The HORRIFIC Torture Of The Women Of The Battle Of Berlin

Post Reply New Topic

When you put it that way then that is also another avenue to discuss the topic. But then I am not sure this belongs in either politics, religion or philosophy.

I'm just trying to explain to you why talking about past Soviet attrocities is meaningful in the context of today. How unhealed old traumas come back with enormous force again.
Both past Soviet attrocities and current Russian attrocities belong to Politics.

[/b]
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This is a poignantly intended part of this thread and gives a better overall idea what this thread is about. I believe .
Note necessarily about a Singular group of soldiers . Nor about Ukraine, according to the title .
But different circumstances can bring back “certain triggers “ from past times . Perhaps trying to at least keep some perspective of what the OP intended .

To those whom have NOT experienced trauma to this degree , as written about above , I hope you never have to.

Maybe all sides did horrible things, but the bottom line is if it wasn't for the red army, it's unlikely Hitler would have been defeated.

Most of Hitlers casualties came from the Eastern front, it was not until German forces were sufficiently defeated by june 1944 by Russia, that the Normandy invasion could have been possible.

Just like if it wasn't for US involvement in Japan then much of SE Asia would have been in Japanese control including Australia.

So yes, the rapes by all sides by a few soldiers was terrible and a crime, but the alternative of no Red Army would have been Hitler winning the war, the holocaust continuing, Britain being unable to fight Germany on its own & eventually giving up & us here in Britain, Poland & whole of Europe living under the Nazi`s.

Not saying it was great living under soviet rule between 1945-1989 it was probably terrible, and many crimes were committed, but thats what i meant by perspective, which is why you rarely hear about red army rapes or boiled Japenese skulls because most people realise bad things happen sometimes to prevent a greater evil.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_ca ... rld_War_II

In the West, Nazi Germany was considered "greater evil" than USSR because it threatned the West and USSR did not (at that time).
Just like we don't really think much about e.g. Khmer Rouge in this part of the world. Or the history of East Pakistan genocides. Or on what's going on in Eritrea. Because it's far away.
And Stalin's attrocities were far away from Churchill and Roosevelt, so they just sold East Europe for their own security, accepting lies that made it easier to them. They cared for defending themselves and themselves only. Even today, I encounter Brits who seem to think that the worst that happened in entire WWII was bombing of London.
If Hitler kept his attrocities to Germany and East Europe, the West would just go on with the Phoney War.

Well so much for staying on Topic . Guess when your going to get involved in the world of generalizations no one crime is much better than the next …. / (Written with hint of Sarcasm)

Here in Britain or at least in high schools in the 70’s & 80’s we were taught that Stalin approached Britain and France for a military pact first.

Outraged over the murder of the Russian royal family and being staunch anti communist not too mention 19th century historic rivals they told him to get lost.

So seeing the imminent danger he went to Hitler to make a pact which involved the joint invasion of Poland.

Of course if I was polish I would take a different view of that but from the law of the jungle makes sense.

After the war traumatized from repeated invasions from the west Russia formed buffer states occupying their historic enemy Germany and Eastern Europe. They also had the revolutionary ideology of communism that they wanted to spread elsewhere so that was a motivation to outstay their welcome after 1945 too.

Of course history is more complicated than that but if you had to shorten 50 years of history into a couple of paragraphs it would be something like that. Or at least the way the British were taught to believe anyway.

What kind of "imminent danger"? Has Russia again been claiming that they were "only defending themselves" by invading and massacring their neighbours?
And do you know what Britain did at this point?
Phoney war.

After the war, Russia took control of as much as they could, in the form of either enlarging Soviet republics or allowing puppet states to exist. And the West did nothing to prevent it, they happily sent to them all POWs (even those who did not want it, even those who attempted to kill themselves to avoid it!) who were transported straight to Gulag. Polish veterans were not allowed even to be visible in British victory celebrations, not to annoy Russia. British officials repeated the lies that Katyń murders were done by Germans. What happened in the Eastern Bloc had to stay in the Eastern Bloc...
The Western Powers apparently agreed that Stalin's paranoid claims justified letting tens of millions of people suffer for another several decades... or that simply their own, Western security was worth it.

Let's not forget that the only reason the Red Army was able to resist and then push back the Germans was massive US aid in materiel and equipment, that a naive and compromised FDR administration propped up Stalin and essentially subsidized not only the Red Army but also Mao by proxy, thus tipping the Chinese civil war to the communists.

A simple google search will tell you how many times Russia had been invaded from the west so hardly a paranoid invention bearing in mind it’s 1945 and you’ve just lost 20 million from an invasion that happened yesterday

Not easy being the sacrificial lamb but in the law of the jungle when no one is going to help you it makes perfect sense to make a pact with what would be your enemy to buy time to strengthen your self before the big fight which actually took place.

So Stalins Paranoia was justified by operation Barbarossa

Excellent point. From a philosophical perspective, while some criticise (and rightly) the behaviour of Soviet soldiers in Berlin, as with the bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima the allied pact with Stalin was a necessary evil to defeat Nazism

What is the alternative scenario? anyone watch Marvel's "Endgame" and saw what Thanos did when he snapped his fingers? or read the neo-Nazi bible the Turner diaries?

Hitler mapped out what would be achieved had his goals been achieved.
1. complete annihilation of jews, gypsies and other groups from Europe
2. likely annihilation of all slavic people in eastern Europe to create lebensraum and forced assimilation of those deemed racially acceptable into the German volk
3. Italian enslavement of all of sub-saharan African and likely enslavement of north Africa to Vichy France.
4. Likely enslavement of all Asians under imperial Japanese rule (we know what the Japanese did to the Ainu people)

The global population would likely be decimated under axis rule. America would be ruled by a nazi party and they too would have their ethnic populations wiped out and the average american would be subject to complete brainwashing forced at the barrel of a gun

So while some feel the Russians should never been allowed to invade Germany. The alternative would have been far far worse. When you look at it from that perspective it's almost a no-brainer.

I can if the thread's purpose is to dispel the myth of the ally's angelic demeanour during WWII.
I find the naivety of some people rather naive. <sic>

To suggest that all Germans during that time were fascist Nazi pigs is simply unTrue and born of ignorance.
I have little time for this type of binary thinking.

In fact, most people were not Nazis when Hitler came to power.
IIRC, Hilter had to form a coalition to gain power.
This is something many are ignorant about.

Also, when Hitler came into power, Germany was not in a state of war.
Also, when Hitler came into power, he was seen as a miracle political leader leading Germany out of the economic disaster that was caused by "The Versailles Treaty".

Time Magazine even conceded that Hitler was responsible for dramatic social recovery.


https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/169520



I have explained my "points".



What decent person doesn't know that Hitler was a monster?
This is a given.
It is the atrocities of the Allied side that needs to be revealed, also, IMO.

The Soviets were part of the alliance.
The west tended to turn a blind eye to the atrocities involved due to political considerations.
I find it "curious" how some ppl find it difficult to accept this fact.

You just don't "get" my reason for creating this thread.
Even after I and others have explained it to you.

I will try one more time.

The Nazi regime was an abomination.
What decent person doesn't know this?
I was shining a light on the atrocities of what the German women in the Soviet Sector had to endure.
I also made a connection between what happened in WWII and what happened in Ukraine recently.

Are we on the same page now?

Nope.
Everything is factual.
I have never denied other atrocities.
I see no logical reason why I can't present my point of view.

May I suggest you make your own thread?

I find cyberdad's obsession "curious" but "interesting".

Alright I'm out. Nobodies listening anyway