3 ms·

Oh, come now. You wrote: >The Soviet Union on the other hand bore the brunt of losses in WWII. It suffered massive deaths in the war, especially among its youn

by TMWNN 4y ago

Oh, come now. You wrote: >The Soviet Union on the other hand bore the brunt of losses in WWII. It suffered massive deaths in the war, especially among its young men of working age. It was invaded by NAZI Germany, and some of its largest cities occupied or put under siege. Its agricultural and industrial lands were ravaged by war, its people by wartime famine. "bore the brunt of losses" "suffered massive deaths" "invaded by NAZI Germany" "ravaged by war" "wartime famine" I.e., "Soviet Union = victim", as opposed to "Soviet Union = one of two criminals that together committed a crime, was attacked by the other criminal, and barely survived and killed the attacker with the help of others"

cmrdporcupine 4y ago
You talk about a whole country like it's a single, morally culpable, person? And those 26 million dead, they all should suffer because Stalin signed the pact with Hitler? So you can wave away massive death -- justified? And all conversation about the matter must be redirected to this allocation of blame. "Mommy, Johnny hit me first." I think you need to give your head a shake. The way you're talking about war and death, it's like you don't really grasp the level of tragedy at all.
- TMWNN 4y ago
  >And those 26 million dead, they all should suffer because Stalin signed the pact with Hitler? Those 26 million dead suffered because Stalin signed the pact with Hitler. >So you can wave away massive death -- justified? Not at all, and I have never given any indication that I think so. Those 26 million dead also shouldn't ever be cited by Soviets, or apologists for same, as some sort of hard-earned virtue or proof of nobility, yet they have been used for precisely such purposes for 80 years and counting. To return to my earlier analogy, that'd be like the criminal who survives the attack by his coplotter now calling himself a hero for having killed the attacker.
twelve40 4y ago
the op is stating the facts. Every single of the 5 points you just quoted from them is an indisputable fact. They tie these facts to another fact that a ravaged country with 30 million corpses literally scattered all over cannot produce luxuries such as cars. What point you are trying to argue, is unclear.
- TMWNN 4y ago
  >What point you are trying to argue, is unclear. Let me repeat: >When two criminals fall out with each other after a joint robbery and murder, one ordinarily does not overly mourn the one whom the other killed in a dispute over the spoils.
  - twelve40 4y ago
    wtf does that have to do with car production, the topic at hand? also, for example me saying that the Germans (yes, the Germans) suffered unimaginable losses of 6 million people, which is a fact, in what twisted mind does stating this fact become "overly mourning"?

by TMWNN 4y ago

cmrdporcupine 4y ago

You talk about a whole country like it's a single, morally culpable, person? And those 26 million dead, they all should suffer because Stalin signed the pact with Hitler? So you can wave away massive death -- justified? And all conversation about the matter must be redirected to this allocation of blame. "Mommy, Johnny hit me first." I think you need to give your head a shake. The way you're talking about war and death, it's like you don't really grasp the level of tragedy at all.

TMWNN 4y ago
>And those 26 million dead, they all should suffer because Stalin signed the pact with Hitler? Those 26 million dead suffered because Stalin signed the pact with Hitler. >So you can wave away massive death -- justified? Not at all, and I have never given any indication that I think so. Those 26 million dead also shouldn't ever be cited by Soviets, or apologists for same, as some sort of hard-earned virtue or proof of nobility, yet they have been used for precisely such purposes for 80 years and counting. To return to my earlier analogy, that'd be like the criminal who survives the attack by his coplotter now calling himself a hero for having killed the attacker.

twelve40 4y ago

the op is stating the facts. Every single of the 5 points you just quoted from them is an indisputable fact. They tie these facts to another fact that a ravaged country with 30 million corpses literally scattered all over cannot produce luxuries such as cars. What point you are trying to argue, is unclear.

TMWNN 4y ago
>What point you are trying to argue, is unclear. Let me repeat: >When two criminals fall out with each other after a joint robbery and murder, one ordinarily does not overly mourn the one whom the other killed in a dispute over the spoils.
- twelve40 4y ago
  wtf does that have to do with car production, the topic at hand? also, for example me saying that the Germans (yes, the Germans) suffered unimaginable losses of 6 million people, which is a fact, in what twisted mind does stating this fact become "overly mourning"?