Are Allied "Crimes" really equal to the Holocaust?

[wm]

Really? Maybe there were some volunteers but the gros did sure only fight because they were drafted. I assume you know the punishment for active soldiers not following such call during war time? I have letters from my great-grandfather and great uncles, I can´t find the will to fight or any war enthusiasm in them. Contrary they only mention in each letter that they only want to go home to their families/brides that´s their only wish. No one writes that he want to conquer the East resp. the country they were stationed.

Nobody wanted to conquer the East for the reason that, according to Nazi propaganda, all the wars were defensive.
Poland attacked Germany, sicced on her by the Allies, Western plutocrats and international Jewry. Then the Allies declared war and attacked Germany themselves. They were going to attack Norway so Germany had to preempt their attack.
Similarly the USSR at the prodding of the usual suspects was going to attack, and had to be preempt too. There was no other choice.
As far as I know although German soldiers frequently complained and criticized their leaders, especially after being wounded, they didn't generally questioned the need to fight and to defend their country against the poised to destroy Germany "aggressors".

[CroGer]

Ok, first of all....
Ok, three things.


1)

I thought you can read. I gave you the explanaition of the word "genoicide".
A genocide does NOT mean that you want to erase a people entirely. It specifically says "in part".

If you just kill people because you want to have less of these people - it's also genocide.
The armenian genocide was a genocide even though
a) there are still armenians
b) the turks never wanted to kill all armenians

There was also resistance among the germans of the genocides. The difference between Nazi Germany and the USA is, though: Nazi Germany was a totalitarian state. The USA is a democracy. There you can openly say "Boy, that sucks".


2)

Get this out of your head that without Germany you would have had peace in europe. There was no peace after WW1

First of all, the peace treatys after WW1 were a joke. The disassembled a large multiethnical state and replaced them with small multi-ethnical states, all of which had ethnic minorities and border disputes.

1917-1922: the plethora of wars under the umbrella of the "russian civil war", which included a ukrainian war for independence, a bolshevik invasion into armenia and georgia, attempted invasions into the baltic states, Finnland and Poland
1919: polish - czechoslovak war
1919: Hungarian - Romanian war
1919-1920: Italian - yugoslavian war
1924: Bessarabia-Revolt (russians vs romanians)
1933-1939: spanish civil wars
1935-1936: Italian-ethiopian war
1937-1945: chinese-japanese wars
1939: hungarian-slovakian war
1939: Italian invasion of albania
1939: soviet invasion into manchuria
1939: Finnish-soviet war, soviet invasion of poland, soviet invasion of romania

I am not including the countless communist revolts here who were all sponsored by the bolsheviks (and their sponsors)


In the danube-balkan-region war would have broken out regardless, because of these facts:

There were large hungarian minorities in slovakia, yugoslavia, and romania.
Croats were quite unhappy in the serbian dominated yugoslavia and the Ustasa already existed
Macedonians, who are ethnically bulgarians, were suppressed by the serbs in Yugoslavia. Bulgaria was pretty pissed off about it and wanted to annex macedonia
There were border disputes between Greece and Bulgaria over a landscape called Thracia.
There were large ethnic albanian minorities in yugoslavia, that the serbs didn't like, since they posed the majority in Kosovo. Serbs were quite pissed off about it.

Then there was the elephant in the room - the soviet union.

The soviet union would have, no doubt, invaded europe. Wether the "axis"-attack in 1941 was a reaction to soviet mobilization or not is debatable. What is not debatable is that the soviet union was a state based on a despicable ideology that wanted world domination.

The Key for the Soviet Union would have been sacking Germany. Why?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NFmfwqzWmHk&t=150s

A combination of soviet natural ressources and manpower, and german industry and (back then) science would have created an unstoppable world power.

It should also be noted that Poland was a very aggressive state. They suppressed all ethnic minorities in their country and they were also very anti-semitic.

Are you aware that Italy, Bulgaria and Hungary were invading war parties as well?

So no, WW2 was not Germany vs the world.

3

The "Generalplan Ost" was not enforced. Primarily because it was a plan aimed for the time after the war. And it was ludicrous and probably would have been rejected by the germans, because

a) nobody wanted to move from Hesse-Kassel to Dnepropetrosk
b) you didn't have enough germans to populate that landscape

And even though some german officers were pretty routhless, others weren't. You know that there was a resistance, right? And that among that resistance there were some of the more important Generals? Like Von Treskow - who was in the east - and Rommel?

--------

So, coming back to my original argument here: two wrongs don't make a right. The allies have a long list of crimes and betrayals.
Supporting Stalin alone should be deemed a crime against humanity

[DavidFrankenberg]

Really? Maybe there were some volunteers but the gros did sure only fight because they were drafted. I assume you know the punishment for active soldiers not following such call during war time? I have letters from my great-grandfather and great uncles, I can´t find the will to fight or any war enthusiasm in them. Contrary they only mention in each letter that they only want to go home to their families/brides that´s their only wish. No one writes that he want to conquer the East resp. the country they were stationed.

Nobody wanted to conquer the East for the reason that, according to Nazi propaganda, all the wars were defensive.
Poland attacked Germany, sicced on her by the Allies, Western plutocrats and international Jewry. Then the Allies declared war and attacked Germany themselves. They were going to attack Norway so Germany had to preempt their attack.
Similarly the USSR at the prodding of the usual suspects was going to attack, and had to be preempt too. There was no other choice.
As far as I know although German soldiers frequently complained and criticized their leaders, especially after being wounded, they didn't generally questioned the need to fight and to defend their country against the poised to destroy Germany "aggressors".

Of course, as we all know, the german propaganda was wrong and the real agressor was Hitler's Germany.
Albeit this war was nonsensical, Germans fought hard for the sake of Hitler. Very few desertions happened. Looks like they believed their beloved Fürher.
Disapointment and anger among german soldiers against him only raised with the era of the defeats : after Stalingrad.

[DavidFrankenberg]

Ok, first of all....
Ok, three things.


1)

I thought you can read. I gave you the explanaition of the word "genoicide".
A genocide does NOT mean that you want to erase a people entirely. It specifically says "in part".

If you just kill people because you want to have less of these people - it's also genocide.
The armenian genocide was a genocide even though
a) there are still armenians
b) the turks never wanted to kill all armenians

Sure, they would have done so if the war had not stopped.

There was also resistance among the germans of the genocides. The difference between Nazi Germany and the USA is, though: Nazi Germany was a totalitarian state. The USA is a democracy. There you can openly say "Boy, that sucks".

The USA didnt genocide anyone.

2)

Get this out of your head that without Germany you would have had peace in europe. There was no peace after WW1

21 years of peace indeed.

First of all, the peace treatys after WW1 were a joke. The disassembled a large multiethnical state and replaced them with small multi-ethnical states, all of which had ethnic minorities and border disputes.

1917-1922: the plethora of wars under the umbrella of the "russian civil war", which included a ukrainian war for independence, a bolshevik invasion into armenia and georgia, attempted invasions into the baltic states, Finnland and Poland
1919: polish - czechoslovak war
1919: Hungarian - Romanian war
1919-1920: Italian - yugoslavian war
1924: Bessarabia-Revolt (russians vs romanians)
1933-1939: spanish civil wars
1935-1936: Italian-ethiopian war
1937-1945: chinese-japanese wars
1939: hungarian-slovakian war
1939: Italian invasion of albania
1939: soviet invasion into manchuria
1939: Finnish-soviet war, soviet invasion of poland, soviet invasion of romania

None of these wars provoked any genocide or millions of deads.

I am not including the countless communist revolts here who were all sponsored by the bolsheviks (and their sponsors)


In the danube-balkan-region war would have broken out regardless, because of these facts:

There were large hungarian minorities in slovakia, yugoslavia, and romania.
Croats were quite unhappy in the serbian dominated yugoslavia and the Ustasa already existed
Macedonians, who are ethnically bulgarians, were suppressed by the serbs in Yugoslavia. Bulgaria was pretty pissed off about it and wanted to annex macedonia
There were border disputes between Greece and Bulgaria over a landscape called Thracia.
There were large ethnic albanian minorities in yugoslavia, that the serbs didn't like, since they posed the majority in Kosovo. Serbs were quite pissed off about it.

None of these countries would have provoked a WW nor a gneocide. Only Hitler was mad enough to provoke it.

Then there was the elephant in the room - the soviet union.

The soviet union would have, no doubt, invaded europe. Wether the "axis"-attack in 1941 was a reaction to soviet mobilization or not is debatable. What is not debatable is that the soviet union was a state based on a despicable ideology that wanted world domination.

The Key for the Soviet Union would have been sacking Germany. Why?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NFmfwqzWmHk&t=150s

A combination of soviet natural ressources and manpower, and german industry and (back then) science would have created an unstoppable world power.

SU didnt plan to invade Europe. Hitler planned to provoke a WW and to invade USSR, and he did it.

It should also be noted that Poland was a very aggressive state. They suppressed all ethnic minorities in their country and they were also very anti-semitic.

There were millions of non-poles in Poland actually (like Ukrainians, Belrarus etc).

Are you aware that Italy, Bulgaria and Hungary were invading war parties as well?

Mussolini didnt want a WW. He always tried to prevent Hitler's war. He failed.

So no, WW2 was not Germany vs the world.3

Oh yes, it was. It was Hitler's Germany vs the world.

The "Generalplan Ost" was not enforced. Primarily because it was a plan aimed for the time after the war. And it was ludicrous and probably would have been rejected by the germans, because

a) nobody wanted to move from Hesse-Kassel to Dnepropetrosk
b) you didn't have enough germans to populate that landscape

And even though some german officers were pretty routhless, others weren't. You know that there was a resistance, right? And that among that resistance there were some of the more important Generals? Like Von Treskow - who was in the east - and Rommel?

The Ostplan planned to starve and kill all non-german people except 12 millions whom were to serve as slaves for the Germans. Germans killed like 23 millions of people in like 3 years in USSR ("ost"). This was the application of the Ostplan. Hitler didnt want to conquer a city like Leningrad, he just wanted to starve its population to death. He succeeded in starving like 1 million of civilians there. He had the same plan for Moscow. He would have done so there, but he failed during the winter 41 to siege the city.

--------

So, coming back to my original argument here: two wrongs don't make a right. The allies have a long list of crimes and betrayals.
Supporting Stalin alone should be deemed a crime against humanity

Because he defeated Hitler ?

[wm]

I thought you can read. I gave you the explanaition of the word "genoicide".
A genocide does NOT mean that you want to erase a people entirely. It specifically says "in part".

To be a genocide an intent must be shown.
For this reason the only country which committed genocide during ww2 was Germany. The Western allies committed only minor war crimes, insignificant in the grand scheme of things.
It the case of the Soviet soldiers they indeed raped and pillaged so it was a serious war crime, but there is no proof it was ordered by Soviet leaders - although they were still guilty because they didn't enforced proper discipline in the Red Army.

The soviet union would have, no doubt, invaded europe.

There is no proof Stalin wanted to invade Europe, it would serve no purpose, and it was against the doctrine of "socialism in one country", he personally devised and implemented. Stalin was a very cautious politician, even in the case of Finland he believed the window of opportunity to do it was just a few months.

In the thirties the situation in Europe was stable, and without the Nazis would stay that way.

[CroGer]

21 years of peace indeed.

None of these wars provoked any genocide or millions of deads.

:roll:

None of these countries would have provoked a WW nor a gneocide. Only Hitler was mad enough to provoke it.

a) You've got a lot of reading to do about the hostilities on the Balkan-Danube-Region...
b) you know about the war 1991-1995? Btw., one of my uncles fought in that war...
c) They would have fought a war within their capabilities.

SU didnt plan to invade Europe. Hitler planned to provoke a WW and to invade USSR, and he did it.

You guys don't have enough smileys....

Oh, so the Soviet Union was peaceful?
Tell me one reason why the soviet Union wouldn't have attacked europe, considering:

Post 41:
a) They attacked Poland & Finnland in 1939
b) They blackmailed Romania in 1940
c) They finances every communist uprising in europe and asia well into the 70's

Post 45:
d) They occupied half of europe after 1945
e) Their empire was based an ideology which had the goal of world domination.
f) Why was there a cold war between 1946 and 1990?
g) why did they violently shoot down all freedom movements in central-eastern europe?


Besides: Why did the new soviet tank, the T-34, have rubber tracks designed to move on german autobahns?
Why were the soviets basically incapable of stopping the german advance into europe because they were in an offensive position but not fully mobilized yet?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalin%27 ... and_debate

You know what the difference is between a war over economic goals and a war over ideologies?
War over economic goals have an end.
Wars over ideologies are endless. They are crusades. Jihads.

There were millions of non-poles in Poland actually (like Ukrainians, Belrarus etc).

That's the point.

The Poles had in 1939 (do I have to do this over and over again)?

According to Wikipedia
35.100.000
27.127.790 Poles (catholics)
4.878.900 Ukrainians
1.088.100 Belarusians
807.300 Germans
1.193.400 czechs, lithunian, russians
3.510.000 jews

According to my own studies these numbers are wrong. But I have not finished these studies yet.

Poland back then was a young state. I ususally compare states to persons. A young person is insecure, agressive, albeit with good intentions, and often boundless. So where all new states in central-eastern, including Germany.

The poles had parts of their populations that were very anti-semitic, very anti-russian and very anti-german. They wanted to polonize the ukrainians and belarusians.
To describe to you where these polish sentiments came from, I would have to back way back and go miles off topic. But many new states had an old state as their identity, and there was an urge to reinstate that old, lost empire. The germans never got over that they lost the HRR. And the poles never git over that they lost Lithuania-Poland. The ukrainians never git over that their empire has been shattered by the mongols and were not "little russia" according to moscow. As you see, eastern europe was a mess.

I am a slav. I have been deeply into slavic studies. But that's a different topic.

But the loss of life in Poland is very hard to estimate, since you had two aggressors. Soldiers, that fight overseas, of course won't make babies. Dead soldiers nonetheless.

I would estimate the number of poles (omly catholics) killed due to the conditions that the germans put them in to at not higher than 800.000.
The rest is poles becoming victims of the SU, as you call it, war casualties and the lack of men, and reprisal against "Volksliste-Poles".
The jews of couse of a different story.

I am sad about the hostility between Hitler and Poland. Poland and Germany would have been perfect allies against the SU. It also would have had a psychological effect on all slavic nations, particilariliy in the east. A slavic-friendly Hitler would have won, IMO.

Mussolini didnt want a WW. He always tried to prevent Hitler's war. He failed.

That's new to me. But what's not new to me is that Hitler wanted to mediate between the danubian-slavic nations. He needed these nations for their national ressoucres. The Ustasha, that my grandfather was a part of, was too brutal. This was critizized by the germans since it created symoathy for the partisans. Hungary and Romania were on the brink of a war over transilvania.
Serbs were the lowest scum for Hitler
Bulgarians were basically unknown to him.

But Hitler did try to calm these parties down and keep the war there more civil.

Oh yes, it was. It was Hitler's Germany vs the world.

In 1945 it was. But you are aware that the allies also bombed hungarian and romanian cities?
Germany was just the power plant. Just like in WW1, where all the allies of Germany were more of a burden than a help.
His main objective was the defeat of the USSR. Not fighting partisan warfare in the f*** balkan mountains.
Germany's capacity to produce small arms was also limited. And they had to supply the romanians, bulgarians, croats, cetniks, partially hungarians and so on. They weakened Germany. The only thing were you are right: Germany was the strategic jackpot.

But it was not a war of Germany vs the World. It was a war over a f*** up peace after WW1 and a war between facism and communism, where the western allies interfered for reasons currently still unknown.

The Ostplan planned to starve and kill all non-german people except 12 millions whom were to serve as slaves for the Germans. Germans killed like 23 millions of people in like 3 years in USSR ("ost"). This was the application of the Ostplan. Hitler didnt want to conquer a city like Leningrad, he just wanted to starve its population to death. He succeeded in starving like 1 million of civilians there. He had the same plan for Moscow. He would have done so there, but he failed during the winter 41 to siege the city.

Hitler, Hitler, Hitler... you know the war was fought by people other than Hiter, right? I told you, some where routhless, some weren't. My grandfather was on the eastern front and always told me about the great cammeradery with the germans.

Did he want to starve Leningrad to death? Or just force it to surrender? How were the Generals involved?
The Finns defiitely let the russians pass a lot of the food transports through, that's for sure.

Btw. I am not trying to defend Hitler. All I'm saying is:

The Wehrmacht was 17,3 million people. They al had different feelings and personalities. They weren't programmed robots. The germans increasingly became sick of Hitler by the time they forced them to invade russia.

--------

Because he defeated Hitler ?

No, because he killed more people than Hitler. Do I really have to show you the numbers again?

Stalins gain of power: 1922

Census 1926: 147.027.915 citizens. 100.891.244 Russians, 29.018.187 Ukrainians, 4.983.240 Belarusians, 1.238.549 germans, 10.896.696 others
Census 1939 (January) 170.557.093 citizens. 99.591.520 Russians, 28.111.007 Ukrainians, 5.275.393 Belausians, 1.427.232 germans, 36.151.941 others

"Others" are primarily tartars and caucasians. (I mean the tribes like chechens)

Lets do the maths here.
Poles and russians are quite alike. Let's compare their birthrate between 1926 and 1931

Poland: 1926: 29.326.316
Poland 1939: 35.100.000 (+19.69%)

How the SU in 1939 should have looked
Russlans: 120.760.000 (- 21.680.000)
Ukrainians: 34.733.000 ( - 6.633.000)
Belarusians: 5.964.000 ( - 689.000)
Germans: 1.482.000 (- 55.000)

Look at the number of germans. fits very well. And the ukrainian death toll fits to the 6+ million of the holodomor.
Apparently, my assumption, that you can apply the polish pop-increase on the USSR, was correct.

So between 1926-1939, Josef Stalin cause the death of 29.057.000 russians, ukrainians, belarusian and germans.
So you're a little commie.
Wow. 100 years of mass murder, and you think Hitler is the only bad guy.
Then... Ok, boy, like I said, I saw yugoslavia in the 1980's. Every commie country had a problem with alcoholism, because life was to bland, empty and unbearable, that getting drunk was the only escape.
F**** a.

@wm
I hope you are a guy. Because then you and Frankie create the next generation of people I have to argue with

[DavidFrankenberg]

21 years of peace indeed.

None of these wars provoked any genocide or millions of deads.

:roll:

None of these countries would have provoked a WW nor a gneocide. Only Hitler was mad enough to provoke it.

a) You've got a lot of reading to do about the hostilities on the Balkan-Danube-Region...
b) you know about the war 1991-1995? Btw., one of my uncles fought in that war...
c) They would have fought a war within their capabilities.

There was no WW, no genocide, no gaz chambers, no millions of deads.

SU didnt plan to invade Europe. Hitler planned to provoke a WW and to invade USSR, and he did it.

You guys don't have enough smileys....

Oh, so the Soviet Union was peaceful?

Yep.

Tell me one reason why the soviet Union wouldn't have attacked europe, considering:

Post 41:
a) They attacked Poland & Finnland in 1939
b) They blackmailed Romania in 1940
c) They finances every communist uprising in europe and asia well into the 70's

It does not prove that USSR was ready to attack Hitler by june 41...

Post 45:
d) They occupied half of europe after 1945
e) Their empire was based an ideology which had the goal of world domination.
f) Why was there a cold war between 1946 and 1990?
g) why did they violently shoot down all freedom movements in central-eastern europe?

Maybe you forgot they occupied eastern Europe as a consequence of the hitlerian agression's war ?
There was a cold war because USA didnt agree with Soviet power.

Besides: Why did the new soviet tank, the T-34, have rubber tracks designed to move on german autobahns?

I just know for sure T34 first served to defend the soviet land for years before going on "autobahns".

Why were the soviets basically incapable of stopping the german advance into europe because they were in an offensive position but not fully mobilized yet?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalin%27 ... and_debate

I see. You are another victim of hitlerian propaganda of 1941. Maybe Hitler managed to convince himself of this lie ?

You know what the difference is between a war over economic goals and a war over ideologies?
War over economic goals have an end.
Wars over ideologies are endless. They are crusades. Jihads.

I cant see your point. Sorry.

There were millions of non-poles in Poland actually (like Ukrainians, Belrarus etc).

That's the point.

The Poles had in 1939 (do I have to do this over and over again)?

According to Wikipedia
35.100.000
27.127.790 Poles (catholics)
4.878.900 Ukrainians
1.088.100 Belarusians
807.300 Germans
1.193.400 czechs, lithunian, russians
3.510.000 jews

According to my own studies these numbers are wrong. But I have not finished these studies yet.

Poland back then was a young state. I ususally compare states to persons. A young person is insecure, agressive, albeit with good intentions, and often boundless. So where all new states in central-eastern, including Germany.

The poles had parts of their populations that were very anti-semitic, very anti-russian and very anti-german. They wanted to polonize the ukrainians and belarusians.
To describe to you where these polish sentiments came from, I would have to back way back and go miles off topic. But many new states had an old state as their identity, and there was an urge to reinstate that old, lost empire. The germans never got over that they lost the HRR. And the poles never git over that they lost Lithuania-Poland. The ukrainians never git over that their empire has been shattered by the mongols and were not "little russia" according to moscow. As you see, eastern europe was a mess.

I am a slav. I have been deeply into slavic studies. But that's a different topic.

But the loss of life in Poland is very hard to estimate, since you had two aggressors. Soldiers, that fight overseas, of course won't make babies. Dead soldiers nonetheless.

I would estimate the number of poles (omly catholics) killed due to the conditions that the germans put them in to at not higher than 800.000.
The rest is poles becoming victims of the SU, as you call it, war casualties and the lack of men, and reprisal against "Volksliste-Poles".
The jews of couse of a different story.

Jews were polish citizens. Why dont you count them as victims of Hitler ? Since polish jews are like 90% of Hitler's victims in Poland, it is very questionable to discount them of the casualties of Hitler's war...

I am sad about the hostility between Hitler and Poland. Poland and Germany would have been perfect allies against the SU. It also would have had a psychological effect on all slavic nations, particilariliy in the east. A slavic-friendly Hitler would have won, IMO.

You think Poles should have been idiot to the point to ally themselves with the man who would erase them from the surface of the earth ? I think it wd have been more idiotic for them not to fight Hitler. What is sad is that Poles didnt permit the passage of the Red Army on their land in order to protect them from the hitlerian menace. They preferred a distant alliance with timorous countries like Britain and France.

Mussolini didnt want a WW. He always tried to prevent Hitler's war. He failed.

That's new to me.

Mussolini was the first ennmy of Hitler. But the "democracies" didnt listen to him. So he chose to ally with the devil. He paid the price...

But what's not new to me is that Hitler wanted to mediate between the danubian-slavic nations. He needed these nations for their national ressoucres. The Ustasha, that my grandfather was a part of, was too brutal. This was critizized by the germans since it created symoathy for the partisans. Hungary and Romania were on the brink of a war over transilvania.
Serbs were the lowest scum for Hitler
Bulgarians were basically unknown to him.

But Hitler did try to calm these parties down and keep the war there more civil.

Hitler had no consideration for those peoples. He despised even his "allies"... romanians were despised, italians were despised, hungarians were despised... when the defeats began to accumulate he put the blame on them for that. HItler had absolutely no consideration for his allies, and even for his own people the Germans as he showed at the end of the war...

Oh yes, it was. It was Hitler's Germany vs the world.

In 1945 it was. But you are aware that the allies also bombed hungarian and romanian cities?
Germany was just the power plant. Just like in WW1, where all the allies of Germany were more of a burden than a help.
His main objective was the defeat of the USSR. Not fighting partisan warfare in the f*** balkan mountains.
Germany's capacity to produce small arms was also limited. And they had to supply the romanians, bulgarians, croats, cetniks, partially hungarians and so on. They weakened Germany. The only thing were you are right: Germany was the strategic jackpot.

It was Hitler's war. Germany didnt need that war. Hitler needed it, he wanted his WWI² like a frustrated child who has lost the last game and wants absolutely to win one regardless to the consequences of his acts...
You make me laugh since i see you repeating Hitler's propaganda and his depsise of his own allies : romanians croats etc never weakened Germany... they served it (at their own dispense), they died for it, Hitler just put the blame on them when he began to accumulate the defeats as the childish egoist he was... and what is incredible is to see a croat like you grandson of usatachas who fought for Hitler who repeat the despise of Hitler to his own grandparents who risked their lives and were indeed abused by him decades later.... wow !

But it was not a war of Germany vs the World. It was a war over a f*** up peace after WW1 and a war between facism and communism, where the western allies interfered for reasons currently still unknown.

Ther is no mystery about WWII... it was Hitler's war, and only Hitler's war.

The Ostplan planned to starve and kill all non-german people except 12 millions whom were to serve as slaves for the Germans. Germans killed like 23 millions of people in like 3 years in USSR ("ost"). This was the application of the Ostplan. Hitler didnt want to conquer a city like Leningrad, he just wanted to starve its population to death. He succeeded in starving like 1 million of civilians there. He had the same plan for Moscow. He would have done so there, but he failed during the winter 41 to siege the city.

Hitler, Hitler, Hitler... you know the war was fought by people other than Hiter, right? I told you, some where routhless, some weren't. My grandfather was on the eastern front and always told me about the great cammeradery with the germans.

Hitler manipulated all these peoples, all his allies for his own pleasure... and your grandfather was part of this manipulation.

Did he want to starve Leningrad to death?

Yep.

Or just force it to surrender?

No, he didnt need million of russians... he preferrred to starve them to death. It was his pleasure.

How were the Generals involved?

Fully involved.

The Finns defiitely let the russians pass a lot of the food transports through, that's for sure.

The Finns despite official allies of the Führer were smart enough to realize that Hitler would not win this war so easyli... since Finns have tasted the thoughness of the Red Armyjust before ("winter war" 40). Mannerheim played a great partition there !

Btw. I am not trying to defend Hitler. All I'm saying is:

The Wehrmacht was 17,3 million people. They al had different feelings and personalities. They weren't programmed robots. The germans increasingly became sick of Hitler by the time they forced them to invade russia.

I cant read in the spirit of millions of Germans. I can only state they followed him for the best and for the worst... When defeats never stopped, strangely (?) the germans began to question hilm a bit, but to be honest they questioned him 'just a bit'.

--------

Because he defeated Hitler ?

No, because he killed more people than Hitler. Do I really have to show you the numbers again?

Stalins gain of power: 1922

Census 1926: 147.027.915 citizens. 100.891.244 Russians, 29.018.187 Ukrainians, 4.983.240 Belarusians, 1.238.549 germans, 10.896.696 others
Census 1939 (January) 170.557.093 citizens. 99.591.520 Russians, 28.111.007 Ukrainians, 5.275.393 Belausians, 1.427.232 germans, 36.151.941 others

"Others" are primarily tartars and caucasians. (I mean the tribes like chechens)

Lets do the maths here.
Poles and russians are quite alike. Let's compare their birthrate between 1926 and 1931

Poland: 1926: 29.326.316
Poland 1939: 35.100.000 (+19.69%)

How the SU in 1939 should have looked
Russlans: 120.760.000 (- 21.680.000)
Ukrainians: 34.733.000 ( - 6.633.000)
Belarusians: 5.964.000 ( - 689.000)
Germans: 1.482.000 (- 55.000)

Look at the number of germans. fits very well. And the ukrainian death toll fits to the 6+ million of the holodomor.
Apparently, my assumption, that you can apply the polish pop-increase on the USSR, was correct.

So between 1926-1939, Josef Stalin cause the death of 29.057.000 russians, ukrainians, belarusian and germans.
So you're a little commie.
Wow. 100 years of mass murder, and you think Hitler is the only bad guy.
Then... Ok, boy, like I said, I saw yugoslavia in the 1980's. Every commie country had a problem with alcoholism, because life was to bland, empty and unbearable, that getting drunk was the only escape.
F**** a.

I see. You just add numbers and conclude Stalin was more evil than Hitler.
Keep on doing some maths here.
Could you calculate the ratio of deads Hitler made during his 6 years' war (1939-1945). It gave like 50 millions of deads if we include his japanese ally. Let's focus on Europe : like more than 30 millions of dead people... rather 40 indeed, among them 25 millions of soviet people. Let's focus on USSR, he did those 23-27 millions in like 4 years. Among these 25 millions, 15 millions are civilians. Germans occupied soviet's land for around 3 years . It would be 5 millions of dead civilians a year for Hitler ruling USSR.
Look at Stalin's numbers. Historians attribute him like 15 millions of deads during like 30 years of gvt. It gives something like 0.5 million a year.

Following the mathematics, Hitler was like 10 times more evil than Stalin.
Oh, i must add Stalin never provoked a WW on his own... he never genocided any people... never used gaz chambers etc. and he didnt shoot himself like a rat in a bunker after having devastated the earth for 6 years... he died from natural causes in a pacific world.

[DavidFrankenberg]

21 years of peace indeed.

None of these wars provoked any genocide or millions of deads.

:roll:

None of these countries would have provoked a WW nor a gneocide. Only Hitler was mad enough to provoke it.

a) You've got a lot of reading to do about the hostilities on the Balkan-Danube-Region...
b) you know about the war 1991-1995? Btw., one of my uncles fought in that war...
c) They would have fought a war within their capabilities.

There was no WW, no genocide, no gaz chambers, no millions of deads.

SU didnt plan to invade Europe. Hitler planned to provoke a WW and to invade USSR, and he did it.

You guys don't have enough smileys....

Oh, so the Soviet Union was peaceful?

Yep.

Tell me one reason why the soviet Union wouldn't have attacked europe, considering:

Post 41:
a) They attacked Poland & Finnland in 1939
b) They blackmailed Romania in 1940
c) They finances every communist uprising in europe and asia well into the 70's

It does not prove that USSR was ready to attack Hitler by june 41...

Post 45:
d) They occupied half of europe after 1945
e) Their empire was based an ideology which had the goal of world domination.
f) Why was there a cold war between 1946 and 1990?
g) why did they violently shoot down all freedom movements in central-eastern europe?

Maybe you forgot they occupied eastern Europe as a consequence of the hitlerian agression's war ?
There was a cold war because USA didnt agree with Soviet power.

Besides: Why did the new soviet tank, the T-34, have rubber tracks designed to move on german autobahns?

I just know for sure T34 first served to defend the soviet land for years before going on "autobahns".

Why were the soviets basically incapable of stopping the german advance into europe because they were in an offensive position but not fully mobilized yet?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalin%27 ... and_debate

I see. You are another victim of hitlerian propaganda of 1941. Maybe Hitler managed to convince himself of this lie ?

You know what the difference is between a war over economic goals and a war over ideologies?
War over economic goals have an end.
Wars over ideologies are endless. They are crusades. Jihads.

I cant see your point. Sorry.

There were millions of non-poles in Poland actually (like Ukrainians, Belrarus etc).

That's the point.

The Poles had in 1939 (do I have to do this over and over again)?

According to Wikipedia
35.100.000
27.127.790 Poles (catholics)
4.878.900 Ukrainians
1.088.100 Belarusians
807.300 Germans
1.193.400 czechs, lithunian, russians
3.510.000 jews

According to my own studies these numbers are wrong. But I have not finished these studies yet.

Poland back then was a young state. I ususally compare states to persons. A young person is insecure, agressive, albeit with good intentions, and often boundless. So where all new states in central-eastern, including Germany.

The poles had parts of their populations that were very anti-semitic, very anti-russian and very anti-german. They wanted to polonize the ukrainians and belarusians.
To describe to you where these polish sentiments came from, I would have to back way back and go miles off topic. But many new states had an old state as their identity, and there was an urge to reinstate that old, lost empire. The germans never got over that they lost the HRR. And the poles never git over that they lost Lithuania-Poland. The ukrainians never git over that their empire has been shattered by the mongols and were not "little russia" according to moscow. As you see, eastern europe was a mess.

I am a slav. I have been deeply into slavic studies. But that's a different topic.

But the loss of life in Poland is very hard to estimate, since you had two aggressors. Soldiers, that fight overseas, of course won't make babies. Dead soldiers nonetheless.

I would estimate the number of poles (omly catholics) killed due to the conditions that the germans put them in to at not higher than 800.000.
The rest is poles becoming victims of the SU, as you call it, war casualties and the lack of men, and reprisal against "Volksliste-Poles".
The jews of couse of a different story.

Jews were polish citizens. Why dont you count them as victims of Hitler ? Since polish jews are like 90% of Hitler's victims in Poland, it is very questionable to discount them of the casualties of Hitler's war...

I am sad about the hostility between Hitler and Poland. Poland and Germany would have been perfect allies against the SU. It also would have had a psychological effect on all slavic nations, particilariliy in the east. A slavic-friendly Hitler would have won, IMO.

You think Poles should have been idiot to the point to ally themselves with the man who would erase them from the surface of the earth ? I think it wd have been more idiotic for them not to fight Hitler. What is sad is that Poles didnt permit the passage of the Red Army on their land in order to protect them from the hitlerian menace. They preferred a distant alliance with timorous countries like Britain and France.

Mussolini didnt want a WW. He always tried to prevent Hitler's war. He failed.

That's new to me.

Mussolini was the first ennmy of Hitler. But the "democracies" didnt listen to him. So he chose to ally with the devil. He paid the price...

But what's not new to me is that Hitler wanted to mediate between the danubian-slavic nations. He needed these nations for their national ressoucres. The Ustasha, that my grandfather was a part of, was too brutal. This was critizized by the germans since it created symoathy for the partisans. Hungary and Romania were on the brink of a war over transilvania.
Serbs were the lowest scum for Hitler
Bulgarians were basically unknown to him.

But Hitler did try to calm these parties down and keep the war there more civil.

Hitler had no consideration for those peoples. He despised even his "allies"... romanians were despised, italians were despised, hungarians were despised... when the defeats began to accumulate he put the blame on them for that. HItler had absolutely no consideration for his allies, and even for his own people the Germans as he showed at the end of the war...

Oh yes, it was. It was Hitler's Germany vs the world.

In 1945 it was. But you are aware that the allies also bombed hungarian and romanian cities?
Germany was just the power plant. Just like in WW1, where all the allies of Germany were more of a burden than a help.
His main objective was the defeat of the USSR. Not fighting partisan warfare in the f*** balkan mountains.
Germany's capacity to produce small arms was also limited. And they had to supply the romanians, bulgarians, croats, cetniks, partially hungarians and so on. They weakened Germany. The only thing were you are right: Germany was the strategic jackpot.

It was Hitler's war. Germany didnt need that war. Hitler needed it, he wanted his WWI² like a frustrated child who has lost the last game and wants absolutely to win one regardless to the consequences of his acts...
You make me laugh since i see you repeating Hitler's propaganda and his depsise of his own allies : romanians croats etc never weakened Germany... they served it (at their own dispense), they died for it, Hitler just put the blame on them when he began to accumulate the defeats as the childish egoist he was... and what is incredible is to see a croat like you grandson of usatachas who fought for Hitler who repeat the despise of Hitler to his own grandparents who risked their lives and were indeed abused by him decades later.... wow !

But it was not a war of Germany vs the World. It was a war over a f*** up peace after WW1 and a war between facism and communism, where the western allies interfered for reasons currently still unknown.

Ther is no mystery about WWII... it was Hitler's war, and only Hitler's war.

The Ostplan planned to starve and kill all non-german people except 12 millions whom were to serve as slaves for the Germans. Germans killed like 23 millions of people in like 3 years in USSR ("ost"). This was the application of the Ostplan. Hitler didnt want to conquer a city like Leningrad, he just wanted to starve its population to death. He succeeded in starving like 1 million of civilians there. He had the same plan for Moscow. He would have done so there, but he failed during the winter 41 to siege the city.

Hitler, Hitler, Hitler... you know the war was fought by people other than Hiter, right? I told you, some where routhless, some weren't. My grandfather was on the eastern front and always told me about the great cammeradery with the germans.

Hitler manipulated all these peoples, all his allies for his own pleasure... and your grandfather was part of this manipulation.

Did he want to starve Leningrad to death?

Yep.

Or just force it to surrender?

No, he didnt need million of russians... he preferrred to starve them to death. It was his pleasure.

How were the Generals involved?

Fully involved.

The Finns defiitely let the russians pass a lot of the food transports through, that's for sure.

The Finns despite official allies of the Führer were smart enough to realize that Hitler would not win this war so easyli... since Finns have tasted the thoughness of the Red Armyjust before ("winter war" 40). Mannerheim played a great partition there !

Btw. I am not trying to defend Hitler. All I'm saying is:

The Wehrmacht was 17,3 million people. They al had different feelings and personalities. They weren't programmed robots. The germans increasingly became sick of Hitler by the time they forced them to invade russia.

I cant read in the spirit of millions of Germans. I can only state they followed him for the best and for the worst... When defeats never stopped, strangely (?) the germans began to question hilm a bit, but to be honest they questioned him 'just a bit'.

--------

Because he defeated Hitler ?

No, because he killed more people than Hitler. Do I really have to show you the numbers again?

Stalins gain of power: 1922

Census 1926: 147.027.915 citizens. 100.891.244 Russians, 29.018.187 Ukrainians, 4.983.240 Belarusians, 1.238.549 germans, 10.896.696 others
Census 1939 (January) 170.557.093 citizens. 99.591.520 Russians, 28.111.007 Ukrainians, 5.275.393 Belausians, 1.427.232 germans, 36.151.941 others

"Others" are primarily tartars and caucasians. (I mean the tribes like chechens)

Lets do the maths here.
Poles and russians are quite alike. Let's compare their birthrate between 1926 and 1931

Poland: 1926: 29.326.316
Poland 1939: 35.100.000 (+19.69%)

How the SU in 1939 should have looked
Russlans: 120.760.000 (- 21.680.000)
Ukrainians: 34.733.000 ( - 6.633.000)
Belarusians: 5.964.000 ( - 689.000)
Germans: 1.482.000 (- 55.000)

Look at the number of germans. fits very well. And the ukrainian death toll fits to the 6+ million of the holodomor.
Apparently, my assumption, that you can apply the polish pop-increase on the USSR, was correct.

So between 1926-1939, Josef Stalin cause the death of 29.057.000 russians, ukrainians, belarusian and germans.
So you're a little commie.
Wow. 100 years of mass murder, and you think Hitler is the only bad guy.
Then... Ok, boy, like I said, I saw yugoslavia in the 1980's. Every commie country had a problem with alcoholism, because life was to bland, empty and unbearable, that getting drunk was the only escape.
F**** a.

I see. You just add numbers and conclude Stalin was more evil than Hitler.
Keep on doing some maths here.
Could you calculate the ratio of deads Hitler made during his 6 years' war (1939-1945). It gave like 50 millions of deads if we include his japanese ally. Let's focus on Europe : like more than 30 millions of dead people... rather 40 indeed, among them 25 millions of soviet people. Let's focus on USSR, he did those 23-27 millions in like 4 years. Among these 25 millions, 15 millions are civilians. Germans occupied soviet's land for around 3 years . It would be 5 millions of dead civilians a year for Hitler ruling USSR.
Look at Stalin's numbers. Historians attribute him like 15 millions of deads during like 30 years of gvt. It gives something like 0.5 million a year.

Following the mathematics, Hitler was like 10 times more evil than Stalin.
Oh, i must add Stalin never provoked a WW on his own... he never genocided any people... never used gaz chambers etc. and he didnt shoot himself like a rat in a bunker after having devastated the earth for 6 years... he died from natural causes in a pacific world.

[David Thompson]

CroGer -- This forum has rules. They are posted for all to see at app.php/rules. In the rules are these passages:

No insults are tolerated (that includes serious national and religious insults)

* * * * *

2. Civility

The first rule of the forum is: "No insults are tolerated (that includes serious national and religious insults)." Personal remarks in posts are strongly discouraged, and personal insults are forbidden here.

There has been a lot of stimulating information exchanged on this forum, and some excellent discussions of controversial points. With few exceptions, the participants are thoughtful, serious people. If you find an argument is flawed, point out the flaws and the evidence to the contrary, and leave it at that. There is no need to resort to insults which do not prove your point. If you disagree with a contributor, please use your energy to show why his argument is mistaken. This will improve both the tone and quality of our discussions.

National and religious insults are forbidden by this first rule of the forum, and the third rule of the forum prohibits racist remarks and slang expressions for ethnic, national, religious or racial groups. Posts containing insulting generalizations about nationalities, ethnic groups, societies or religious groups and practices are not permitted here. This includes remarks about collective responsibility.

Nonconforming posts are subject to deletion without warning. Serious breaches of these rules are punishable by banning the poster.

If any reader feels that an offensive remark has been directed at him or at some national, racial, ethnic or religious group, and I have somehow missed it, please send me a PM directing my attention to the statement.

* * * * *

2. Low forms of speech

We have intelligent readers here, so low forms of speech are unwelcome. We're trying to move past the lavatory wall stage in discussing historical problems. Noncomplying posts are subject to deletion after warning, and in extreme cases, to deletion with no warning at all.

Consider this your warning.

[CroGer]

@David Thompson

What insults?

btw. I try to keep the discussion ON TOPIC, while David Frankenberg constantely digresses, and turns this into a weird discussion about "Hitler".
The question here has nothing to do with Hitler.

@ David Frankenberg

Your ideas of the USSR are ludicrous. I just asked you: if Stalin had no desire to conquer europe, why did he conquer half of europe in 1945, and why didn't the red army leave these countries when the people there revolted against the occupation?

-> Hungarian revolt of 1956
-> Prague Spring 1968

"It was because of Hitler"

No.


And you don't understand what a genocide is. Your info about WW2 is low and your argumentation is irrational.

Unfortunately, some of your replys are so rediculous, that I could only answer them in ways that some here might interprete as "insults". You constantly digress and claim thing without any empirical data. You don't follow my argumentation.

example:
Why didn't I include jews into the number of poles killed? I wrote that I won't touch the Holocaust and I am estimating the number of non-jewish poles killed, according to my demographic studies. The killing of catholic poles is not part of the Holocaust.

"Mousolini tried to warn the wolds"

Historians attribute him like 15 millions of deads during like 30 years of gvt. It gives something like 0.5 million a year

Historians strongly disagree on the number of people killed by Stalin.

Btw. my grandfather didn't fight for Hitler. He fought against communism. He tried to prevent what happened between 45-91. Today, more croats live outside of croatia than within croatia. Ask yourself why?
Croatia was once a properous part of the Habsburg empire. I have seen Yugoslavia in the 80's. It was like a time travel, going from the 1980's to the 1945. Not a single former communist country has recovered yet from the damage that communism left in that country.



And a question:

What would the "international community" call it, if turkey would bomb the entire kurdish part of the middle east, to a point where 80% of all houses in residental eras are desrroyed, then violently expell all kurds from turkey into the rest of kurdistan in Syria&Iraq, kill about 20% of all turkish kurds in the process, and keep all kurds on low calories (560-1200) for 3 years, while all kurdsih PKK-members are used a forced labourers for 3 years?

Would that be called a genocie?

[DavidFrankenberg]

@David Thompson

What insults?

btw. I try to keep the discussion ON TOPIC, while David Frankenberg constantely digresses, and turns this into a weird discussion about "Hitler".
The question here has nothing to do with Hitler.

Oh, you would like to talk about the Holocaust and WWII war crimes without mentionning Hitler ? That's original for the least.

@ David Frankenberg

Your ideas of the USSR are ludicrous. I just asked you: if Stalin had no desire to conquer europe, why did he conquer half of europe in 1945,

Maybe because Germany, and its allies agressed USSR the 22nd june 1941 ?

and why didn't the red army leave these countries when the people there revolted against the occupation?

Maybe because they didnt want to leave these countries which attacked USSR the 22nd june 1941 leading to the massacre of 25 millions of soviet peoples ?

-> Hungarian revolt of 1956
-> Prague Spring 1968

Some elements revolted risked their lives and lost... that's part of the game.

"It was because of Hitler"

No.

Absolutely : no Hitler in 1933 > no german agression 1941 > no soviet invasion 1944/5 > no soviet occupation 1944-1990.

And you don't understand what a genocide is. Your info about WW2 is low and your argumentation is irrational.

Unfortunately, some of your replys are so rediculous, that I could only answer them in ways that some here might interprete as "insults". You constantly digress and claim thing without any empirical data. You don't follow my argumentation.

Absolutely. I dont follow your argumentation.

example:
Why didn't I include jews into the number of poles killed? I wrote that I won't touch the Holocaust and I am estimating the number of non-jewish poles killed, according to my demographic studies. The killing of catholic poles is not part of the Holocaust.

What about the jewish poles ? What are your numbers about them ?

"Mousolini tried to warn the wolds"

Yep. He failed of course (unfortunately).

Historians attribute him like 15 millions of deads during like 30 years of gvt. It gives something like 0.5 million a year

Historians strongly disagree on the number of people killed by Stalin.

I gave you a volunteerly high estimate, as i thought you would go crazy if i wd give a moderate estimate.

Btw. my grandfather didn't fight for Hitler. He fought against communism.

Didnt you say he fought beside Hitler'' soldiers during the war ? Did he follow german orders, Hitler's orders ?

He tried to prevent what happened between 45-91.

What happened between 45-91 was the direct consequence of what he did between 1940-1945.

Today, more croats live outside of croatia than within croatia. Ask yourself why?

I guess you better ask them first. *

Croatia was once a properous part of the Habsburg empire. I have seen Yugoslavia in the 80's. It was like a time travel, going from the 1980's to the 1945.

Yugoslavia was a very beautiful and pacific country before german reunification of 1989.

Not a single former communist country has recovered yet from the damage that communism left in that country.

The damages were rather caused by the war provoked by the german reunification, the subsequent slovenian secession and croatian problem.

And a question:

What would the "international community" call it, if turkey would bomb the entire kurdish part of the middle east, to a point where 80% of all houses in residental eras are desrroyed, then violently expell all kurds from turkey into the rest of kurdistan in Syria&Iraq, kill about 20% of all turkish kurds in the process, and keep all kurds on low calories (560-1200) for 3 years, while all kurdsih PKK-members are used a forced labourers for 3 years? Would that be called a genocie?

I wd just say that's pretty bad, but still nothing compared to what Hitler did between 1939 and 1945.

[history1]

[...]
Albeit this war was nonsensical, Germans fought hard for the sake of Hitler. Very few desertions happened. Looks like they believed their beloved Fürher.

How many do you consider "very few" exactly? Believed their beloved Führer? They swore on oath on him and were afraid of the punishment when being caught after desertion. A five minute lasting drum court and a bullet in your head for "desertion and showing fear in the face of the enemy" and you´re gone. And your family at home without maintenance!

Disapointment and anger among german soldiers against him only raised with the era of the defeats : after Stalingrad.

Nonsense! Just one example of the many opponents of Hitlers regime and ideas:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anton_Schmid

[history1]

[...]

There was also resistance among the germans of the genocides. The difference between Nazi Germany and the USA is, though: Nazi Germany was a totalitarian state. The USA is a democracy. There you can openly say "Boy, that sucks".

The USA didnt genocide anyone.
[...]

ROFL
Maybe not during WWII but during five (!) centuries before on the land they conquered!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_A ... ndian_Wars

[history1]

[...]

Btw. I am not trying to defend Hitler. All I'm saying is:

The Wehrmacht was 17,3 million people. They al had different feelings and personalities. They weren't programmed robots. The germans increasingly became sick of Hitler by the time they forced them to invade russia.

I cant read in the spirit of millions of Germans. I can only state they followed him for the best and for the worst... When defeats never stopped, strangely (?) the germans began to question hilm a bit, but to be honest they questioned him 'just a bit'.[...]

Obviously you kow absolute nothing about the resistance in Austria which was even active before WWII.

[history1]

[...]

@ David Frankenberg
Your ideas of the USSR are ludicrous. I just asked you: if Stalin had no desire to conquer europe, why did he conquer half of europe in 1945,

Maybe because Germany, and its allies agressed USSR the 22nd june 1941 ?

and why didn't the red army leave these countries when the people there revolted against the occupation?

Maybe because they didnt want to leave these countries which attacked USSR the 22nd june 1941 leading to the massacre of 25 millions of soviet peoples ? [...]

1. To defend your own country you don´t need to conquer others, just stop your troops on your countries border! But why does that remind me on a country which fights terrorism only oversea countries?
2. Please explain me when Poland or the CSSR did attack the Soviets in WWII!?