Stalin ?

It's all about moustaches, here.

I don't think he's a monster but I'm undecided wether he would deserve something like Gulag or not. In my view he had three main mistakes: Preserving Soviet economical system's capitalisticity, his failure to support correctly soviet agronomic scientifical development and tactical planning failures in WWII, and perhaps repressive methods against authentic communists.

Perhaps ?

AllMightyShadow wrote:

Perhaps ?

I'd have to research more deeply on how many genuine communists opposed Stalin and were repressed and how. After all, Stalinism, with all its flaws, is better for a nation like USSR than free-market capitalism in my view. Though its flaws are still terrible.

Send him here !
Without him russia could EASLY win the Ww2 to, he sayd that there is no retreat or else u get shot by your own officers, Stalin had just more men then Germany and with a little tactic he could win it whitout so many deads.

CoolKidX wrote:

Without him russia could EASLY win the Ww2 to,

Without the industrialisation? If Stalin didn't cam to power, the country would've been taken by the Allies (actually, that's the main reason for them to hate him, my opinion), or the Nazis. He didn't actually "won" the war, but without him Russia would be now a bunch of separate territories, annexed by other countries.

Anyway, my opinion: he wasn't an angel, but sure more a hero than a villain. And the topic like that actually existed before.

I'm undecided on this, personally.

Riddler wrote:

CoolKidX wrote:

Without him russia could EASLY win the Ww2 to,

Without the industrialisation? If Stalin didn't cam to power, the country would've been taken by the Allies (actually, that's the main reason for them to hate him, my opinion), or the Nazis. He didn't actually "won" the war, but without him Russia would be now a bunch of separate territories, annexed by other countries.

Anyway, my opinion: he wasn't an angel, but sure more a hero than a villain. And the topic like that actually existed before.

I agree with this.


Stalin may or may not have been indirectly responsible for the deaths of millions (NKVD acted roguely), but he improved much of Russia's infrastructure with the industrialization, and the roads, canals, and subways. His leadership may have not been the best during WWII, but he saved the U.S.S.R. from total annihilation, as Hitler wanted to exterminate the Soviet population.

He was both good and bad, which one outweighs the other, I don't know.

revolution wrote:

I agree with this.


Stalin may or may not have been indirectly responsible for the deaths of millions (NKVD acted roguely), but he improved much of Russia's infrastructure with the industrialization, and the roads, canals, and subways. His leadership may have not been the best during WWII, but he saved the U.S.S.R. from total annihilation, as Hitler wanted to exterminate the Soviet population.

He was both good and bad, which one outweighs the other, I don't know.

I agree with this post, it greatly sums up what I think about Stalin.

However, I consider Stalin's flaws were crucial for USSR's fall and that makes me have less consideration for him

Quote :

Hang this son of a bitch who's responsible of 60 million soviet losses !

Bullshit. Even Conquest only maintains that he killed 20 million.

Steel wrote:

Quote :

Hang this son of a bitch who's responsible of 60 million soviet losses !

Bullshit. Even Conquest only maintains that he killed 20 million.

And that is too much still. But well you'll always find the guy that will tell you that Stalin killed 100 million Russians.

i voted the ww2 one
but he still deserves worse, even with that great and wonderful mustache....='[ the mustache

I vote the ww2, too. Stalin was the leader, but my respect goes to the soldiers of the USSR.

Cyprian Uljanow wrote:

Stalin and Hitler combos is the one way of makeing fun of stalin i don't like

He was in Alliance with Nazis until 41 remember?

Cyprian Uljanow wrote:

He was in Alliance with Nazis until 41 remember?

Non-agression-pact or the Lets-screw-Poland-together-and-then-fight-each-other agreement.

The pact was essential to the USSR to win some time, because both Russia and Germany knew that the war is inevitable and will start anyway. The question was when?

Triarii wrote:

It's all about moustaches, here.

I agree!

Should I grow a Stalin mustache or a Hitler mustache?

Right now I'm growing a vito corleone mustache!

Liche wrote:

Triarii wrote:

It's all about moustaches, here.

I agree!

Should I grow a Stalin mustache or a Hitler mustache?

Right now I'm growing a vito corleone mustache!

why don't you grow a staler mustache?
like a combination of the world's most evil men, in ONE.

Riddler wrote:

The pact was essential to the USSR to win some time, because both Russia and Germany knew that the war is inevitable and will start anyway. The question was when?

Very true, and in the intervening years the USSR was able to more adequately prepare for that war. Poland itself had been preparing, under Pilsudski's fascist regime, to act as the 'jumping-off' point for the invasion of the Soviet Union. It's dispute with Lithuania over Vilnius however, saw the Nazis choose the latter over the former. But while the Nazis attacked Poland, the USSR finished off the Nazis new fascist allies in Lithuania.

One has to look at the events leading up to the anti-fascist struggle as maneuvering for position. Kruschev himself admitted that, after the Molotov-Ribbentropp pact, that Stalin said, "Hitler thinks that he has fooled me, but it is I who have fooled him."

Capitalism makes a big deal out of these pre-war preparations in the hope they might cover up the reality that fascism is the sharp edge of capitalism, utilised by the wealthy to crush the working classes.