Are Allied "Crimes" really equal to the Holocaust?

Discussions on the Holocaust and 20th Century War Crimes. Note that Holocaust denial is not allowed. Hosted by David Thompson.
User avatar
Cammin1
Member
Posts: 406
Joined: 01 Mar 2003 02:55
Location: Chicago

Post by Cammin1 » 28 Nov 2003 03:50

My .02, (you are all more well read and I may be getting off topic but,)
Pacific theater of allied operation was 8O, not sure how many died in the Japanese city (Colateral damage) bombings however they were huge. I guess weather or not they were a war crime is a matter of opinion.

User avatar
Peter H
Member
Posts: 28628
Joined: 30 Dec 2002 13:18
Location: Australia

Post by Peter H » 28 Nov 2003 05:16

The theory could be stated that Stalin doubted the legitimacy of his rule---the Bolshevik Revolution,the Russian Civil War, and his own grab for power after Lenin's death.All chapters in an atmosphere of violence,or the threat of violence.Hence the suspicion of overthrow and the methods to counter such threats.

Hitler at least could absolve himself that he worked the Weimar system after the Beer Hall putsch and came to power via democratic means.However a little thing called the Enabling Act meant he could not thereafter be removed by the same method.

Krasnaya Zvezda
Financial supporter
Posts: 1157
Joined: 27 Dec 2002 17:45
Location: Moscow

Post by Krasnaya Zvezda » 28 Nov 2003 10:08

michael mills wrote:R M Schultz wrote:

If Stalin brutally purged the officer corps of the Red Army, in the absence of any military plot against him, and in the absence of any sign of real ideological opposition, then that is a clear sign of his irrationality.
The method is commonly applied in todays science. For instance, if one is to design a test to screen for a mortal disease, let say cancer, the test has to be utmost and at first sensitive that is able to pick all the conditions where cancer exists and much less specific (in this precarious situation nobody cares about specificity) . Lower specificity will result in more false positives but that is acceptable in this situation as it is easy to deal with false positives, the problems are undetected cancers that you can not afford to miss as that is sure death you have missed.

So Stalin new the potential sources of usurpation of his power. He also wanted to avoid death (political or physical). He regularly purged the officer cadre. He really did not care how many innocents will suffer yet he knew he is making it almost impossible for anyone to challenge his supremacy. This is not irrational at all. If your rational is to stay in power this is an efficient system. Remember this method has high sensitivity and low specificity but the outcomes is benevolent for only one person that matters - Stalin. Had for instance he let people vote for him he would loose for sure, had he let the army grow dissatisfaction sooner or later they would take him down. Like this knowing how system operates he made sure he eliminates every obstacle to his survival.

Now why did he acted like this? Obviously from fear. And he had a fear for good reasons. Had he had a sense that he is doing this for his people, for the country and much more important , had he had a sense that vast majority of the people are supporting him and that most state structures are with him - he would probably be less sensitive in his methods and more specific. Unlike Hitler who was convinced he is doing something for his country and more important this believe was widely shared in Germany from the lowest to the highest members of the society, this was not the case in USSR where he was detested and wished to be gone. Stalin had nothing else to offer his people except the desire for him to stay in power despite the desires of everyone else. He had to design a system where people would be coming to important positions because he liked them, but yet he had to prevent from the cancer developing in them in time. Than he would again replace them with his followers and the cycle of generation , destruction and regeneration would continue never allowing the cancer to develop and we know cancer usually develops in cells that have been around for awhile. The process usually starts in one cell and than spreads to others, yet it is this single cell that we can not identify, but b amputating the organ we know for sure we will avoid cancer in this organ. There are many doctors who recommend hysterectomies (removal of the uterus) and mastectomies (removal of the breasts) as a prevention in all women. many others disagree thinking it is too radical. It is up to the patient to decide today, yet in Stalins time that was not the option offered cause he knew that the organism and the patient was - himself.

User avatar
R.M. Schultz
Member
Posts: 3062
Joined: 05 Feb 2003 03:44
Location: Chicago

Post by R.M. Schultz » 28 Nov 2003 15:50

michael mills wrote:RM, if you cannot see the irrational nature of Stalin's purge of the military, then your stint as a "godless Communist" must have addled your critical faculties to a greater extent than I had at first thought.
Perhaps it was ill advised, but Stalin did win the war. Compared to Hitler, Stalin's regime looks like a smashing success. He won the largest war in history, helped his ally triumph in China, acquired the A-Bomb for the Soviets, pioneered the H-Bomb, and left the Soviets with an industrialized economy, the largest modern army in the world, and a commanding lead in the Space Race. These are real accomplishments.

User avatar
Nina van M.
Member
Posts: 365
Joined: 31 Oct 2003 23:55
Location: Ljubljana, Slovenia

Post by Nina van M. » 28 Nov 2003 16:46

Atomic bombs and H-bombs are presenting big achievements to you, Schultz :? ?
Yet another weapon for mass murder- I don't and can't understand, how could that possibly be any kind of "success" and accomplishment, sorry.
I don't compare him to anyone at all, but you have to admit, that neither was Stalin the "gentle dictator" and the things weren't that perfect in Soviet Union. You wrote just couple better sides from his regime...

Salute, von K.

David Thompson
Forum Staff
Posts: 23579
Joined: 20 Jul 2002 19:52
Location: USA

Post by David Thompson » 28 Nov 2003 19:47

For readers interested in other readers' appraisals of Stalin, take a look at:

http://www.thirdreichforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=17640

and

http://www.thirdreichforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=18307

User avatar
Alexander
Member
Posts: 182
Joined: 13 Oct 2003 08:25
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine

Post by Alexander » 28 Nov 2003 19:48

R.M. Schultz wrote:
michael mills wrote:RM, if you cannot see the irrational nature of Stalin's purge of the military, then your stint as a "godless Communist" must have addled your critical faculties to a greater extent than I had at first thought.
Perhaps it was ill advised, but Stalin did win the war. Compared to Hitler, Stalin's regime looks like a smashing success. He won the largest war in history, helped his ally triumph in China, acquired the A-Bomb for the Soviets, pioneered the H-Bomb, and left the Soviets with an industrialized economy, the largest modern army in the world, and a commanding lead in the Space Race. These are real accomplishments.
...And with bloody scars on faces of different nations. Accomplishments vs deaths of millions of people. :|

User avatar
Matt H.
Member
Posts: 554
Joined: 15 Aug 2003 18:34
Location: Keele, Staffs, UK

Post by Matt H. » 28 Nov 2003 23:54

R.M. Schultz wrote:
michael mills wrote:RM, if you cannot see the irrational nature of Stalin's purge of the military, then your stint as a "godless Communist" must have addled your critical faculties to a greater extent than I had at first thought.
Perhaps it was ill advised, but Stalin did win the war. Compared to Hitler, Stalin's regime looks like a smashing success. He won the largest war in history, helped his ally triumph in China, acquired the A-Bomb for the Soviets, pioneered the H-Bomb, and left the Soviets with an industrialized economy, the largest modern army in the world, and a commanding lead in the Space Race. These are real accomplishments.
Stalin also left over 30 million dead after he snuffed it. The artificial Ukrainian famine and the Kazakhstan famine, the death toll for which amounted to more than the total number of deaths in the Great War! The terror against the kulaks, many of which probably owned one more cow than their next door neighbour, and the endless columns of "politicals" swallowed up into the Gulags, probably for cracking a joke about Stalin's moustache or not clapping continuously like the rest of the mindless commies in the Kremlin.

Damn, guess my "Cold Warrior" phase just emerged!

User avatar
witness
Member
Posts: 2279
Joined: 21 Sep 2002 00:39
Location: North

Post by witness » 29 Nov 2003 00:51

Deterance wrote:
R.M. Schultz wrote:
Deterance wrote:Same absolute idealogy....just a different name.
Really? All the Soviet excesses were Democide (the killing of social groups) and never Genocide (killing by race, ethnicity). Since there is no racism in the Soviet ideology, aren't they that much better than the Nazis?
I dont think so. Immense human suffering is the same to the victim. Whether the perpetrator was motivated by racial or political grounds is secondary.
I agree.
Both characterized a group of people as "sub human" and then attempted to totaly destroy those people.
As for the Soviet system I never heard of this. Where did you get it from that the Communists ever characterized those whom they considered
"class enemies " as "subhumans " ?
Both totalitarian systems are brutal to the extreme.
However one of the essential differences being is that while the Nazi idelogy is completely irrational (built up on the " Aryan mystique "wishful thinking )the Communist ideology attempted to build a rational Universal system based on the socio -economical theories.
And once again as you said for the victims it didn't really matter.

User avatar
Matt H.
Member
Posts: 554
Joined: 15 Aug 2003 18:34
Location: Keele, Staffs, UK

Post by Matt H. » 29 Nov 2003 01:05

Marxism is the clearest example of "wishful thinking" I have ever come across. The bearded boob must have been away with the fairies for his entire life.

User avatar
Penn44
Banned
Posts: 4214
Joined: 26 Jun 2003 06:25
Location: US

Post by Penn44 » 29 Nov 2003 01:13

Matt H. wrote:Marxism is the clearest example of "wishful thinking" I have ever come across. The bearded boob must have been away with the fairies for his entire life.
And Nazism is "less wishful thinking"?

There is a great deal of childlike "magical thinking" in Nazism, and I use the term, "magical thinking" in the clinical sense derived from child psychology.


.

User avatar
witness
Member
Posts: 2279
Joined: 21 Sep 2002 00:39
Location: North

Post by witness » 29 Nov 2003 01:39

Matt H. wrote:Marxism is the clearest example of "wishful thinking" I have ever come across. The bearded boob must have been away with the fairies for his entire life.
Look if you had got yourself familiar with the both ideologies , you might have dicovered that while Marxism had many serious flaws in its theory it is certainly much more logical (particularly its analitical parts ) compared to the absolutely irrational ideology of Nazism.
Nazism played on one simple thesis which is very attractive to populace
-people you Aryans are better then others ( and no explanations is given as to why )and therefore have all the rights to impose your will on them.It is always very tempting for one to believe then he is better then the other.This is the main appeal of Nazism .And no matter how primitive this appeal is it creates the really powerful stumili for rabble to be led by a leader preaching this idea.

User avatar
John W
Financial supporter
Posts: 9088
Joined: 03 Jan 2003 07:12
Location: United States of America

Post by John W » 29 Nov 2003 01:55

witness wrote:And no matter how primitive this appeal is it creates the really powerful stumili for rabble to be led by a leader preaching this idea.
As it still does... :|

I've had real thoughts about these systems. I'm not so sure now, but till a while back, I used to think that in theory Marxism, it is a good system and has good ideals. It is just impossible to put into practise (as it should be so).

User avatar
witness
Member
Posts: 2279
Joined: 21 Sep 2002 00:39
Location: North

Post by witness » 29 Nov 2003 02:02

John W wrote:I used to think that in theory Marxism, it is a good system and has good ideals. It is just impossible to put into practise (as it should be so).
I agree.

User avatar
Penn44
Banned
Posts: 4214
Joined: 26 Jun 2003 06:25
Location: US

Post by Penn44 » 29 Nov 2003 03:25

John W wrote: I used to think that in theory Marxism, it is a good system and has good ideals. It is just impossible to put into practise (as it should be so).
And is capitalism that much better?

.

Return to “Holocaust & 20th Century War Crimes”