Did Stalin's leadership do more good or harm for his country during the Eastern Front

let me give a modern day example of how paranoia can influence and even disrupt real events , even if some 99.5% of it will be terribly off-topic .

now the Turkish Foreign Minister has been to Diyarbakır , to talk about our great future with our "brothers" the Kurds . Much stuff on how the Old Republic was bad and mistreated them and so on in recent years . Reforms by the goverment is to correct all that and he is very clear on it , if together we have a great future . If not , they will tear us apart to tiny bits . They being some undetermined enemy who doesn't like us , the peoples of Middle East and Muslims . The location and the message seems to suggest a call on the Kurds to stay with the Goverment's Ankara . It's over , the ways of the Old and everything will be better , our past is glorious in that we respected cultural differences and will do so in the future , meaning an equally glorious future ..

a necessary background info to understand the "urgency" in delivery by the FM is that nobody can dare name-calling the PM and everybody criticizes him the FM for the utter lack of success with this Neo-Ottomanist approach . He has even railed at this neo thing , he fervently asks why people don't describe those in Turkey who favour stronger ties with the EU as Neo-Romans or Neo-Holy Romanic Germans or whatever . He should be advised , perhaps , that certain people can somehow get offended -if the State , too , starts to play the MI6 angle that Christians used to run this country in the 20th Century . The entire admission to EU was a smokescreen for his party to get more votes from the Center ; provided by the EU -after some US prodding , has he already forgotten ?

that apart even the skimpiest take on the respect of differences and stuff fails immediately , in that a second province in Turkey has banned the consumption of alcohol , anywhere not under a roof , just like countries ban smoking anywhere under a roof . Not a drinker here and not exactly one that who supports those who drink , but it's easy to see the muscle-flexing . It's not a year that it was Alevis , not Alawites / Syrian Nationals in the Syrian State service massacring the Sunnis as reported in every public statement by the Goverment . Allright , an exaggeration ... Everybody sees the Reform in Turkey only serves those who are liked by the Reformers ; we have spectacularly wasted a chance to come clean with the Death Squads and disappearances of the 1990s for the cases were fed into this thing in the Kangoroo courts , to implicate innocent patriots -in the complete sense of the word- as bloody murderers and so on . As if the people in the East do not see half of those responsible are still around , currently talking brotherly love etc etc ... Though the failure of providing Rights for the Individual is not that horrible a thing for our Easterners , how else they would keep their feodal lording over people after the country was divided ?

for any Kurd with half a brain sees that the Civil War to come in Turkey will be one between the Turk and the Turk . For those more hawkish , there is this incredible fighting machine , the armed wing of the seperatists that must have beaten the Turkish Armed Forces in combat , according to the tone of days ; any spill-over can easily be handled ... Don't take it as far-fetched . There is a strenous effort to break the "Turk" into components ; to justify the "rights" being provided to the Kurds there is always a reference to Caucasians , Bosnians , Black Sea folks and so on . Taking a cue from what the Easterner MPs regularly use , will a day come that ı will be offered "my" rights as a "Bulgarian" ? So what if Mehmet Akif , the guy who penned the words of our National Anthem was of Albanian stock , what makes it so certain that he wouldn't spit in the faces of some of those Reformers ? He was with the propaganda section in Berlin in 1917 , was he not ?

much ranting against Racism inherent in being a Turk and the trouble it has caused , foremost with the suffering of our brothers , the Kurds . This brother thing wouldn't have rankled one bit , had it been about how we are of one family , inseperable like flesh and nail . It doesn't go that way when they are "kept" as an entity -encouraged to succeed with their monolithic one party structure- while this "majority" is broken up so that this new Turkey can be held together by an warlike "race" , instead of the effeminate Turks who have got rich and accustomed to the ways of 21st Century and stuff , good life foremost . America does not intend to give too much to the Fundemantalist Oil Empire to be , there needs to be a balance afterall . Let the Emir of Qatar to buy islands in the Aegean as his Westernest territory , America doesn't like Greeks anyhow . Effeminate , rich and lazy democratic dwellers of Athens and around ... Much whispers around on how some land should be given to Kurds and let them rot there ; who says that would work ? We stop being "racists" and get the award : a chance to die for our new masters , though it's debateable who they will be . Cue in Mehmet Akif , who wrote pamplets to be distributed by Germans ; intented to awaken the suffering Muslims from Algeria to India , Egypt to steppes of Russia . He would see the game immediately .

one might argue that the FM calls attention to such stuff to prevent more horrible stuff , drinking smuggled tea in front of TV cameras as well . For Kurds know it to a man that the West has decided for a Kurdish Nation-State and nothing can stand its way . The FM just vocalizes the oft mentioned dictum that one should enjoy being raped if one can't avoid it ; which neatly explains the way Ankara builds up N.Iraq and the oil profits for Turkish companies glosses over how much goes there . ı must really mention lipsticks , miniskirts , high heels , complete removal of the hair on the legs and stuff women do before a date . One must follow the command of the West or the West teaches one's proper place ; with this reference to "they will tear us apart" ...

it is known , as Dothrakis say .

since 2002 the American war-plans against this Blue Threat aka Turkey has been changed for the 8th time , last this March . Say , the possible Russian complicity increases every time even if it's still just a page and it has grown from "LOL, what?" to "Bah, we can handle anybody. We will offer them so many billions, just in case." Rights to individuals , actual democracy , respect of differences work real good for lots of countries , why should them hurt Turkey ? Unless , there is no intention for them to happen ; for destruction of this country will be quicker and cheaper when people loose all kinds of attachment , by a feeling of being lied to ? For the safety of oil fields , maybe ? Oil fields we don't even have ... The FM attaches too much importance to himself when it was "decided" this country would fall by intervention in 1997 ; as a preparation the West had this almost sexual obsession with the Serbs , with such learned articles in Diplomacy journals . Observation of what has happened since seems to suggest waiting to tire invasions is not productive . If we are to watch for some "peacekeeper" sentry fall asleep on guard to plant some C4 at some wall in Istanbul or Ankara , we are already lost ... ("We" naturally does not include me , me being an utter failure , even as an armchair general .) The consensus seems to be it will be immediate , full scale , all-out with anything and everything (*). What this means for the FM , who has to find a way out of American demands about a re-approachment with Israel in the clear , among other things , which indeed scratches some charisma here in Turkey ? You know April is coming with attendant voting in Washington on whether we genocided the Armenians or not ... He can wear a skullcap and cry at the Wall in Kudüs , we wouldn't be surprised one bit ... Such goes the summary of what's currently in , in this weird forum ı am allowed in without any privileges .

(*) now NATO was of the opinion that if Turkey lasted a week in WW III it would rightly be a legend . The bets are on whether we will last more than 24 hours when our turn to be given Democracy comes .

paranoia exists everywhere . History is supposed to help somewhat in avoiding the making the exact same mistakes others did , and ı hope present day can also be taken as an example for a discussion of the past , in this thread . Something one should ponder on for the world of 1930 and 40s is the apparent possibility that Capitalism could fail and be replaced by Socialism and other -isms that abounded at the time . Causing all sorts of proposals of prevention or agitation . Leading to genuine fears on part of those who were playing the game , a game the fans of Games of Thrones see realized in that show . One either did or died . Due to its size , hence potential , Russia was usually the primary in such discussions and Stalin who rose to his position by bloody murder was conditioned to expect the same . He deserves tons of crap but ı can't say anybody in his place could do much better or worse or whatever .
 
red_elk said:
How anything of these disproves (or even relevant to) my point that Stalin was preparing the country for war, modernizing and increasing its army in 1930-s?
So your point is the sole purpose of rapid industrialization was to build up a huge military power.
Answer to my actual statements, don't try to attack your creative interpretations of them.
Again, this is not working with me.

This document (I've no idea where it's from, as it's not indicated) shows a defense budget of over 40% GNP even before WW II officially started.
If you disagree with it, give your data.

So, if Stalin was intentionally preparing the USSR for war during the 1930s...
What was the goal of "rearmament" of many European states and USSR in 1930-s, which you mentioned before?
Give your explanation of Soviet largest tank force in the world and ~6 million army, if it was not a preparation for war.

I can't imagine anyone doing a worse job.
Well, if you like to judge by the results - any European country defeated by Hitler in 1939-1941 did a worse job preparing for war.
Unlike all of them, USSR won the war, and that is the point which matters.
 
red_elk said:
Give your explanation of Soviet largest tank force in the world and ~6 million army, if it was not a preparation for war.
The tanks were obviously being used as tractors, tovarisch. :lol:
 
TASS: Yesterday, on the Soviet-Chinese border, Chinese soldiers disguised as peasants opened fire on a peaceful Soviet tractor, which was plowing fields. Our tractor returned fire, neutralized the intruders, and flew away...
 
nashtraktoripushka_Baydeww2.jpg


Enough said, tovarisch.
 
Answer to my actual statements, don't try to attack your creative interpretations of them.
Again, this is not working with me.

Arguments do not work for you? I kind of suspected that...

If you disagree with it, give your data.

I'm asking for the source of those data, that is all. A rather common request, I should think. In my post I am assuming those data are correct.

What was the goal of "rearmament" of many European states and USSR in 1930-s, which you mentioned before?
Give your explanation of Soviet largest tank force in the world and ~6 million army, if it was not a preparation for war.

You were arguing Stalin was preparing the country for war. I pointed out that every European country of importance was doing so in the 1930s. What is the problem exactly?

Well, if you like to judge by the results - any European country defeated by Hitler in 1939-1941 did a worse job preparing for war.
Unlike all of them, USSR won the war, and that is the point which matters.

You seem to have missed the fact that after the disastrous results of the first 6 months of the Axis invasion, Stalin radically changed policy (as I mentioned before). That means that the policy followed so far was recognized as not being adequate.

As far as Stalin being a succesful WW II leader is concerned, consider the following:

To begin with, in 1941, the Soviet Army numbered approximately 250 Rifle Divisions, 17 Mountain Rifle Divisions, 16 Parachute Brigades, 2 Naval Infantry Brigades, 6 Rifle Brigades, 11 Cavalry Divisions, 2 Mountain Cavalry Divisions, 20 Motorized Rifle Brigades, 5 Motorized Rifle Divisions, 1 NKVD Motorized Division, 2 Tank Brigades, 73 Tank Divisions, and 36 Mechanized Divisions. Additionally there were dozens of NKVD Border Regiments, NKVD internal Security regiments and even a couple of NKVD Rifle Divisions scattered around the country.

The Germans basically destroyed this army, in its entirety, by the end of the first summer. In the meantime, the Soviets had raised enough new troops to completely replace the destroyed army and then some.


This "second" army was also basically completely destroyed by the Germans (and by poorly planned and executed Soviet attacks on the Germans) by the time the summer of 1942 rolled around.


Over the course of the war in the east, the German Army identified some 500 Rifle Divisions raised by the Red Army, over 100 Tank Brigades, over 100 Motorized and Mechanized Brigades, over 50 Cavalry Divisions and so on. All told, some 20 Million Soviets cycled through the Soviet Army during the war, and the Germans captured or killed close to 10 million of them.
 
Arguments do not work for you? I kind of suspected that...
Logical fallacies which you are constantly trying to use instead of arguments, don't work for me.
Last time it was a strawman, boldened in my previous message.

You were arguing Stalin was preparing the country for war.
So you agree with this or not? :)

I pointed out that every European country of importance was doing so in the 1930s.
Yes, except they were less successful in that, and we are discussing USSR in this thread, not other European countries.

Stalin radically changed policy (as I mentioned before).
Give a quote where you mentioned it.

As far as Stalin being a succesful WW II leader is concerned, consider the following:
I never said Stalin was a flawless leader, he made many mistakes. The victory was an achievement of all Soviet people and leaders, not only his.
As for your quote, any country which encountered German invasion in 1939-1941 suffered initial defeats.
But USSR was the only one who was able to withstand after them and defeat Germany.
And in 1945, USSR was annihilating German divisions, not vice versa.
 
Thanks for stating the obvious - albeit in a somewhat cryptic manner. As I now repeatedly indicated, virtually all powers of importance (and then some) were rearming during the 1930s. It would be odd if the USSR somewhow did not fit into that profile.
 
<Discussion about iron ore>
[off-topic] Well, if Russia buys furniture from Sweden or microchips from Taiwan, it doesn't necessarily mean scarcity of sands, forests and other raw materials here. [/off-topic]
 
TASS: Yesterday, on the Soviet-Chinese border, Chinese soldiers disguised as peasants opened fire on a peaceful Soviet tractor, which was plowing fields. Our tractor returned fire, neutralized the intruders, and flew away...

Good joke. But I have a better one (actually - it is Mr. Putin's joke, I only copy-paste it below):

"(...) the unfavourable boundary line of the Soviet-Finnish border, which was located just 17 - 20 km from Saint Petersburg, at that time Leningrad, posed a serious threat to that city, numbering 5 million inhabitants. (...)"

Vladimir Putin, 14.03.2013, explaining the reason why the USSR invaded Finland (in 73rd anniversary of the end of the Winter War).

I suppose those Chinese peasants also posed a serious threat to that Soviet peaceful tractor.

Perhaps the Finnish border opened fire on a peaceful Soviet city, just like peasants opened fire on a peaceful Soviet tractor.
 
Good joke. But I have a better one (actually - it is Mr. Putin's joke, I only copy-paste it below):

"(...) the unfavourable boundary lines of the Soviet-Finnish border, which was located just 17 - 20 km from Petersburg, at that time Petrograd, posed a serious threat to that city, numbering 5 million inhabitants. (...)"
Not sure why you call it a joke, this was a real reason for the USSR to start Winter War.

The Soviet Union demanded the territories for security reasons, primarily to protect Leningrad, which was 40 km from the Finnish border.[27]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War

Initially, USSR tried to exchange those territories for another ones, and when negotiations failed, took them by force.
As for "serious threat" question, having Finnish border as it was in 1939, would likely mean losing Leningrad in 1941, if not WW2 entirely.

Perhaps the Finnish border opened fire on a peaceful Soviet city, just like peasants opened fire on a peaceful Soviet tractor.
There were soldiers disguised as peasants, in the joke.
 
Not sure why you call it a joke, this was a real reason for the USSR to start Winter War.

This was the "real" Stalinist propaganda reason (or rather justification invented post factum) to start the Winter War.

Like for Germany the reason to invade Poland was allegedly the Polish Invasion of Gleiwitz one day before the Germans "returned fire".

This is exactly what was the reason of the invasion according to German propaganda. Adolf Hitler said on 01.09.1939 in Reichstag:

"Polen hat heute Nacht zum ersten Mal auf unserem eigenen Territorium auch mit bereits regulären Soldaten geschossen. (...) Seit 5:45 Uhr wird jetzt zurückgeschossen! (...) Und von jetzt ab wird Bombe mit Bombe vergolten! (...) Wer mit Gift kämpft, wird mit Giftgas bekämpft!"

Translation:

"Tonight from the Polish side first shots were fired on our territory by Polish regular soldiers. (...) Since 5:45 AM we are returning fire! (...) Since this moment we are paying a bomb for each Polish bomb! (...) Who fights with use of poison, will be combated by toxic gas!"

BTW - the USSR always wanted more land "for security reasons".

Poland was invaded for "security", Besarabia was invaded for "security", Georgia "for security", Finland "for security"...

Kaliningrad Oblast is occupied "for security", some Japanese islands are occupied "for security"...

Hungary in 1956 was invaded "for security" as well...

Afghanistan in 1979 - "for security"...

"For security" are the two words most frequently used by Russian authorities a day before the invasion of some country begins...

================================================

The joke is that Putin repeats the words of 60-70 years old Stalinist propaganda.

There were soldiers disguised as peasants, in the joke.

And a modern combat aircraft "disguised" as tractor.

So were those "soldiers" allegedely "disguised".

==============================================

As a matter of fact - Finland in 1939 posed such a threat to the Soviet Union (or to Leningrad), like a housefly poses to a Jumbo Jet. :rolleyes:

==============================================

Initially, USSR tried to exchange those territories for another ones, and when negotiations failed, took them by force.

Initially - the Soviets agreed - it was their free will - to give those territories away to Finland - in 1917.

BTW - what kinds of "negotiations" failed? Since when is Ultimatum called "negotiations"?

Similar "negotiations" were carried out by the Nazi Germany with Lithuania before Germany annexed Klaipeda in March 1939. Similar "negotiations" were also carried out by the Nazi Germany with Czechoslovakia in 1938 regarding the Sudety region, or with Poland before September 1939.
 
This was the "real" Stalinist propaganda reason (or rather justification invented post factum) to start the Winter War.
Like for Germany the reason to invade Poland was allegedly the Polish Invasion of Gleiwitz one day before the Germans "returned fire".
You don't understand the difference between casus belli and reason for war, that's it.

Kaliningrad Oblast is occupied "for security", some Japanese islands are occupied "for security"...
They are as much occupied, as Pomerania is occupied by Poland.

As a matter of fact - Finland in 1939 posed such a threat to the Soviet Union (or to Leningrad), like a housefly poses to a Jumbo Jet. :rolleyes:
Germany posed.

BTW - what kinds of "negotiations" failed? Since when is Ultimatum called "negotiations"?
Change your tone and read at least wikipedia article about the issue, before making such statements.

The joke is that Putin repeats the words of 60-70 years old Stalinist propaganda.
If it infuriates russophobes, I must admit, he is doing right thing.
 
If it infuriates russophobes, I must admit, he is doing right thing.

Stalin is the only Russophobe mentioned in this thread. He did the most harm to his own nation.

Those who don't understand that people like Stalin and Putin are destructive for Russia, are the real Russophobes.

I am a Russophile indeed - and I am terrified by the fact that so many Russians are still so blind and can't see what is the real threat for their freedom and for their country (i.e. people like Stalin or Putin). You are also defending Stalin in this thread - which means you are offending all of his victims.

In the Katyn Forest - there are ethnic Russians buried next to Polish officers. It was a place of mass murder commited on many nationalities.

You don't understand the difference between casus belli and reason for war, that's it.

I do. But you don't understand the difference between propaganda and real reason.

And propaganda reason for war is often the same as casus belli - for example "failed negotiations" or "enemy attack on our radio station".

In the Winter War, 126,000 Soviet soldiers were killed and only 22,000 Finnish soldiers.

Stalin again sent to death thousands of Russian nationals, to fight for a totally non-significant piece of frozen ground.

Germany posed.

And Finland was not Germany's ally before the Soviet Invasion.

Finland became Germany's ally only because it had to search for protection from the aggressive Soviet Imperialism.

Had the Soviet Union not invaded Finland in 1939, Finland would have remained NEUTRAL in 1941...

Once again Stalin did harm to his own country - by invading Finland, he added one more enemy to the long list of Soviet Union's enemies.

They are as much occupied, as Pomerania is occupied by Poland.

I know. And so what?

You justify your own wrongdoings by finding other similar wrongdoings?

"I killed a man, but I'm justified because I'm not the only murderer on this planet" - is that your reasoning?

The difference is that Pomerania was historically - during at least some periods of history - Polish.

While East Prussia was never Russian before 1945. It wasn't Russian even for 10 years prior to 1945. Even for one year or one month.

Nor was there any significant Russian ethnic minority in East Prussia in 1945 or before 1945 during any historical period.

Lithuania is historically much more justified to have the Kaliningrad Oblast than Russia.
 
I do. But you don't understand the difference between propaganda and real reason.
Give your explanation, why USSR tried to negotiate these territories for larger pease of land, and later fought a war for them.

Finland would have remained NEUTRAL in 1941...
It wouldn't.
USSR and Finland had 4 wars in period of 1917-1941, relations were hostile enough.

I know. And so what?
You justify your own wrongdoings by finding other similar wrongdoings?
Yalta, Potsdam conferences, Nurenberg trial, Helsinki accords and UN recognition. Enough for justification?
Don't like it's part of Russia, take it by force if you can.

I am a Russophile indeed
With such friends, we don't need enemies.
 
I will never understand the ethnic obsession of Eastern Europeans. That goes for Polish nationalists as well as that ridiculous Commissariat of Ethnicities in the USSR. Historic ownership of a piece of land means nothing. A "people" don't own the land, either an individual owns the land, or a company owns the land, or a state owns the land. Besides, a play set in that part of the world not that long ago concluded that those who are best for something ought to have it...
 
Back
Top Bottom