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.

[Type941]

Don't deny that russians were silently agreed to be given the 'dirty' job. It's been admitted in many documentaries, albeit it was not an official stance. Indeed they fought in other places, but I suppose the casualty count speaks for itself. Russian army in 1944-45 was pretty damn good by any standard of that era, yet they lost so many more people when they had to plough through Europe. Unfortunately, now it's demeaned by the West as murdering, raping communists hungry to build an iron curtain, which I repeat, demeans so many people the allies danced and laughed when they met at Berlin. Oh well. Leave that discussion, as I don't really need convincing on the role russia took in WW2 - a role that's more and more smeared by the likes of US and screaming eastern europe who only want to see the bad.

Anyway, all of this is pretty much water under the bridge, but when someone puts out their view oh how awful russia was, I'll always reply that one must look at own self before judging others. People equate communism and nazism on EU parliament level - what can you really expect from a common Joe! I'm starting to get the sense that all these anti russia polls are just started by trolls and I should stay the heck away from them.

[joea]

Whatever, you don't want to answer my points fine. I already made it clear I appreciate the role Russia played in WWII as do many academics and honest history amateurs. Hey I believe the Russian army really did have logistical problems in 1944 near Warsaw, doesn't mean Stalin wasn't happy to see the Germans crush the Polish national army...not to mention all the hypocritical antiwar propaganda put out by western Communist parties between 1939 and 1941. About looking at oneself before judging others, well I don't see that anywhere to be honest lately. Yup was a troll poll for sure.

Have a nice day ya'll.

[Type941]

I think a lot of what you said makes sense, but I don't want to pick it apart point by point. Overall I see you don't act like a CNN f*cked sheep (figuratively speaking) and that's all to it, and that's great.

Will have a nice day. :|\

[Ducimus]

Not voting, for two reasons:

1. Hitler gets more "press time". Whatever stalin has done is little known i think as compared to hitler

2. Stalins own words, "A single death is a tragety, a million is a statistic" or words to that effect. In other words, i think theres more to the story of both dictators then their body count.

[Onkel Neal]

No way to vote for Bush??

[bradclark1]

Originally Posted by Type941

Anyway, all of this is pretty much water under the bridge, but when someone puts out their view oh how awful russia was, I'll always reply that one must look at own self before judging others. People equate communism and nazism on EU parliament level - what can you really expect from a common Joe! I'm starting to get the sense that all these anti russia polls are just started by trolls and I should stay the heck away from them.

I don't think it was a poll on how awful Russia was. It was how awful uncle Joe was. Got to admit he was pretty awful.
The only difference between Hitler and Stalin is one was axis, the other was allied. Thats it. The poll didn't have anything to do with Russia's performance in the war.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Neal Stevens

No way to vote for Bush??

Deep down there he is already heating the cauldron while waiting for the winner of the poll to arrive

Ah shoot, you're right. I should have added George Bush to the voting poll.

[Type941]

Originally Posted by U-552Erich-Topp

Ah shoot, you're right. I should have added George Bush to the voting poll.

Than the thread would be locked, may be on AL's request. :hmm: