, and the oil industry was eventually hurt. Plus there were other theatres like Asia and the Pacific that diverted some resources. You really think an Anglo-American landing in 42 would have helped the USSR with a still powerful LW and KM? Or the USSR would have won, at least as quickly, without any western assistance at all? Prove it. Again, I am not saying Hitler wasn’t essentially beaten on the Eastern Front, just trying to swing the pendulum back a bit.

Another post that won’t be read for sure. I’ll go post at the tank forum maybe.