|
Post by 1949 on Jul 20, 2004 16:54:57 GMT -5
ShineThePath, that sounds very good, but I have a few questions that were brought up in my debate with Disco Stu, a right-winger at the Ernesto Guevara Forums:
-Why did the Soviet Union suffer over 25 million casualties from Germany but Germany only suffered three million from the Soviet Union?
-Disco Stu claims that the Nazi-Soviet Pact was secret, so Britain could not have known about when they declared war on Sep. 1, and only knew when the USSR invaded Poland on Sep. 17. Is this true?
|
|
|
Post by iskra on Jul 20, 2004 22:25:30 GMT -5
1949, I'm not as knowledgeable as a lot of people on this site but I'll give you two short answers.
1. The Red Army was a socialist army that was both defending the USSR and smashing Nazism. The proletariat simply has no interest in slaughtering people the way the Nazis did.
The Nazis were trying to subjugate both Soviet socialism and the people of the Soviet Union. The Red Army was trying to defeat fascism and, to a certain extent, lay the ground for socialism in Eastern Europe and Germany.
This seems a far cry from the capitalist Allies' (especially the US) approach (Dresden, Hiroshima, Nagasaki).
2. By "Nazi-Soviet" do you mean "Molotov-Ribbentrop"? This was not secret, it was immediately denigrated as the "Hitler-Stalin" pact by the Trotskyites for example.
This was a diplomatic move meant to buy time for the Soviet Union to prepare itself. It is also worth noting that this wasn't signed until after the Munich Agreement was reached. But of course the Trots weren't screaming "Hitler-Chamberlain pact" or anything like that, despite the fact that it would have been far more applicable (although it would deny the reality of the world situation at the time which is that the two imperialist blocs were definitely opposed, not united, and almost certainly headed for an armed clash).
|
|
ShineThePath
Revolutionary
"Individualism is Parasitism"
Posts: 128
|
Post by ShineThePath on Jul 21, 2004 1:03:59 GMT -5
There are many reasons why 25 million were lost, and while the Germans lost nearly 4 million. First the German Army had many allied Nations enter the war with her, this include Romania, Finland, Hungary, Slovakia, and Italy. The Finnish were attacking Leningrad along side the German Army, while those other nations were all involved in the invasion of the Ukraine, the Crimea , and were involved in the siege of Leningrad. Secondly, The German Army, unlike the Red Army, destroyed all the farmland, straved people, with SS troops exterminating people everywhere. In fact Stalin near the end of the war ordered that SS troops be shot on the spot of their capture for all their crimes. The Red Army was careful not to destroy the infrastructure when they liberated the nations, as the German Army took the opposite postion. Mass Starvation was not felt in the nations that USSR had liberated. In fact Stalin found the resources, and food to feed the people of East Germany, when his own people were still facing the same problem. Hitler never took such percautions. Also for the longest of time, specifically in 1941, USSR was unable to bring a large bulk of its Army from Vladistok to fight Germany, in order to prevent a possible Japanese Invasion. Luckily the great spy work of the USSR manoveured Japan to attack America and the Dutch, in order to gain desperatly needed resources. The Intelligence managed to get the Japanese to see an invasion of Vladistok and the rest of the East as unprofitable.
The second question can be anwsered as such. USSR prior to the Molotov-Ribbentrop, tried desperatly to work out a deal between France and Britian to have an alliance against Germany in a war that Stalin so as inevitable. Maxim Litvinov was the Foriegn Minister at the time, and he failed to get this deal through. Stalin replaced him with Molotov in order to work out a deal with Nazi Germany, to by time. The Pact between USSR and Nazi Germany was known, it was almost a full month prior to the invasion. It was not a secret at all, and was known throughout the Western press as the Hitler-Soviet Pact.
|
|
|
Post by 1949 on Jul 21, 2004 15:41:05 GMT -5
I understood the need for the pact, I'm just wondering whether it was secret or not.
|
|
|
Post by redstar2000 on Jul 21, 2004 21:30:14 GMT -5
ShineThePath wrote: Luckily the great spy work of the USSR maneuvered Japan to attack America and the Dutch, in order to gain desperately needed resources. The Intelligence managed to get the Japanese to see an invasion of Vladivostok and the rest of the East as unprofitable.A novel theory of the determination of Japanese imperial strategy. The real causes are somewhat more mundane. The Japanese Army favored a "northern strategy" aimed at the USSR. The Navy favored a "southern strategy" aimed at the "Dutch East Indies". The Japanese Army did launch some "probing attacks" against the USSR...and were soundly defeated. The Navy made the most of this "loss of face" and their strategy was chosen. Soviet intelligence agents, in all likelihood, had nothing to do with it.
|
|
ShineThePath
Revolutionary
"Individualism is Parasitism"
Posts: 128
|
Post by ShineThePath on Jul 22, 2004 0:23:38 GMT -5
It is well known that there were infiltrations at the top of both the Japanese government and US, for example such the case was for FDR economist, Dexter White, a paid agent of the NKVD. Also we Must remeber Spy master Richard Sorge was in Japan as well, under cover as a Nazi Journalist in the German Embassy. Dexter White has been revealed to have caused FDR to take more serious approach to Japan, warning of an attack of the Phillipines. Richard Sorge managed to infilitrate even the Prime Minster's information, and assumed masses of information that were sent to Moscow. Richard Sorge in fact came into contact with information of "Operation Barbarrosa" but Stalin failed to act on it. When the Soviet Army managed to stall Hitler's troops. Master spy Richard Sorge reported that Japan definitively would not attack the USSR, but would attack the US instead, prior to the attack on the Naval Station in Pearl Harbor. To say the Intelligence of NKVD had nothing to do with this, is undermining the documentation of this time period. Also we must complement not just the grand intelligence reports of Spy Master Richard Sorge, but also the Dimplomatic achievements of Joseph Stalin who knew of those two Japanese variants which you spoke of, the ones wanting war with the Soviets, and those with the intentions of spreading South. Stalin in April of 1941 signed the non-aggression Treaty with Japan. Stalin understood that the non-aggression treaty between the USSR and Japan would allow the latter to feel free about its activities in the south, without any pressure from the "north," - i.e. on the part of the Soviet Union. Stalin; however knew there was still dissent of many in during the "Imperial Coniterm" many military officals wanted to scrap the treaty and join their Ally, Germany, in the attack against the USSR. Only until Richard Sorge had determined that Japan would not attack the USSR, did Stalin brought the Eastern Divisions to the Western front, Stalin learned his lesson not listening to Sorge in the first place.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 22, 2004 2:17:53 GMT -5
It is well known that there were infiltrations at the top of both the Japanese government and US, for example such the case was for FDR economist, Dexter White, a paid agent of the NKVD. Also we Must remeber Spy master Richard Sorge was in Japan as well, under cover as a Nazi Journalist in the German Embassy. Dexter White has been revealed to have caused FDR to take more serious approach to Japan, warning of an attack of the Phillipines. Richard Sorge managed to infilitrate even the Prime Minster's information, and assumed masses of information that were sent to Moscow. Richard Sorge in fact came into contact with information of "Operation Barbarrosa" but Stalin failed to act on it. When the Soviet Army managed to stall Hitler's troops. Master spy Richard Sorge reported that Japan definitively would not attack the USSR, but would attack the US instead, prior to the attack on the Naval Station in Pearl Harbor. To say the Intelligence of NKVD had nothing to do with this, is undermining the documentation of this time period. Also we must complement not just the grand intelligence reports of Spy Master Richard Sorge, but also the Dimplomatic achievements of Joseph Stalin who knew of those two Japanese variants which you spoke of, the ones wanting war with the Soviets, and those with the intentions of spreading South. Stalin in April of 1941 signed the non-aggression Treaty with Japan. Stalin understood that the non-aggression treaty between the USSR and Japan would allow the latter to feel free about its activities in the south, without any pressure from the "north," - i.e. on the part of the Soviet Union. Stalin; however knew there was still dissent of many in during the "Imperial Coniterm" many military officals wanted to scrap the treaty and join their Ally, Germany, in the attack against the USSR. Only until Richard Sorge had determined that Japan would not attack the USSR, did Stalin brought the Eastern Divisions to the Western front, Stalin learned his lesson not listening to Sorge in the first place. ya know...paragraphs can do wonders for readability...just something to keep in mind.
|
|
ShineThePath
Revolutionary
"Individualism is Parasitism"
Posts: 128
|
Post by ShineThePath on Jul 22, 2004 2:48:52 GMT -5
No, 1949, it was not secretive in any bit. It was plainly in the open.
Also SonofRage, Sarcasm really does not do anything. It is not impressive just childish, if you needed to point that out to me, a simple message would have worked. Not posting it on a thread which does not nead that. I forgot to paragraph, big deal. There was only Two paragraphs of work anyway.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 22, 2004 2:57:13 GMT -5
Also SonofRage, Sarcasm really does not do anything. It is not impressive just childish, if you needed to point that out to me, a simple message would have worked. Not posting it on a thread which does not nead that. I forgot to paragraph, big deal. There was only Two paragraphs of work anyway. Geez, don't be so damn sensitive. EDIT: Let's not argue, no offense or sarcasm was intended.
|
|
VolPatsyOHara
New Member
Republican Socialist / Syndicalist
Posts: 34
|
Post by VolPatsyOHara on Jul 23, 2004 3:00:57 GMT -5
The arguments made by Kim, Readpunk and SonofRage I agree with very strongly.
Stalin had comrades exectued for "trying to establish anarchism". That was actually a crime punishable by death in the USSR! If you don't agree w/ anarchism that's fine, as the admin. andrei said, arguments are more appropriate.
Stalin subverted the attempted workers revolution in Spain. It seems that too many modern commies are obsessed with thrid world revolutionaries when there are genuine examples of worker revolutionaries in the first world.
|
|
ShineThePath
Revolutionary
"Individualism is Parasitism"
Posts: 128
|
Post by ShineThePath on Jul 23, 2004 17:07:31 GMT -5
Stalin had all the right to rid the party of such elements, They would undermine and destroy what had been built in the USSR, what was built for Proletariat Dictatorship. Stalin's only problems were his methods in doing so, and the fact that outright Capitalists managed to snuggle in the Party, such was Khruschev and Beria. Beria more so then Khruschev, and everyone else. Know it is known that he focused on Adam Smith "economics" and said Marx and Engels were useless. Such elements can't exist in a Vanguard Party.
Stalin never tried to subvert the Leftists in the Spanish Civil War. Stalin facilitated Ammunition, Arms, and Financing to the leftist government. Also transporting Foriegn Volunteer fighters. The problem was the Resistance to General Fransico Franco was diverted into many divisions and contingents, and never had a leading Vanguard. It was split between Republicaneers, Social-Democrats, Communists, Anarchists, and Foreign Volunteers. It is amazing that Anarchists don't point out that while valiant fighters against The Fascists and the Army of Franco, that Anarchists were too busy siezing factories in the area already controlled by the Spanish Republic. The problem of Spain should be seen as why the need of a Vanguard is needed, a successful People's War has always been led by a Vanguard force, a leadership.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 23, 2004 21:16:17 GMT -5
The Stalin-supported Communist Party was absolutely part of the counter-revolution in Spain. They actively rolled back gains of the revolution.
Hierarchy was restored in many of the collectivized areas and power was taken away from workers and unions and monopolized by the "Popular Front."
The Militias were destroyed by the "Communists." They were declared illegal and technically perged with the Popular Army. Weapons were allowed to fall into the hands of Franco's forces, only because the "Communists" feared the Anarchists would get them.
|
|
ShineThePath
Revolutionary
"Individualism is Parasitism"
Posts: 128
|
Post by ShineThePath on Jul 24, 2004 12:52:26 GMT -5
Stalin did no such thing in Spain. It is widely known that the USSR financed the whole Republican government in itself, even Wells admitted that. The fault of the lack of leadership amongst the government and their last armed forces. The Spanish Republic still maintained almost half the Army and all of the Navy. Factionalism broke out amongst the Spanish Republican government, and the Anarchists are the most guilty of this. Stalin, Himself, approved of discouraging the Spanish communists from taking too prominent a role in government for fear of alienating other more conservative elements of the Republican movement. If there was a mistake of Stalin made, it was that of not encouraging the Communists to lead.
While Spanish Loyalists, Communists, and Foreign Volunteers fought valiantly against the Fascist Army led by Franco. Anarchists were too busy shutting down factories already held by the Republicans, having gun fights when Republican Troops had to gain order in the region and take back their factories. Instead of a Popular front against the Fascists, the Anarchists simply fought everyone for power.
|
|
|
Post by OglachPatsyOHara on Jul 24, 2004 15:31:09 GMT -5
It is widely known that the USSR financed the whole Republican government in itself, even Wells admitted that.
Less widely known but still true is that the USSR, after managing Spain's gold reserve for them, actually turned a profit (see: the spanish civil war by antony beevor).
Factionalism broke out amongst the Spanish Republican government, and the Anarchists are the most guilty of this.
That's the version of the story according to those who weren't there, such as the foreign press, the Stalinists and their liberal lackies.
According to most eyewitness reports the PSUC-controlled Assault Guards (in some accounts the Civil Guards) who were something like the Black-and-tans, stormed the anarchist controlled telephone exchange, only to be driven out by the libertarians.
The fighting spread throughout the town and it was mostly the CNT who urged peace - even though they could've used that as an opportunity to rid Spain of counter-revolutionaries and implement the revolution fully, as was argued by some elements of the POUM and the Friends of Durruti.
The POUM and libertarian forces won the fighting in Barcelona hands down. They did call a general strike, except those indsutries producing war materiel. They at no time abandonded the front to fight for the revolution.
The stalinists, who simply didn't possesse the numbers to win in Barcelona, actually used their attack to unite opinion against the anarchists and the largely insignificant POUM. The stalinists famously hunted down and destroyed the POUM after the Tragic Week.
Instead of a Popular front against the Fascists, the Anarchists simply fought everyone for power.
The anarchists were actually quite loyal to the Popular Front, unfortunately. They should've chucked their middle class "allies" and fought on. The PSUC only weakened Spain and the supposed prowess of Republican-Stalinist military was laughable. Who utilizes an armor attack in a woods?
|
|
ShineThePath
Revolutionary
"Individualism is Parasitism"
Posts: 128
|
Post by ShineThePath on Jul 26, 2004 0:13:40 GMT -5
The Gold Reserve was being protected by the USSR, because the ever visible scene that Franco's troops were pushing to Madrid, Professor Jose Giral, a REPUCLICAN took this step, not Communists. Any gold taken by the USSR was done with the acknowledgement of The Republican government in order to pay for Tanks, Airplanes, ammunition, arms, oil, and other material needs of the Republican Government. Stalin was more than generous giving Aid to the Spanish Government without large payments back, after France stopped all sales to the nation, they had no other supplier.
Even though Stalin said for Communists in the nation to not take a large role in the nation's government in order to not harrass the more moderate elements, you blame almost all attacks carried by the Republican government on Communists. The only Communist Prime Minister to come was at the last stages of the civil war was Dr Negrin, and even he was forced to resign by the Republicans. Dr. Negrin had much Communist backing and Left-Republican backing, but he himself was not a Communist, but a self-proclaimed Socialist.
The Council of Aragon, which was dominated by the CNT (Confederacion Nacional de Trabajo [the Anarcho-Syndicalist Trades Union]), was recognised by the Republican government. Only to be dissolved in Months because of their reckless disregard of the intelligista within Aragon, which emirgrated from the area into the dominant areas of the Spanish Government. Also large numbers of Peasants as well emigrated from the area after The CNT and POUM collectivized all their land, and forcibly put Peasants to work. I have no problem with their collectivization of land in the area, but obviously they put a lot of fear into the Republicans. Socialist/Republican Frente Rojo wrote "Under the régime of the extinguished Council of Aragon, neither the citizens, nor property, could count on the least guarantee .... The government will find in Aragon gigantic arsenals of arms and thousands of bombs, hundreds of the latest model machine-guns, cannons and tanks, reserved there, not to fight fascism on the battle fronts, but the private property of those who wished to make of Aragon a bastion from which to fight the government of the republic . . . Not a peasant but had been forced to enter the collectives. He who resisted suffered on his body and his little property the sanctions of terror. Thousands of peasants have emigrated from the region, preferring to leave the land than to endure the thousand methods of torture of the Council ... The land was confiscated, and rings, lockets, and even the earthen cooking pots were confiscated. Animals were confiscated, grain and even the cooked food and wine for home consumption .... In the Municipal Councils there were installed known fascists and Falangist chiefs. Holding union cards they officiated as mayors and councillors, as agents of the public order of Aragon, bandits by origin making a profession and a government regime of banditry." In May 1937 Street-fighting broke out in Barcelona; the CNT [the Anarcho-Syndicalist Trades Union]) and POUM openly came into confrontation and began to battle with the Communists. This pushed the Republican Government to dissolve CNT, and outlaw POUM. The only thing I regret was the Soviet assasination of Andres Nin, and the formation of SIM.
Also I must say, I find it funny when you start referring to the "Western", "Liberal", Media as being absolutely wrong when it starts not to move with your case and they become Defendants of Stalin. How was this? Why would the Western Media ever side with Stalin? However when it comes to situations of were the Western Media attacks Stalin with absolute no proof, your ready to side with them, and say they are bringing out the "truth".
|
|