What Do Russians Think About Stalin?

[dviz]

He is a Romanian - the most cowardly nation of all the allies of Nazi Germany

Not according to the Nazis. Among Nazi allies, Romanians received the largest amount of Iron Crosses by a large margin.

[Rumata]

I don't know about any attack, so it's probably your imagination, Czechoslovak forces were withdrawn as per the ultimatum.

Poland had no say in what was to happen with Czechoslovakia, it was the British, French, Italians and Germans that decided Czechoslovakia's fate.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munich_Agreement

Also how could Poland side with Czechoslovakia if the latter declined to fight the Germans? Actually Poland offered Czechoslovakia help if it was to put up military resistance, which Czechoslovakia was unwilling to do, instead counting on Munich Conference to be in its favour, which badly backfired.

Poland tried to cooperate with Czechoslovakia many times in the Interbellum period, but it rejected those proposals.

In fact when Poland proposed to France to jointly attack Germany after Hitler took power
https://www.thefirstnews.com/article...s-germany-3447

Czechoslovakia warned Germany of the existence of such plans. Czech politicians were counducting anti-Polish policy because they thought Poland was in a worse position, and Czechoslovakia wanted to take Poland's "place" as the most important ally of France, painting itself as the only democracy in Central Europe, which hugely backfired when it found itself sold at Munich.

Don't be ridicolous, noone would let an enemy army march through their territory, even a Russian could understand that. Czechoslovakia didn't have a common boundary with the USSR, so hardly a surprise.

The same land that was stolen from Poland in 1919 (the division of Cieszyn Silesia happened in 1918 by common agreement of Polish and Czech local comitees) after Czechoslovakia backstabbed Poland while Poland moved most of its army from there bacause it was needed on the front.

And those same lands would just fall into the German hands otherwise, making Poland's defensive posistion against Germany even worse than it was IRL and providing German war machine with even more industry.

It was only a "turn" of Poland to be attacked because the Soviet Union allied with Germany in Ribbentrop-Molotov pact to divide Central and Eastern Europe among themselves.

Obviously the Soviet Union which allied with Germany, because otherwise Germany feared the war on two fronts - against France, UK and Poland too much.

It didn't seem to be strategically very bad when Soviet Union allied with Germany to see Poland fall. It obviously would be bad if the Soviet Union wanted to avoid a war and have peace in Europe, but Stalin had something else on his mind.

So from 1-st September to 17-th September German army destroyed Polish army and achieved and had about all chances for a total success and what did your allies in Britain and France? According to you Britain and France were stopped by the officially non-aggression Ribbentrop-Molotov pact.. For 17 days their ally - Poland fought Germany 1 to 1 and all this time they feared the fact that USSR promised not to attack Germany? Meanwhile if Britain and France stroke Germany from the west, USSR indeed could stay neutral, we never know.
By blaming USSR for this situation and not your fake allies you demonstrate how big a coper you are.

I didn't imagine anything. I read it in the web. Just we probably got info from different sources and it's very difficult and often impossible to state which are true and which false, so I wouldn't waste much time on it. I'm already sorry I started to comment this thread.

I'm not "ridiculous". The officially neutral Sweden let the transit of Nazi troops through its territory and even a coping Pole could comprehend it.

[Victor]

Not according to the Nazis. Among Nazi allies, Romanians received the largest amount of Iron Crosses by a large margin.

Romanians switched the sides in the very proper moment. My grandfather who participated in famous siege of Budapest as an artillery officer fought next to Romanian troops which used to be part of Axis few months ago.

[Rumata]

I divided my post in two parts because it was too long to read

How can a person be totalitarian? More like a political system can be totalitarian.

I don't know you enough to judge whether you're evil or not.

Obviously, there were good people under nazist tule, like for example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilm_Hosenfeld

Modern Poland and especially modern Lithuania are only possible because Poland and soon after other European countries threw down communism, and the USSR fell apart, freeing - among other - the Baltic republics which it occupied at the turn of 1939/1940.

And yet this was exactly was has happened, not to really look far

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katyn_massacre

Here you have a whole list (in Polish of articles about German and Soviet murders of the Poles, focusing on Polish elites, just in the period from the invasion of Poland to the German attack on USSR, September 1939 - June 1941).

Many is an overstatement. Some people were able to survive, but most perished in the time period from the start of the Russian Civil War to the end of stalinism. Of course later the USSR no longer kept mass murdering people at the same rate - though Gulags still existed for some time and the Soviet troops have commited numerous war crimes, especially in Afghanistan - but the new intellectual elites came into existence, somewhat replacing the previous ones.

This part is already indeed ridiculous. Poland and Lithuania have sovereignty because of Poland bravely throwing down communism? that very Poland whose elites "had been destroyed by communists"? What? stop your illusions. Poland went the way of capitalism because of the processes inside USSR. That's the truth for you.

I'm sure you can't properly prove what you bubble about share of perished elites in Russia.

I don't know if you can prove the Katyn case too. Nor that I were up to dig in those things either.

[Rumata]

The whole picture of WWII looks like some enormous powers wanted such a war to happen and that it would be particularly intensive for USSR and Germany. While some others were touched much less. Keeping this in mind I don't see much sense in examination of details such as what small and even medium countries could do.

[KirillMazur]

Dedicated to fans of repeating fakes about the losses of the USSR in the Second World War.
How they turned the VICTORY into a kind of Holocaust, the senseless sacrifice made by the "bloody Stalin", you and I can see quite clearly today.

Spoiler!

In February 1946, the Bolshevik magazine first published the figure of 7 million direct losses suffered by the Soviet people in the war against fascism. This is not yet Stalin said. It is published in the party press.

In March 1946, Stalin, in an interview with the newspaper Pravda, confirmed these data: “As a result of the German invasion, the Soviet Union irretrievably lost about seven million people in the battles with the Germans, as well as due to the German occupation and the theft of Soviet people into German hard labor.”

Think about it - 7 million! This is a huge loss. Soviet-Afghan war of 1979-1989 lasted ten years. Over the course of ten years, 15,000 of our soldiers have died according to the highest estimates. There were, of course, several times more people with disabilities. Remember the 90s, how pretty tangible it was for the people.

Now imagine that in 4 years there were 500 times more deaths than in 10 years of the Afghan war. And the disabled, too. Multiply the sensation of the loss of the Afghan war by 500 times - how is it?

That's it. 7 million - a tragedy of enormous proportions. Plus - 20 million disabled people. According to statistics, for every person killed, 3-4 are disabled. The country was going through this tragedy hard.

And the Soviet people did not meet Stalin’s figure with disbelief. People were friends with their heads and felt these losses on themselves.

But after Stalin's death, a company began to discredit him. Including on discrediting him as the military leader, the Commander-in-chief. And Khrushchev needed new data on losses. Such that Stalin could be seen in them exactly as he was presented at the XX Congress.

Even such a document appeared:

"Declassified
Of particular importance
copy number 2

In the Central Committee of the CPSU

Comrade Shepilov asks to wire the figures to be published on the casualties of the Soviet army and Soviet people during the Second World War.

In this regard, I report:

a) in an interview with I.V. Stalin, published in print on March 14, 1946, it was said: “... As a result of the German invasion, the Soviet Union irretrievably lost in battles with the Germans, and also thanks to the German occupation and the theft of Soviet people to German hard labor - about seven million people. In other words, the Soviet Union lost several times more people than England and the United States of America combined. ”

b) according to the estimates of the Central Statistical Bureau, the population decline of the USSR during the war years as a result of losses of the Soviet army by the extermination of Soviet people by the invaders and the excess of mortality over fertility amounted to more than 20 million people;

c) from the numbers published in the compilation of the Central Statistical Bureau on the population of the USSR for 1940 (191.7 million) and in April 1956 (200.2 million), as well as data on population growth published in recent years, we can conclude that losses in the USSR during the war amounted not to 7 million, but much more.

In this regard, I would consider it necessary to give Comrade Shepilov’s instruction to either not give the loss figure at all, confining itself to the phrase “many millions,” or call the figure — more than 20 million people, giving it approximately as follows:

“The Soviet Union during the Great Patriotic War lost in battle with the invaders, as a result of the extermination of the population by the invaders, as well as from a decrease in the birth rate and increased mortality, especially in the occupied regions,”

I ask for directions.

Head of the Central Statistical Administration of the USSR (V. STAROVSKY)

14 / XI-56 y.

RGAE. F. 1562. Op. 33 D.2990. L.75. "

Note that even in this document, which was drawn up specifically with the aim of multiplying the losses of the Soviet people by the dead, the head of the Central Statistical Bureau of the USSR did not dare to name the figure of 20 million as direct losses. He calls it demographic loss.

But Nikita Sergeevich is a famous magician. November 5, 1961 N.S. Khrushchev, in a letter to the Swedish Prime Minister T. Erlander, noted that the past war “took away two tens of millions of lives of Soviet people.”

It's all. Now 20 million dead have become official statistics. How do you like this trick?

About 7 million Soviets died as a direct result of the actions of the Nazis, and another 2 million as indirect results (famine, disease). The rest, up to the overall 27 million Soviet deaths, were a direct consequence of Stalin's regime actions.

Your kind apparently took the information about the executed Russians from here:


С днём рождения, товарищ Сталин!
Всё что коммунисты с тобой во главе построили, мы до сих пор не можем поломать и распродать.
Всё что ты говорил, оказалось правдой, которую мы до сих пор не можем осознать.

[Rumata]

Your kind apparently took the information about the executed Russians from here:

His kind is probably capable of inventing such information too.

[Klaus601]

I even know Protestants who love Stalin... In Russia, the situation with him is very strange, this can be understood even by reading the answers under this post. This is about the question of whether there are orthodox people who love Stalin.

[dviz]

Military deaths from all causes alone in Soviet army are considered much bigger than 7 millions you say died of "direct actions". Then there were punitive destruction of civil population, enslavement and forced labouring almost without feeding, intentional starving of Leningrad civilians etc.

What are "facts" you mumble about? I hope you didn't get them out of your ass because in such a case it's likely to be hurt.

Slow down, dude.

About 11 million Soviet non-combatants died of non-natural causes in areas where combat occurred (meaning in places reached by the Nazis), at any time during ww2 (not necessarily at the time of their death). Even if we are at our most charitable and conclude that all these deaths were caused by the Nazis (which is clearly incorrect), there are another 10 million Soviet deaths that occurred in places never reached by the Nazis.

For instance, there were 350,000 Kazakhs, 220,000 Uzbeks and 70,000 Uzbeks, all civilians living in their respective republics, who died of non-natural causes during ww2. They obviously all died as slave laborers.
The "home front" was more dangerous than the front line.

It still made sense during the Cold war to keep production centers furthest away from borders, you idiot.

If your intention was ever peace, that policy would have been reverted. But peace was never the plan. During Soviet time, and also in today's Russia, a super-aggressive revanchism is cultivated.

[Scarface F]

Not according to the Nazis. Among Nazi allies, Romanians received the largest amount of Iron Crosses by a large margin.

Only because in absolute numbers Romanians gave biggest armies. In Stalingrad campaign Romanians preformed badly.