The Red Army

lol you know who else says they have data to back up what they say?

It sure as hell isnt you. You have given me nothing but your opinion, AKA: What you want to believe is the truth, rather than what really is.

It sure as hell isnt you. You have given me nothing but your opinion, AKA: What you want to believe is the truth, rather than what really is.

Well actually the nutzis on stormfront say they can prove racism is the way to go with scientific data.
German generals would be a bad source for info on the Red Army considering they would probably been imprisoned or executed for being generals in the Wehrmacht and the fact that they would probably lie to paint themselves as white knights because they were killing big bad commies.
Also your post makes no sense "What you want to believe is the truth, rather than what really is." yeah I believe the truth and all you say is "omg red army bad" and provide sources produced by the Minister of Propaganda for the National Socialist Party. According to Polish Soviet his gramps fought in the Red Army and says no tramplers cleared minefields. I personally don't care what you opinion on the Red Army. I don't really feel like looking up sources on google just to prove you wrong.

Ah, the "I have no time for you" defence? You really do have no way to back up anything you say other than some bs about a Soviet vet. Im sure he served on every single place of the Russian front at all times too?

German generals by 1950 were busy worrying about how exactly they were going to defend West Germany if the Red Army decided it wasnt happy with the half of Europe it had conquored durring WWII. Im sure "painting themselves as white knights" too a back seat to "how do we not get killed if this goes hot". Even Dmitri Volkogonov acknowledge tramplers.

Think, this was an army that in instances encouraged rape, shot its own men, used wave attack frequently, and was responsible for multiple atrocities. Is the idea they sent soldiers sentenced to death across mine fields to clear the way that crazy of an idea?

Also, how are my sources produced by Goebbels? Show me anything to back that up?

shot its own men, used wave attack frequently,

I'm back and I'll just attack this once.

Now durring WW2 this tatic was used. Why? well I dont know...maybe it was because they were being invaded! The Soviet Red Army wasnt like the German wercmarch. It wasnt moderized, not the best trained at the time, and in size was a good army. When the Troops retreated they'd 'eave the front un-defended and when you have a large army of troops wanting to take your land then what comes across your mind? You have to take into thought that most of those tatics were used during WW2 and never used years after.

was responsible for multiple atrocities.

Oh and the KMT didnt do any Atrocities? All Armies have done things their not proud of.

Ah, the "I have no time for you" defence? You really do have no way to back up anything you say other than some bs about a Soviet vet. Im sure he served on every single place of the Russian front at all times too?

German generals by 1950 were busy worrying about how exactly they were going to defend West Germany if the Red Army decided it wasnt happy with the half of Europe it had conquored durring WWII. Im sure "painting themselves as white knights" too a back seat to "how do we not get killed if this goes hot". Even Dmitri Volkogonov acknowledge tramplers.

Think, this was an army that in instances encouraged rape, shot its own men, used wave attack frequently, and was responsible for multiple atrocities. Is the idea they sent soldiers sentenced to death across mine fields to clear the way that crazy of an idea?

Also, how are my sources produced by Goebbels? Show me anything to back that up?

Your source from google got it's info straight from one of Goebbels pamphlets or a book that used one of his pamphlets as a source. I don't know the name of the pamphlet but it's all on Soviet "atrocities" and Soviet and Jewish conspiricies. If you want you can use your favorite source and google for it. I actually read a copy of it so I can confirm my source isn't some neo-nutzi that knows how to use the internet. Well my source is a Nutzi but I'm using it to tell you that you're using the Nutzis source to try and say that the USSR were a bunch of rapists and murderers ha sounds alot like Ronald Reagen or Adolf Hitler.

Well, they say a week is a long time in (capitalist) politics — it’s an eternity without a computer and arguments to make life interesting!

Soldat noted one error I made (1943 rather than 1944), but no-one picked me up on the second (Patton stopped on the west bank of the Rhine, not the Elbe). However I stand firm on my interpretation of both the rationale for the US getting involved in Europe at all and Patton’s “reluctance” to go beyond the Rhine.

Wehrmacht and US officers as sources for Soviet tactics? We are talking about the same Wehrmacht officers who raced pell-mell to lay all blame at the feet of Hitler and the SS, and the same US officers who accepted those very Wehrmacht officers as allies in a possible future war with the USSR?

And if we’re talking multiple atrocities aka “War Crimes,” let’s not forget the fire-bombing of Dresden and Tokyo and the nuclear holocausts of Hiroshima/Nagasaki (A War Crime is no less a War Crime when committed from X 000 metres up). As for “Crimes against Humanity,” how about Remagen, where over 18,000 German POW's died of malnutrition and abuse while in US care?

Ain’t none of us clean, Comrade.

Have we also forgotten the Far East/Pacific sphere where the Soviet attack on Manchuria handed the Japanese their largest and swiftest land defeat of the entire war? Or are we going to swallow the Hollywood line that the US fought and won singlehandedly there as well?

(We in Australia find Hollywood's version of the Pacific War a bit of a giggle actually)

And since Soldat is so keen to paint the Red Army as rapists, let's look at the record of US soldiers in this respect.

We could, of course, start at 1783, and the treatment of Native Americans (we could even go back to 1492, but I did specify US soldiers), but we only need to look at what happens now.

Women are raped on a regular basis by American servicemen in the vicinity of US bases around the globe (http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/03/14/7699/ ), and no action is ever taken against the perpetrators. From this it is obvious that the US military regards itself as above any law, not only those of the International Criminal Court, or the ordinary criminal laws of the countries in which the bases are, but even US military law and the laws of the USA itself.

And US servicemen rape US servicewomen with impunity on an alarmingly regular basis. The most harrowing reading in an article by Colonel Ann Wright, a retired US army reserve officer and former diplomat ( http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/04/28/8564/ ) is the story of Private Lavena Johnson, who was found dead in her tent in Iraq in 2005. Her parents eventually extracted from the investigative record a CD of photographs which

… revealed that Lavena, a small woman, barely 5 feet tall and weighing less than 100 pounds, had been struck in the face with a blunt instrument, perhaps a weapon stock. Her nose was broken and her teeth knocked backwards. One elbow was distended. The back of her clothes had debris on them indicating she had been dragged from one location to another. The photographs of her disrobed body showed bruises, scratch marks and teeth imprints on the upper part of her body. The right side of her back as well as her right hand had been burned apparently from a flammable liquid poured on her and then lighted. The photographs of her genital area revealed massive bruising and lacerations. A corrosive liquid had been poured into her genital area, probably to destroy DNA evidence of sexual assault.

Despite the bruises, scratches, teeth imprints and burns on her body, Lavena was found completely dressed in the burning tent. There was a blood trail from outside a contractor’s tent to inside the tent. She apparently had been dressed after the attack and her attacker placed her body into the tent and set it on fire.

Private Johnson’s death was classified as “suicide”!!!

Given that the winners wrote the history of the Second World War, can we ever be really sure that nothing of a similar nature ever occurred as US armies occupied Europe?

If your going to tell me Hiroshima and Nagasaki were war crime go cry me a river somewhere else. Both cities contained a large degree of wartime industry and both contained valid military targets. Not to mention the attacks brought the war to an end and saved millions of lives, both US and Japanese, by preventing an invasion of mainland Japan.

You say fire bombing of Dresden and Tokyo like it was something extra terrible. Yes, many civilians were killed, but that was hardy the goal of bombing runs on those cities. Believe it or not the majority of bombings done to cities in the war was "fire bombing". Turns out if you burn their shit down it wont work.
But both Dresden and Tokyo contained large factories supporting the enemy war effort, it would have been stupid not to bomb those cities. Dresden was Germany's 7th largest city and to that point was largely left alone by bombing. Killing civilians sucks, but when factories are in cities what choice do you have? Bombing a factory and missing is slightly different from taking 22,000 POWs and executing them, or having a platoon rape a woman while her husband and children are forced to watch before shooting them all.

As for the POWs who died in US care, I agree, that is completely wrong. However, its silly to even attempt to compare possible US attrocities in WWII to those of the USSR. The USSR in cold blood killed 22,000 at Katyn alone, not to mention the millions of their POWs who died of malnutrition, and execution, and abuse, etc. Also the US or Brisith did not keep out POWs in labor camps until the 1950s.

Now onto your rape thing.

Maybe you dont know people or havent lived enought, but some people are insane. In any army there is going to be crime commited by the soldiers, just as in civilian life some people will commit crime. The US Army is no exception and many soliders do many terrible things, but to even attempt to compare it to the millions of women raped and murdered in the last couple months of WWII is just impossible.

Also, your balanced source acts as thought the US military simply allows it,as the Red Army did, which is untrue. If sufficient evidence is brought to bear to support an accusation the soldier will be punished.

Im also not sure what you mean by history is written by the winners? If Im not mistaken Russia won too...


With regards to the Pacific and Russia's "contribution" to the war, while they did deliver a crushing defeat, really it meant nothing in the PTO. Think, Russia declared war on Japan August 8th 1945, Japan surrended on August 15th. They were in the war a whole 7 days, not really enough time to make any difference whatsoever.

PS: The reason it was "their largest land defeat" was because after the first 9 days the USSR kept advancing and taking more and more land as the japanese surrended. Its easy to take land when nobody is stopping you, eh?

Soldat your arguments contain no real substance and you are really struggling to stay afloat in this argument over whether or not the Red Army was evil or whatever propaganda they fed you in grade school. You come off as a patriot with your justification of the crimes of the U.S. probably because you live in Philidelphia and that's like the birthplace of democracy and equality. . . oh wait.

No substance? In what way? Oh, yeah, because it isnt the same baseless crap you like to hear and believe. I am willing to bet I know a great deal more about WWII than the vast majority of those on this board, and everything I have said about lend lease, red army behavior, the PTO, etc, can be backed up with hard fact and reliable sources. I will admit the existance of tramplers in debatable, but certainly not penal legions, and certainly not anything else I have said. You say I have no substance, now I ask where is yours?

You are all trying to twist the topic to "US vs Russian war crimes". That isnt what I came on here to talk about. I came on here to discuss the Red Army in WWII. After reading 30 comments saying "Red Army kicks all teh asses" or things to that effect like a bunch of rebelling high schoolers I had to throw in some logic.

No, the Red Army wasnt the best army in WWII.
No, they couldnt have won the war themselves.
Yes, their soldiers commited war crimes on a wide scale

Get over it, thats just the truth. I post statistics and provide sources, while you simply mount some personal attacks.
Now prove me wrong, prove to me the Red Army could have fought the war themselves, that the allies couldnt have possibly won without them, and their soldiers were the shining example of discipline and honor. Prove me wrong.

If your going to tell me Hiroshima and Nagasaki were war crime go cry me a river somewhere else. Both cities contained a large degree of wartime industry and both contained valid military targets.

Oh apperently you just dont care that thousands of japanese died and that the Americans tested this dman weapon in the Desert( wow smart) and thus how can you tell the power of a weapon and its heat if your in a area thats filled with heat? answer: you cant.

Not to mention the attacks brought the war to an end and saved millions of lives, both US and Japanese, by preventing an invasion of mainland Japan.

Not to mention it also created the most destructive weapon on earth or has that sliped your mind? Face it those lives that were "saved" were going to be killed in the Korean war and ruined by the economic break down after the fall of the Japanese empire. It was an Imperialist war in the Pacific so the soilders who survived would die in another war created by the imperialists to destroy their enemies.

Im also not sure what you mean by history is written by the winners? If Im not mistaken Russia won too...

*ahem* let me re-fresh what you have obviouslty forgotten. Education in one country can differ compared to another. Here in America they say their the best, their unbeatable,etc. They say the USSR was evil,bad,etc. The US and Capitalists watched as the USSR fell. Now since the Capitalists were un-challegened what do you think they would do? tell the truth?

prove to me the Red Army could have fought the war themselves, that the allies couldnt have possibly won without them, and their soldiers were the shining example of discipline and honor. Prove me wrong.

Now lets see the USSR's Red Army destroyed 90% of German forces thus leaving the werchmarcht unable to mass a massive relaiation force against the Western Allies. now if there was no USSR Eastern Europe would have been rolled over and German got to the oil fields that means more production, more equipment, more tanks, and more things to throw at the Western allies. with no one pre-ocuping the Germans in the Eastern Front the Germans could foucs at one enemy at a time. If they focused in the UK alone with their fleet's, bombings,etc London would be no more and the germans would have Europe for themselfs.

Maybe you dont know people or havent lived enought ...

My first lover was gangraped and murdered — I found her body. Please don’t tell me I haven’t lived enough.

...millions of women raped and murdered in the last couple months of WWII is just impossible.

MILLIONS?

...If sufficient evidence is brought to bear to support an accusation the soldier will be punished.

So why aren’t they? What haven’t those who raped and murdered Laverna Johnson been found and punished? Why has her death been classified as suicide? (Perhaps you need Gibbs and Abby of NCIS to investigate?)

Im also not sure what you mean by history is written by the winners? If Im not mistaken Russia won too...

That wasn’t my point. My point was that the way that information was controlled by ALL governments in WWII, we are hard pressed to find any evidence of misconduct by ‘our side’ — the Western Allies never actually regarded the USSR as being on ‘our side,’ especially after the bullets stopped flying.

The attitude of the ruling classes in all of the allied nations of the West probably approximated that of Winston Churchill — when asked why he, a conservative monarchist, allied himself with a ‘monster’ like Stalin, Churchill replied, “If Mr Hitler were to invade Hell, I would feel compelled to make at least one favourable reference to Satan in the House of Commons.”

The reason it was “their largest land defeat” was because after the first 9 days the USSR kept advancing and taking more and more land as the japanese surrended. Its easy to take land when nobody is stopping you, eh?

QED, I’d say (You’ve just proved my case).

You’re here to discuss the Red Army, you say. Fair enough — as long as you too can be fair enough.

If your going to tell me Hiroshima and Nagasaki were war crime go cry me a river somewhere else. Both cities contained a large degree of wartime industry and both contained valid military targets.

Just thought I would attack this statement. The use of nuclear weapons is never justified. These things were not created to be nice, little, friendly, harmless things. They were designed to take lives on a mass scale and I'm sure everybody who was working to develop them knew this. The two bombs dropped on Japan affected civilians more than the actual soldiers. Not only were thousands vaporized immediately upon impact, but even years after Japanese citizens were feeling the effects of radiation poisoning. Attacking citizens because your military is too cowardly to face the enemy directly could be considered a war crime. Nuclear Weapons have only been good for one thing: preventing massive wars due to the destruction both sides know they wouldn't want to cause. For example the US right now has enough nuclear weapons to destroy the entire world several times.

Hiroshima and Nagasaki were indeed warcrimes.To deny this is to completely buy into american propaganda which makes no sense when you actually look into it. Japan was going to surrender, they were losing quite badly.
and do you really think they bombed those cities just because they contained wartime industry? Surely normal bombs would suffice for that, and they wouldnt need to kill all the civilians
i feel sorry for these people that defend the nuking of japan

No army can ever dream to compete with the Red Army!
Good Russian quality! Those were the days...

Thats what Im talking about! Red Army conversation!

Soldat, how old are you?

You are all trying to twist the topic to "US vs Russian war crimes". That isnt what I came on here to talk about. I came on here to discuss the Red Army in WWII.

Funny, it seemed to me that your aim was to discuss the Red Army in tones of “yes, they did their bit, but, gee, weren’t they bastards?” — you were the one who initially raised the question of human rights abuses by the Red Army. We understand that the USSR was as much the ideological enemy of the US as it was the “race enemy” of the Nazis — and that the US ruling class will always fear the spectre of proletarian revolution, particularly when backed by a well-equipped military — so we quite understand which version of history you choose to believe.

Yes, Millions Read "Berlin: The Downfall, 1945," by Antony Beevor or "A Woman in Berlin: Eight Weeks in a Conquored City"

Look, I’ve already stated my interest in and position on the question of rape — it is a horrific, sickening nightmare for the victim and a vile act by the perpetrator. I am also on record as stating that, if Stalin had ordered it and if my officers had concurred — I seriously doubt it, but I will allow it for the sake of the argument — I would have protested even if I had had to face execution for insubordination. Even ONE instance of rape is one too many, but I really must question a source that talks of MIILIONS of women being raped and murdered by the Red Army within the space of a few months, especially since at the same time they must have also been quite busy chasing the Axis troops westwards. This is reminiscent of the old chestnut about the “millions” burned at the stake as witches during the fifteenth to seventeenth centuries — more, in fact, than the entire population of some countries at the time.

One case hardly represents the rule of how things are done. It is a tragedy and a crime, but individual stories like that are given to get an emotional response from people.

One case? But Lt Col Wright has dozens on her files from the vicinity of US bases around the world — Private Johnson’s case was only one of many, each equally horrendous, and as often perpetrated against indigenous women. Why aren’t the convictions rolling in?

Again, you all keep trying to twist this away from the topic of "Red Army: Best Army in Evah" to some crap about the US army and nuclear weapons.

The imperialist rulers of the USA are the only ones who have ever used nuclear weapons against other human beings — that they did not do so more often was due to the fact that the USSR soon acquired them also. For as long as I have lived the US has self-righteously postured that it alone has the “moral” right to possess these hellish weapons (oh, except for a few mates, like the UK and Israel… and whatever tinpot little regime on whose soil it decides to place them to further the its — the US’ — strategic objectives), and has just as readily wielded its nuclear arsenal as a threat against any regime that gets in its way.

So you cannot simply blame the capitalist countries for conflicts such as Korea.

We blame capitalists because were leftists — it’s not an exercise in bourgeois “impartiality.”

You have to remember how threatened Australia the the European colonies in the Pacific felt by Japans lust for territory.

There’s actually very little evidence that Japan wanted to invade Australia — until the US decided to use it as a base in its invasion of Japan. Douglas MacArthur, who demanded dictatorial powers from the Australian government as the price for “saving” Australia, was advancing AMERICAN interests when he went to fight the Japanese — and he decided to do it from Brisbane because it was easier, cheaper and more politically acceptable (to Americans) than doing it from San Francisco. Doubtless, the soldiers he commanded saw the matter no differently — Australia was no more than a stationary aircraft carrier, Australians tolerable only insofar as they were co-operative and did not get in the way.

For one, its not the same, the Russians started that war in order to gain a war water port, they werent fighing a war because they were attacked, it was a war of conquest .

This is the biggest load of crap you’ve come out with yet. The reactionary king of Afghanistan, who had been supported by the US, was overthrown by the People’s Democratic Party of Afghanistan (PDPA), allies of the USSR. When the PDPA tried to introduce minimal reforms — land redistribution, abolition of bride-price — the Afghan landlords and their fundamentalist-lackeys-with-dangly-bits, the mullahs, called a jihad to exterminate the “infidel.” The US, seeing an opportunity to engage the USSR in yet another game of strategic “chicken,” funnelled money and weapons to the mujahedin (through an organization called the Maktab al-Khidamar or MAK — headed by one Osama bin Laden Esq.). The USSR was helping an ally when it sent in an army, many of whose members came from the Central Asian — ie former Muslim — Republics, who had a fair idea of what would happen if the mujahedin and their successors in the Taliban happened to win. And happen it did — Soviet soldiers skinned alive, acid thrown in the faces of unveiled women, teachers shot for trying to teach girls to read. The US ruling class thought that the Afghan fundamentalists were like Pinochet and Somoza, loyal puppies who would go to their graves licking Uncle Sam’s arse — or at least taking his money. What a surprise it must have been (hint — this is irony!) when they discovered that the beardies were serious and really wanted to recreate the Islamic empire. So the putrid scum who hold positions of power (and office) in the US are getting their just desserts — my only regret is that it is working-class Americans who have to do the killing and dying for them.

Their seizure of Eastern Europe after the war was pure conquest.

Sure, and Poland was re-liberated by Solidarnosc and the Roman Catholic Church???

Soldat you are so quick to condemn the Red Army because of the atrocities you say they committed but when you look at any army in the world the Red Army can be considered saviors even if they committed the things you accuse the soldiers of. I mean look at the U.S. Armed Forces. They have possibly committed the most atrocities of any army in the world. If you could Soldat remind me of what you accuse the Red Army of and I will be able to engage in this debate. It's takes too much time to sift thru all the previous posts.

Soldat you are so quick to condemn the Red Army because of the atrocities you say they committed but when you look at any army in the world the Red Army can be considered saviors even if they committed the things you accuse the soldiers of. I mean look at the U.S. Armed Forces. They have possibly committed the most atrocities of any army in the world. If you could Soldat remind me of what you accuse the Red Army of and I will be able to engage in this debate. It's takes too much time to sift thru all the previous posts.

Im actually not codemning the Red Army in WWII, Im just trying to point out the terrible things they have done. Until I came here every post on the Red Army was how super awesome the were, with all the bad being ignored. If you look farther up on this page I discussed the mass rape commited by Soviet troops and offered understanding as to why is happened. Im not trying to comdemn them, just point out the bad tha everybody else is so keen on here to ignore and deny.

Look at my first few posts, thats my arguments for the negative of the Red Army, the last 3 pages are just me and Polish Soviet arguing over unrelated things.

Probably? Their war crimes are pretty widespread and well documented. Its not cold war propaganda, the fact is the Red Army killed alot of civilians and raped a hell of alot more. Not to mention killing of their own troops and the slaughter of POWs (not that the Germans treated Soviet POWs better)

I agree, Trotsky did a great job organizing the Red Army and they did suffer alot of losses in WWII. Your also right, they did carry more then their share of the ground war. The Red Army sacrificed alot in WWII and was a powerful army, im just pointing out their faults. Their faults just happen to be pretty bad.

Could you provide references.
Sorry if you already have them in this thread I'm just really busy.

Jesus Christ, this is still going on? Seriously, neither of you is going to change your opinion so maybe you should just stop, hmm?

Jesus Christ, this is still going on? Seriously, neither of you is going to change your opinion so maybe you should just stop, hmm?

I cant believe it either, I want to talk Red Army.

I cant believe it either, I want to talk Red Army.

Great idea. It's what the thread was intended for.

hahahaha, ah Polish Soviet, you crack me up. Yeah, its a leftist forum, but this section is about the CCCP, and this topic is about the Red Army, so why cant I discuss it the Red Army?

To you calling a nuclear attack justifiable is stupid, okay, thats your opinion. Now me and the majority of the world think the idea of a worldwide socialist utopia where everybody is taken care of and peace rules is also stupid and just unrealistic.

Lol, its funny how you say you have info to disprove me but fail to show it because I "will keep blabbing on" then insist on asking me questions about Tibet and China. Wont I just keep blabbing on? Or wait, you were just giving an excuse to get around my facts and trying to change the subject werent you?

PS: Using "idiot" and "stupid" to constantly refer to those who disgree with you really discredit your argument. You come off like a pissed off 15 year old.

To you calling a nuclear attack justifiable is stupid, okay, thats your opinion.

Well I wouldnt say my oppion. Its the whole boards oppion since trying to justify a nuclear attack by simply stating they were "military targets" are very illogical and not intellegent in the least bit sense. It also makes you look like a conservative tbh.

Now me and the majority of the world think the idea of a worldwide socialist utopia where everybody is taken care of and peace rules is also stupid and just unrealistic.

lol its no wonder you dont post on the forum your a rightist whose trying to get under the radar and talk about what he feels he knows about and talks about what he thinks is the popular concept of "right" and what concepts he see are "wrong." now of course it wont be a utopia but in the apperent reasoning of your over all intellegence you, personally, think that Socialism will not work, then why are you here, and to make a futher note you know as much as leftism as the ordinary American adult. to classify a Socialist "utopia" you must also realize that it wont be sperate Socialist states it'll be one World Socialist state. Thus no more boundries, no more wars,etc. This state will dissolve as the people learn to govern themselfs and they will be used to not being goverend at all. this is the main Communist look on how the Revolution will look afterwards. To answer on how Violent Revolution and War are different is very simple. Violent Revolution makes the people have a class councniess on where they are on the class tower and why they have such misirbale lives. The proletariat, workers, and peasants will revolt thus starting what can end a Capitalist state. A Vanguard party, Communist party or bolshevik party, helps the Revolution and makes sure it is sucessful and stays to help the Socialist state survive and prospery to give the peopel what they deserve and to put the workers in control of the means of prodution. My Talk on "China and "tibet" is going to see how you are a "leftist." I bet your going to say it was wrong for China to attack Taiwan. Or it was wrong for Castro to achive "power."

Lol, its funny how you say you have info to disprove me but fail to show it because I "will keep blabbing on" then insist on asking me questions about Tibet and China.

I showed you about Imperialism, Stalin,etc and you did keep blabing on.

Or wait, you were just giving an excuse to get around my facts and trying to change the subject werent you?

Nah. But everytime you type I feel like I'm debating a conservative once again and maybe I am. Are you a conservative? You sound like it, act like it, and ,tbh, I would be surpised if you werent.

Yeah, its a leftist forum, but this section is about the CCCP, and this topic is about the Red Army, so why cant I discuss it the Red Army?

Now lets make it clear to why I created the group. I created it for discussions on the USSR, its leaders,etc not for there to be blated attacks on it and the Red Army. The 1st moment you typed here everyone suspected the were paintig the Red Army as murderous bastards,etc since you were mainly talking about their flaws on which we already knew. You then started to talk about your stance on many thins, War, Persian gulf War,USSR,Eastern europe,etc and I'm pretty sure that the reason why most dont post in this group is becuase this is why. To be arguing no stop contsantly with someone who justifies a nuclear attack simply stating they were "military targets" who thinks War is horrible but if the enemy must die then you wouldnt care,etc,etc,etc.

Yeah, its a leftist forum,

Yes it is. Then why arent you showing you are a leftist or simply a begginer? You keep talking about how the USSR was imperialistic when they took the Batlics how they "counqered" europe and so forth. Some might agree with you simply becuase they view the USSR differently then others but then wont agree with you personally.

so why cant I discuss it the Red Army?

you Can discuss about the Red Army but, tbh, your talking more about War,USSR,etc then you can talk about the Red army.

Using "idiot" and "stupid" to constantly refer to those who disgree with you really discredit your argument.

To be honest mostly everyone in this group thinks you are if they hear what you say. Merely saying a nuclear attack is justifiable is not that great in the stance of intellegence.

One question, Soldat. Are you even Socialist or are you just here to discuss the USSR and Red Army?

No problem, I will, but I have to do it later, no time now.

How about now?