Support NeoGAF

[kharma45]

The amount of uncorrect facts found in this thread is simply amazing.
I've been spending the past two or three years reading as many books as I could about the USSR and Nazi Germany, and I am shocked. Not that I can blame anyone here, I'm 100% sure that I'd be posting wrong facts about any other subject since I don't know much.

For example, flying_phoenix, Hitler didn't want to conquer the whole world. At least, not until he lost his mind when it became clear that Germany would lose the war.
Based on the advice of Karl Haushofer, he tried to conquer a "lebensraum", that is to say enough territory to provide enough resources for Germany. Haushofer (well known geopolitics theorist) also said that Germany should keep from attacking the USSR and try to work things out with the British Empire in order to survive. Mind you, this all happened almost 20 years before WWII even began. And Hitler did not completely listen to him in the end. Later, even though Germany was trying as hard as it could to destroy England, they kept trying to sign a peace treaty with the British Empire, offering them to keep their colonies, and even promising to remove troops from Benelux and France. Hitler didn't really care about controlling the whole world directly, as long as he could expand Germany's territory eastwards.

Not quite right, Haushofer didn't give advice to Hitler on the idea of Lebensraum, it was Hess that helped Hitler develop these ideas in Mein Kampf. Haushofer and Hess' close friendship (from their relationship when Hess was a student of Hausofer at Munich University) led to Haushofer's visiting of Hitler and Hess in Landsberg and giving Hess Friedrich Ratel's 'Politshe Geographie' (as well as Clausewitz’s On War) in which the idea of Lebensraum came from.

It was through Hess that Hausofer’s ideas and concepts were incorporated into Nazi Party strategy.

 

[Anticitizen One]

Judging by the way Gaf whines you would think George Lucas was the most evil man in history

 

[Patrick Bateman]

Hitler made killing people an industrial process, I don't think Stalin ever went that far.

I also find it funny that some paranoid as fuck like Josef Stalin didn't see Hitler's betrayal coming.

I tried to resist to answer this thread with comparing any killing methods or numbers of victims, but the times of the Red Terror, Holodomor, the mass killings of Polish people at the start of the 2nd WW, the Gulags and mass executions of any political opponents qualifie pretty much for a industrial process.

For example, read the the story about the massacre of Katyn and especially Wassili Blokhin's method. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasili_Blokhin

Blokhin initially decided on an ambitious quota of 300 executions per night, and engineered an efficient system in which the prisoners were individually led to a small antechamber—which had been painted red and was known as the "Leninist room"—for a brief and cursory positive identification, before being handcuffed and led into the execution room next door. The room was specially designed with padded walls for soundproofing, a sloping concrete floor with a drain and hose, and a log wall for the prisoners to stand against. Blokhin—outfitted in a leather butcher's apron, cap, and shoulder-length gloves to protect his uniform—then, with no procurator present and no reading of the sentence or any other formalities,[12] pushed the prisoner against the log wall and shot him once in the base of the skull with a German Walther Model 2 .25 ACP pistol.[13] He had brought a briefcase full of his own Walther pistols, since he did not trust the reliability of the standard-issue Soviet TT-30 for the frequent, heavy use he intended.[12][14] The use of a German pocket pistol, which was commonly carried by Nazi intelligence agents, also provided plausible deniability of the executions if the bodies were discovered later.[14]

An estimated 30 local NKVD agents, guards and drivers were pressed into service to escort prisoners to the basement, confirm identification, then remove the bodies and hose down the blood after each execution. Although some of the executions were carried out by Senior Lieutenant of State Security Andrei M. Rubanov, Blokhin was the primary executioner and, true to his reputation, liked to work continuously and rapidly without interruption.[12] In keeping with NKVD policy and the overall "black" nature of the operation, the executions were conducted at night, starting at dark and continuing until just prior to dawn. The bodies were continuously loaded onto covered flat-bed trucks through a back door in the execution chamber and trucked, twice a night, to Mednoye, where Blokhin had arranged for a bulldozer and two NKVD drivers to dispose of bodies at an unfenced site. Each night, 24 to 25 trenches, measuring eight to ten meters total, were dug to hold the night's corpses, and each trench was covered up before dawn.[15] Blokhin and his team worked without pause for ten hours each night, with Blokhin executing an average of one prisoner every three minutes.[3] At the end of the night, Blokhin provided vodka to all his men.[16]

On 27 April 1940, Blokhin secretly received the Order of the Red Banner and a modest monthly pay premium as a reward from Joseph Stalin for his "skill and organization in the effective carrying out of special tasks".[17][18] His count of 7,000 shot in 28 days remains one of the most organized and protracted mass murders by a single individual on record,[3] and earned him the Guinness World Record for 'Most Prolific Executioner' in 2010.[4]

 

[Flying_Phoenix]

You seem knowledgable enough about the german side of the war, didn't your school teachers mention the russian side of things.

American History and Social Studies: "America FUCK YEAH!" WE'RE NUMBER 1! GO PILGRIMS!"

"Oh NO! The EVIL British are tyrants! Taxing us like hell! We're practically slaves!!!!"

"We went to war with the British, a David vs Goliath like battle. They threw all of their men at us and we beat them! FUCK YEAH!...wait the French helped us because the Britain was more focused with them at the time? I never read that so that isn't true!"

"Oh look we killed a bunch of Native Americans. How sad. Well we don't talk about this at all again so I assume everything is peachy with them now. This is just to make us feel bad about them! W-H-I-T-E G-U-I-L-T!!!!"

"Civil War! Down to the evil South!"

"The industrial revolution? Fuck this sucks. Are you guys going to talk about the Mill Girls? Cause that's the worst!"

"The Great Depression? Man America and Ireland suffered during that."

"World War II! Europe was losing then America came in and saved the world single handedly. America! FUCK YEAH!"

"Now we hate communists for some reason. The Red Scare."

"Civil Rights Movement? I feel bad about what happened but due to us not talking about this ever again I assume everything is peachy from them now. This must be here to make us feel bad for them due to some politically correct bullshit! W-H-I-T-E G-U-I-L-T!!!"

"Vietnam! What a controversial war!"

"A bunch of random stuff in recent history that is very uneventful."

-The End-

This is what all of the history classes in the US I took were like up until college. Even with "World" History in highschool at least 50% focused on America.

I remember once on of my history teacher's tried to explain what Communism was and they had absolutely no clue. They said "In Communism the government decides what you will be when you grow up since you are a child and you can't change it after. If they assign you to be a doctor you'll be that for life. If a janitor you'll be that for life too, and you can't change it no matter what."

Essentially Communism works a lot like Invader Zim's America.

 

[Flying_Phoenix]

He won the war.

But then the Cold War happened and the United States HATED Communist and the Soviet Union was the enemy So why don't Americans look at this more?

This is actually kind of right. Lening was realising how horrific the execution of communism was going, thus the change from War Communism to NEP. When Lenin died and Stalin took over after eliminating Trotsky he made up an excuse that NEP was just a temporary step back before plunging into full communism. Needless to say, that didn't really work out that well.[/QUOTE]

NEP?

 

[Moundir&Tony>you]

As someone allready mentioned, Molotov-Ribbentrop pact meant Stalin was just as eager to start wars in europe. Hard to say who was more evil tho but I guess I have to go with Stalin even if I am a little biased.

You couldn't be more wrong.

In 1938, Stalin realized that Hitler would eventually attack the Soviet Union, and succeed because the Nazis had built up an impressive and well equiped army, whereas the Red Army still didn't have enough power to protect itself from the Germans.

He tried to get on Britain and France's side, and even though France was in favour of an alliance with the Soviets, the British refused to take them seriously, and kept sending nobodies to Moscow in order to negociate with Stalin, who at the time really wanted to contain Germany's expansion eastwards. This lasted until may-june of 1939 (IIRC).

Since Stalin was offended by the fact that the western democracies didn't take him seriously, and since Von Ribbentrop, who was eager to impress his master, kept insisting on signing a pact with the Russians, Stalin decided to accept the non-agression treaty in order for him to catch up with the Nazis military-wise. Believing that Germany wouldn't attack the USSR until 1942 or 1943, he tried to modernize the Red Army's equipment, focusing especially on tanks. The Molotov Ribbentrop pact was the only way of buying himself some time to do that.

 

[Ultratech]

Hitler, though both have very vaild points as to being pretty messed up.

Especially if you've seen any documentaries on Stalin...dude was all kinds of crazy.

But you could make a much better argument for Hitler being more evil given all the crap he led over in WWII.

 

[VonRehausen]

They were both increadibly evil. Hitler in his own way utilizing the industrial nature or Germans. To compare them in interesting in the perspective and depth of their activities. While Hitler only destroyed the peoples he predetermined in Mein Kampf.

Stalin went outright blindly paranoid and genocidal. The NKVD destroyed not only tens of millions or ordinary Russians but huge amount or minorities as well. Not only had Soviet Union a strong anti-semitic under current but all non Russian minorities were viewed as suspicious. Millions of Jews, Germans, Polish, Ukranians, Finno-Ugric peoples (including the president of Estonia Mr. Päts as well as soime 30 000 Finnish communist willing to move to the communist paradise) and various other groups of pleople deemed anti-soviet were destroyed in the gulags. Total victims measuring in tens of millions. Some survivers like my wifes grandma bears heart breacking stories from concertration camps and escapes from Siberia.

 

[notsol337]

Is something really "worse than Hitler"?

One "Hitler" is the measurement of human deaths attributed to Adolf Hitler, roughly 6^106 human deaths.
SI Unit measurements apply to this particular calculation. This means standard unit conversions are available. Harld Shipman's work is roughly 36 microhitlers.
The EPA currently values a human life as being worth 6.9 million dollars ( USD), or 6.9 megadollars.
Doing some math, 1 hitler is -41,400,000,000,000 dollars (-41 teradollars).
When your bank charges you a $35 (USD) fee, you can tell the teller they fucking you over to the tune of 84 picohitlers, and ask if they have a tiny Auschwitz behind the counter.

http://robotsrule.us/picohitlers.html

 

[Bleepey]

Why is no one arguing that Pol Pot was worst

 

[JackEtc]

Stalin because he didn't give a fuck who you were. If you did anything he didn't like you were dead.

 

[Flying_Phoenix]

So many of these "most evil" people in the 20th century are communist dictators. Are they any other notable capitalist one's besides Hitler?

Why is no one arguing that Pol Pot was worst

Just watched this documentary after the "hype" of Pol Pot.

Holy Fuck! He's like Stalin and Hitler combined while taking steroids.

 

[Count of Monte Sawed-Off]

Chong Li or Tong Po, who was more evil and why?

I'd say Tong Po. He raped that one girl in the first one then he KILLED JCVD (SPOILER!) in the sequel. Worse than that, he subjected us to a series of movies that starred the wifebeater from Step by Step.

Chong Li just cheated a bit and beat the shit out of Ogre. Well he also killed that gold pants dude, but who cares about him. Plus Chong Li was in or nearing his 50s and he was still kicking ass.

 

[CassSept]

But then the Cold War happened and the United States HATED Communist and the Soviet Union was the enemy So why don't Americans look at this more?

Don't know, because they sided with USSR at the time and how could noble America side with horrible tyrants like Soviets?

This is actually kind of right. Lening was realising how horrific the execution of communism was going, thus the change from War Communism to NEP. When Lenin died and Stalin took over after eliminating Trotsky he made up an excuse that NEP was just a temporary step back before plunging into full communism. Needless to say, that didn't really work out that well.

NEP?[/QUOTE]

New Economic Policy, the second stage of communism that was introduced in early '20s and then took down by Stalin. Basically more liberal version of communism.


Oh and yeah, Pol Pot was worse than them both.

 

[Flying_Phoenix]

Was NEP working?

Don't know, because they sided with USSR at the time and how could noble America side with horrible tyrants like Soviets?

But the Soviet Union was rebranded a tyrant shortly after the war. As in the country and its entire ideology.

 

[LQX]

American History and Social Studies: "America FUCK YEAH!" WE'RE NUMBER 1! GO PILGRIMS!"

"Oh NO! The EVIL British are tyrants! Taxing us like hell! We're practically slaves!!!!"

"We went to war with the British, a David vs Goliath like battle. They threw all of their men at us and we beat them! FUCK YEAH!...wait the French helped us because the Britain was more focused with them at the time? I never read that so that isn't true!"

"Oh look we killed a bunch of Native Americans. How sad. Well we don't talk about this at all again so I assume everything is peachy with them now. This is just to make us feel bad about them! W-H-I-T-E G-U-I-L-T!!!!"

"Civil War! Down to the evil South!"

"The industrial revolution? Fuck this sucks. Are you guys going to talk about the Mill Girls? Cause that's the worst!"

"The Great Depression? Man America and Ireland suffered during that."

"World War II! Europe was losing then America came in and saved the world single handedly. America! FUCK YEAH!"

"Now we hate communists for some reason. The Red Scare."

"Civil Rights Movement? I feel bad about what happened but due to us not talking about this ever again I assume everything is peachy from them now. This must be here to make us feel bad for them due to some politically correct bullshit! W-H-I-T-E G-U-I-L-T!!!"

"Vietnam! What a controversial war!"

"A bunch of random stuff in recent history that is very uneventful."

-The End-

This is what all of the history classes in the US I took were like up until college. Even with "World" History in highschool at least 50% focused on America.

I remember once on of my history teacher's tried to explain what Communism was and they had absolutely no clue. They said "In Communism the government decides what you will be when you grow up since you are a child and you can't change it after. If they assign you to be a doctor you'll be that for life. If a janitor you'll be that for life too, and you can't change it no matter what."

Essentially Communism works a lot like Invader Zim's America.

So you never thought of maybe reading a book outside of your history class or maybe watching a documentary or two? Come on.

 

[Flying_Phoenix]

So you never thought of maybe reading a book outside of your history class or maybe watching a documentary or two? Come on.

? I'm huge into history. I just went over what History class in America is like.

 

[LQX]

? I'm huge into history. I just went over what History class in America is like.

Oh I figured that's where your were saying knowledge of history stopped. My mistake. And I kind of think you are short changing it bit if not lot. And I don't get what the "W-H-I-T-E G-U-I-L-T" parts and weather you are saying the coverage of those events is there to make us feel that way or what.

 

[RSLYG]

I'd say Tong Po. He raped that one girl in the first one then he KILLED JCVD (SPOILER!) in the sequel. Worse than that, he subjected us to a series of movies that starred the wifebeater from Step by Step.

Chong Li just cheated a bit and beat the shit out of Ogre. Well he also killed that gold pants dude, but who cares about him. Plus Chong Li was in or nearing his 50s and he was still kicking ass.

*NEX=AWESOME!

 

[Boogie9IGN]

I just watched the 1992 HBO movie with Robert Duvall as Stalin (he OWNS the role). What a paranoid and conniving sob

 

[Riposte]

that depends on your definition of evil

If evil even exists at all.

 

[akira28]

Isn't Bolo like 70 something now, and looks maybe a just a little more haggard and razor burnt than before? He needs to make a cameo in the new Expendables.

 

[Locke_211]

To everyone saying Stalin perverted the course of Russia's revolution, it's worth considering arguments that everything he did was merely an intensification of what Lenin had already established during and after the Russian Civil War. The Gulag system and the mass repression was already there under Lenin.

I'm also reading Hannah Arendt's "Totalitarianism" and Vaclav Havel's essay "The Power of the Powerless" as part of an ongoing research project and both seem to suggest that under Stalinism the ideology of the state affects every single citizen's day to day life and the things they can think and the actions open to them on a much more systematically entrenched level than under Hitler's Germany.

 

[Mael]

Don't anyone find disturbing that people in the US use US documentaries as proof that US enemies are evil?

 

[Moundir&Tony>you]

Don't anyone find disturbing that people in the US use US documentaries as proof that US enemies are evil?

I do.

Especially when there are so many books out there about those two guys.

 

[Mael]

I do.

Especially when there are so many books out there about those two guys.

What I find even worse is all the qualifiers that go with that, I'm not even sure why I would trust 1 documentary that boils down to 'that guy was paranoid and used astrology to predict the weather' when the claim is so ridiculous.
Are we to trust a US documentary made in the 90's about Saddam Hussein too if it talks about him eating the babies of his ennemies?

 

[Pezking]

You can always make a case that genocidal maniacs like Stalin or Hitler were insane. While these two made tens of millions suffer, they must have been far detached from reality, which might make them seem a little less evil, rather than crazy.

I think you can't say that about people like Shirō Ishii, a scientist in Unit 731 during the second world war, who was responsible for atrocities such as:

Prisoners of war were subjected to vivisection without anesthesia. Vivisections were performed on prisoners after infecting them with various diseases. Scientists performed invasive surgery on prisoners, removing organs to study the effects of disease on the human body. These were conducted while the patients were alive because it was feared that the decomposition process would affect the results. The infected and vivisected prisoners included men, women, children, and infants.
(...)
Human targets were used to test grenades positioned at various distances and in different positions. Flame throwers were tested on humans. Humans were tied to stakes and used as targets to test germ-releasing bombs, chemical weapons, and explosive bombs.

I think the most evil people are the ones that use the surroundings established by madmen like Hitler or Stalin to live out their own sadistic nature in order to impress and even make a career out of it. Mengele wasn't forced to experiment on children in Auschwitz. Nobody asked him to. He saw the holocaust as a chance to expand his research. That is pure evil.

Oh, and that Ishii dude had been granted immunity by the American Occupation Authorities after the war.

 

[santi_yo]

George W. Bush

 

[Wiktor]

Stalin. Not only he's responsible for death of more people, but most of those were his own countrymen. At least under Hitler's rule the life in germany improved noticably.

Plus, when he was young Hitler was a war hero, there was no time in Stalin's life when anything positive could be said about this man.

 

[Log4Girlz]

Hard to say, they were both insane in my book, so not really evil at all. Now, the people who supported them on the other hand...

 

[Moundir&Tony>you]

Stalin. Not only he's responsible for death of more people, but most of those were his own countrymen. At least under Hitler's rule the life in germany improved noticably.

Plus, when he was young Hitler was a war hero, there was no time in Stalin's life when anything positive could be said about this man.

WHAT

THE





FUCK





Are you for real ?

 

[MrHicks]

WHAT

THE





FUCK





Are you for real ?

war hero is a little crazy lol but he had respect for what he did in WW1 i think
like many

 

[Log4Girlz]

war hero is a little crazy lol but he had respect for what he did in WW1 i think
like many

Last I heard he had spun a story, because he was despised. But I'm no history expert :/

 

[Wiktor]

WHAT

THE





FUCK





Are you for real ?

Yes. One of the reasons why Germans supported Hitler is because of how much the economy improved before the war. One of examples is popularization of cars.

And during WWI he recieved two Iron Crosses for bravery. No matter the monster he turned on later on, the man did start as genuine patriot.

 

[Wiktor]

Last I heard he had spun a story, because he was despised. But I'm no history expert :/

Reliable sources say he was despised and lacked leadership abilities. THere are also some facts that point the 2nd class Iron Cross he recieved most mostly because of sucking up to his superiors. But I've yet to find any reliable source that could deny tha he did earn his first Iron Cross.

 

[akira28]

I've read some pretty derisive things about young Adolf. That he was a rear echelon message runner, who was kept mainly out of danger since he could read well and use a type writer. So he stayed mainly on bases away from battle lines, and I think even in his own diaries he commented on the cushy lifestyle where he could "enjoy a good breakfast and 8 oz of beer, even on duty". Meanwhile, people were dying in mud and filth filled trenches. I believe I read that there was some small resentment towards him from others less fortunately assigned. That he was a super-patriotic brown noser who spent most of his time away from the battle. He was injured during the war, and he did receive commendations for bravery, but some sources say this was because of his being posted at headquarters and his close service to high ranking officers. I'm not sure that makes him a 'war hero', in the truest sense. Perhaps technically.

 

[Kabouter]

Reliable sources say he was despised and lacked leadership abilities. THere are also some facts that point the 2nd class Iron Cross he recieved most mostly because of sucking up to his superiors. But I've yet to find any reliable source that could deny tha he did earn his first Iron Cross.

A second class Iron Cross was common enough that saying someone is a war hero based on that is pushing it, to say the least.

As far as economic recovery goes, I think the Weimar Republic needs more credit for that. The autobahns were started under General von Schleicher's government for instance, Hitler (or more to the point Hjalmar Schacht) just ran with those ideas not to mention took advantage of the start of a global recovery, and the NSDAP cleverly used propaganda to convince the people that they were the ones to thank.

 

[Wiktor]

I've read some pretty derisive things about young Adolf. That he was a rear echelon message runner, who was kept mainly out of danger since he could read well and use a type writer. So he stayed mainly on bases away from battle lines, and I think even in his own diaries he commented on the cushy lifestyle where he could "enjoy a good breakfast and 8 oz of beer, even on duty". Meanwhile, people were dying in mud and filth filled trenches. I believe I read that there was some small resentment towards him from others less fortunately assigned. That he was a super-patriotic brown noser who spent most of his time away from the battle. He was injured during the war, and he did receive commendations for bravery, but some sources say this was because of his being posted at headquarters and his close service to high ranking officers. I'm not sure that makes him a 'war hero', in the truest sense. Perhaps technically.

Well, I use the term for people who deservedly recieved a medal during war. Isn't that the typical definition?
Of course this doesn't make him even a decent being, same with economical growth (no matter how much he really contributed to i). I'm just mentiioning this specificaly in comparision to Stalin. You can find some petite positives in Hitler's life. As small as it is, it's still more than you can say about Stalin.

 

[akira28]

Well, I use the term for people who deservedly recieved a medal during war. Isn't that the typical definition?

decorated infrantryman/officer, etc. War hero, if they have an actual verifiable story of bravery and valor, life saving, etc, then sure they get war hero, easily.

 

[Napalm_Frank]

You couldn't be more wrong.

In 1938, Stalin realized that Hitler would eventually attack the Soviet Union, and succeed because the Nazis had built up an impressive and well equiped army, whereas the Red Army still didn't have enough power to protect itself from the Germans.

He tried to get on Britain and France's side, and even though France was in favour of an alliance with the Soviets, the British refused to take them seriously, and kept sending nobodies to Moscow in order to negociate with Stalin, who at the time really wanted to contain Germany's expansion eastwards. This lasted until may-june of 1939 (IIRC).

Since Stalin was offended by the fact that the western democracies didn't take him seriously, and since Von Ribbentrop, who was eager to impress his master, kept insisting on signing a pact with the Russians, Stalin decided to accept the non-agression treaty in order for him to catch up with the Nazis military-wise. Believing that Germany wouldn't attack the USSR until 1942 or 1943, he tried to modernize the Red Army's equipment, focusing especially on tanks. The Molotov Ribbentrop pact was the only way of buying himself some time to do that.

I guess invading Poland and Finland was justified as self defence?

Oh yay I'm member! :3

 

[Wiktor]

decorated infrantryman/officer, etc. War hero, if they have an actual verifiable story of bravery and valor, life saving, etc, then sure they get war hero, easily.

Ok then. My mistake. As non-native english speaker such nuances sometime escape me. Sorry

 

[Wazzim]

To everyone saying Stalin perverted the course of Russia's revolution, it's worth considering arguments that everything he did was merely an intensification of what Lenin had already established during and after the Russian Civil War. The Gulag system and the mass repression was already there under Lenin.

I'm also reading Hannah Arendt's "Totalitarianism" and Vaclav Havel's essay "The Power of the Powerless" as part of an ongoing research project and both seem to suggest that under Stalinism the ideology of the state affects every single citizen's day to day life and the things they can think and the actions open to them on a much more systematically entrenched level than under Hitler's Germany.

Gulag was necessary when Lenin took power, too many people of the old regime etc. You can't take any risks.
He wanted good progression (like the before mentioned economic policy) but Stalin flipped over the table and just wanted full control over everything.

 

[Instigator]

I guess invading Poland and Finland was justified as self defence?

Oh yay I'm member! :3

Strategically-speaking, yes.

Just like it made sense for Finland to ally themselves with the Nazis to drive the Soviets out.

 

[War Peaceman]

You couldn't be more wrong.

In 1938, Stalin realized that Hitler would eventually attack the Soviet Union, and succeed because the Nazis had built up an impressive and well equiped army, whereas the Red Army still didn't have enough power to protect itself from the Germans.

He tried to get on Britain and France's side, and even though France was in favour of an alliance with the Soviets, the British refused to take them seriously, and kept sending nobodies to Moscow in order to negociate with Stalin, who at the time really wanted to contain Germany's expansion eastwards. This lasted until may-june of 1939 (IIRC).

Since Stalin was offended by the fact that the western democracies didn't take him seriously, and since Von Ribbentrop, who was eager to impress his master, kept insisting on signing a pact with the Russians, Stalin decided to accept the non-agression treaty in order for him to catch up with the Nazis military-wise. Believing that Germany wouldn't attack the USSR until 1942 or 1943, he tried to modernize the Red Army's equipment, focusing especially on tanks. The Molotov Ribbentrop pact was the only way of buying himself some time to do that.

Spot on. The British treated the USSR with enormous content. They sent a guy called Sir Reginald Aylmer Ranfurly Plunkett-Ernle-Erle-Drax to engage in diplomacy with Communists.

A second class Iron Cross was common enough that saying someone is a war hero based on that is pushing it, to say the least.

As far as economic recovery goes, I think the Weimar Republic needs more credit for that. The autobahns were started under General von Schleicher's government for instance, Hitler (or more to the point Hjalmar Schacht) just ran with those ideas not to mention took advantage of the start of a global recovery, and the NSDAP cleverly used propaganda to convince the people that they were the ones to thank.

To be fair, the Nazis were preceded by Bruning, who was abysmal for the German economy (whether his 'hunger chancellorship' was necessary medicine is debatable, but it was unpopular) and thus any improvements would immediately contrast with that.

It is a shame that Stresemann died so soon; he worked wonders with the German economy. That said, the Great Depression would have likely destroyed his reputation too.

 

[Napalm_Frank]

Strategically-speaking, yes.

This of course is true but then this whole discussion on ''evil'' will take a whole diffirent turn. Maybe all the executions Stalin/Hitler did can be justified as some form of twisted self defence of ideology and power. Well in the end war with Finland did them way more harm than if they left em alone.

I wonder what could have happened if Soviets tried to ally themselves with western neibourghs and promise aid if Germany decided to invade them.

 

[Mael]

Gotta love how Hitler is a war hero and Stalin a crazed madman with nothing to say for himself before or how Stalin somehow invented deportation or something.
I'm far from the last to shit on my local communist party but come on let's not be ridiculous.
And heck for all the portrayal of crazed warmongers USSR get they still weren't as bad as Mc Carthy would have let you believe.

 

[Wotan131]

There's no need to downplay Hitler's bravery in WW1 just because he was supposedly evil. Most early Nazi's were decorated war heroes, the best example is Hermann Göring. He was one of Germany's top aces of the war, enough to make him modestly famous.

Also, Stalin is far more evil if I had to choose. Staling ordered all Soviet POWs to be treated as traitors, even though these men often fought to the last bullet before being captured.

 

[Mael]

There's no need to downplay Hitler's bravery in WW1 just because he was supposedly evil. Most early Nazi's were decorated war heroes, the best example is Hermann Goering. He was one of Germany's top aces of the war, enough to make him modestly famous.

You're asking for nuances in a thread about how EVIL some historical character are.

 

[Flying_Phoenix]

So why was the Soviet Union attacking Finland? Was it because they were Nazi allies? Or did they invade Finland prior to that for the fuck of it?

 

[Instigator]

So why was the Soviet Union attacking Finland? Was it because they were Nazi allies? Or did they invade Finland prior to that for the fuck of it?

Two reasons.

1. The Soviets were asking for territorial concessions from Finland so that the Soviet Union could gain more buffer territory to protect Leningrad. Finland refused. When Germany did attack the Soviets, Leningrad was quickly encircled by German forces.

2. Finland was part of the Russian empire until they broke free during the chaos of the Russian revolution. Lenin did recognize Finnish independence, but Stalin obviously had other plans.

Finland became Nazi allies only after the Soviets attacked them. They switched sides again when the Nazis were on the losing side.