Nazis....Everywhere

[Sparko]

the sentiment?

how do ya figure?

cuz I'm an idiot, and wasn't previously familiar with this Order. No. 227. But I'm pretty sure Stalin, issuing a "not a step back" military order, in 1942 of all times, on the Eastern Front of all places, was actually issued to counter the advance of Nazis, rather than normalize it.

The sentiment is - never apologize, never explain, never backtrack, never admit you're wrong or did something wrong.

Fascism 101. Add the Narcissist, and it goes further down quickly. And Stalin, in paranoiac narcissism, had purged himself into the peril of 1942

[BiggDick]

ah.

thanks for clarifying.

Tho, unless there's some other context here, and even if there's some other context here, there may be an irony to trying to compare "not a step back" as far as not apologizing for nazi shit, with "not a step back" as far as being the country to arguably sacrificed more than anyone else to counter nazi shit.

[BiggDick]

Here's your friendly reminder that the soviets were among the GOOD guys in WW2.

they lost like over 25 million lives fighting the nazis. Just think about how big that number is.

on a sane planet, the post-WW2 narrative should have very much been something like, purging the world of nazis.

But instead, we got McCarthyism; the Cold War; these attempts to purge the world of...commies?

(and, realize, that shit never really ended)

...all while also giving former Nazi officials high-ranking positions in organizations like, NATO...

[Sparko]

I would argue that Ukraine sacrificed more than any other nation fighting both Stalin and Hitler, starting with Stalin's brutal collectivization famine in the mid-1930s that cost 3 million lives, and being pressed into the line in great numbers to not take a step back. It is a big reason why I support them. They are a great people who have suffered greatly for the rest of us.

[BiggDick]

I'm pretty sure Ukraine's WW2 casualties may have been counted among the USSR's as a whole.

And dunno if the casualties of the Ukrainian famine of the 30s counts as among the WW2 casualties either.

There's also a competing narrative that the Ukrainian famine of the 30s either wasn't so specific to Ukraine, and/or wasn't actually as bad in real time either way, but ended up getting traction in the years and decades after the fact as Nazi propaganda, and/or subsequently Cold War propaganda too.

But I don't mean to lend credence to it, cuz I don't fucking know. But when it comes to things like famines, I tend to go more bleeding-heart and wonder if it might have happened, rather than wonder if it actually wasn't that big of a deal.

[jfish26]

Here's your friendly reminder that the soviets were among the GOOD guys in WW2.

they lost like over 25 million lives fighting the nazis. Just think about how big that number is.

on a sane planet, the post-WW2 narrative should have very much been something like, purging the world of nazis.

But instead, we got McCarthyism; the Cold War; these attempts to purge the world of...commies?

(and, realize, that shit never really ended)

...all while also giving former Nazi officials high-ranking positions in organizations like, NATO...

What this really tells me is that nothing is as permanent as we think; it probably should not be surprising at all that, as living memory of the 1920s-30s interbellum fades to black, we're seeing a hell of a lot of history repeating itself.

[BiggDick]

wait, what living memory of the 1920s-30s?

[twocoach]

Here's your friendly reminder that the soviets were among the GOOD guys in WW2.

they lost like over 25 million lives fighting the nazis. Just think about how big that number is.

on a sane planet, the post-WW2 narrative should have very much been something like, purging the world of nazis.

But instead, we got McCarthyism; the Cold War; these attempts to purge the world of...commies?

(and, realize, that shit never really ended)

...all while also giving former Nazi officials high-ranking positions in organizations like, NATO...

What this really tells me is that nothing is as permanent as we think; it probably should not be surprising at all that, as living memory of the 1920s-30s interbellum fades to black, we're seeing a hell of a lot of history repeating itself.

There's a difference between being "among the good guys" and fighting against the same bad guys.
Germany invaded Russia in June 1941 and Russia needed the United States help to defend themselves. They didn't just look at the war and choose to fight with the Allies because they felt they were just and the Axis powers were evil.

Maybe they just didn't want Germany taking over Europe because THEY wanted to take over Europe.

[BiggDick]

Allsome.

[twocoach]

Allsome.

Smoke a bowl and do some reading on the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. It's interesting for sure. Certainly paints a different picture than "Russia was one of the Good Guys back then".

Historians seem to be conflicted about whether Russia would have entered the war fighting for the Allies if Hitler had not invaded Russia. There really isn't much out there that supports either a "yes" or a "no".

[BiggDick]

Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact?

Is that strain of weed an indica or a sativa?

[twocoach]

Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact?

Is that strain of weed an indica or a sativa?

It's the one where Russia and Hilter agreed to divvy up Europe between the two of them.

[BiggDick]

Ohh, so more like a hybrid. Sounds heady!

[Sparko]

I'm pretty sure Ukraine's WW2 casualties may have been counted among the USSR's as a whole.

And dunno if the casualties of the Ukrainian famine of the 30s counts as among the WW2 casualties either.

There's also a competing narrative that the Ukrainian famine of the 30s either wasn't so specific to Ukraine, and/or wasn't actually as bad in real time either way, but ended up getting traction in the years and decades after the fact as Nazi propaganda, and/or subsequently Cold War propaganda too.

But I don't mean to lend credence to it, cuz I don't fucking know. But when it comes to things like famines, I tend to go more bleeding-heart and wonder if it might have happened, rather than wonder if it actually wasn't that big of a deal.

Ukrine's casualties were disproportionate as part of the USSR, yes. They were subjected to Soviet abuse similar to today to try to erase their national history--which is older than Russia's. And the Holomodor definitely occurred:
https://cla.umn.edu/chgs/holocaust-geno ... /holodomor

Any revisionism of it is part of the sad talking points of the Russian Federation.

[Overlander]

Any revisionism of it is part of the sad talking points of the Russian Federation.

Hey, Ousdahl's calling card!

[twocoach]

A little more similar than DC's comparisons.

[Overlander]

A little more similar than DC's comparisons.

Pure coincidence.

[BiggDick]

I'm pretty sure Ukraine's WW2 casualties may have been counted among the USSR's as a whole.

And dunno if the casualties of the Ukrainian famine of the 30s counts as among the WW2 casualties either.

There's also a competing narrative that the Ukrainian famine of the 30s either wasn't so specific to Ukraine, and/or wasn't actually as bad in real time either way, but ended up getting traction in the years and decades after the fact as Nazi propaganda, and/or subsequently Cold War propaganda too.

But I don't mean to lend credence to it, cuz I don't fucking know. But when it comes to things like famines, I tend to go more bleeding-heart and wonder if it might have happened, rather than wonder if it actually wasn't that big of a deal.

Ukrine's casualties were disproportionate as part of the USSR, yes. They were subjected to Soviet abuse similar to today to try to erase their national history--which is older than Russia's. And the Holomodor definitely occurred:
https://cla.umn.edu/chgs/holocaust-geno ... /holodomor

Any revisionism of it is part of the sad talking points of the Russian Federation.

Oh, great, so NOW you care about genocide.

[BiggDick]

Any revisionism of it is part of the sad talking points of the Russian Federation.

Hey, Ousdahl's calling card!

Know the difference between me and you?

And for that matter, the difference between me and the “majority opinion” pols board posters…and for that matter, the Randys and JKs too.

I’m at least willing to consider whether I might be influenced by propaganda.

You, on the other hand, very stubbornly refuse to consider whether you even might be influenced by propaganda.

[TDub]

bwahahahahahahahahahaha