Should East Europe countries be thankful to Soviet Union?

[Serb]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
Well it wasn't perfect, far from it - but it was better than what went before. Would you prefer nazis running Eastern Europe?

I would have preferred to live under Hitler than Stalin, though. David Floyd.

For the third time, I did just said that third reich was better than Soviet Union, not that third reich is very good. I've said tons of examples why Hitleristic Germany was better than Soviet Union, you did retalled to none of them. Nazisonic.

[TheStinger]

Originally posted by Serb
The Soviet Union consisted of 15 national republics. Ukraine was one of them. And btw one of the 4 national republics- Russia, Ukraine, Beylorussia and Caucasus republic, who were co-foundres of Soviet Union.

Oh come on they had absolutley no choice in the matter

[Serb]

Originally posted by Sonic
OK Serb...

Later panasonic, later. I have other things to do now.

[Alexander's Horse]

Originally posted by TheStinger


Oh come on they had absolutley no choice in the matter

But they were very grateful

[Arrian]

Nazi Occupation -> Soviet Occupation = "From the frying pan into the fire"

-Arrian

[Serb]

Arrian,
I don’t advocate that Soviet domination over Eastern Europe was a right thing. I advocate that two lines below are bullsh*t:
Germans + Italians+ Rumanians + Finns + Lithuanians + Estonians + Latvians + Hungarians + others who were on nazi side, killed 27 millions of Soviet people (majority of whom were Russians) in 1941-1945. It gives moral right to modern Russians to hate modern people from all of those countries. Their next generations who don't responsible for this.

Eastern Europe suffered from communists during 1945-1991 it gives moral right to population of those countries to hate modern Russians. Their next generations who don't responsible for this.

I stand only for this, not for soviets or smth else.

p.s. Almost only for this… Also I consider every person who prefers nazism over communism at least as criminal.

p.p.s And don't pay much attention to crap I've posted about US role in WW2. It's for David only. It’s an adequate reply to his crap about SU role in WW2. Sometimes both of us drop too low in our showdowns.

[Serb]

Originally posted by TheStinger


Oh come on they had absolutley no choice in the matter

Just do research about foundation of Soviet Union.

[DanS]

"Also I consider every person who prefers nazism over communism at least as criminal."

Two birds of the same feather.

[Serb]

Ahhhhhh…. I'm so tired
Go and save a dollar somewhere, Dans.

[David Floyd]

I am sure we have gone through this before. So far, your side has failed to provide necessary evidence.

Evidence of what? That the Chinese occupied Tibet 40 years ago?

serb,

Let's see you are offering to remove Hitler, reach the peace agreement, but let nazi in chargre and let them continue their atrocities, anything, but prevent strengthening Soviet influence in the region?
Because, without destruction of their war machine nazi would never gone, even if you assasinated their leader.

I suppose it depends on who seized power. There were moderate Nazis and extreme Nazis, just like anything else. Not all Nazis wanted to kill everyone.

Then again, what you were waiting for? He declared war on you in 1941. Why you have start to fight only in 1944, if you didn't really need Soviets, you could easily crush nazi without millions casualties from your side (as you beleive) why you let Soviets to crush nazi major forces. You could done it yourselves, sure you were so strong.

Look, I can't believe you are so incredible dense. The US was in the process of building up from the 43rd largest army in the world. It was fighting from across an ocean. These things take a couple of years. Once the US got going, though, there was really no stopping it.

And as for starting to fight only in 1944, why don't you tell that to the soldiers and sailors who fought in the Pacific, Africa, the Atlantic, and Italy?

Soviet influence in those countries last 46 years. Nuclear waste affect people who live there for centuries. And only in single such nuclear blow, you advocate for, would die much more civilians then died because of Soviets.

I'm not arguing otherwise. I'm simply saying you can't justify the Soviet occupation by saying Soviet occupation is better than nuclear destruction. Well no ****, but no occupation at all is better than Soviet occupation, wouldn't you agree?

Poland wasn't ally of SU.

No, but Nazi Germany was an ally of the SU, which is my point. I still haven't heard you respond to that one

Then you have no idea about nazi occupation.

Sure I do, and I can say that from a selfish perspective, it would be better for me under Hitler than under Stalin.

[Sprayber]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
Well it wasn't perfect, far from it - but it was better than what went before. Would you prefer nazis running Eastern Europe?

I think the whole point was to have Eastern Europeans running Eastern Europe. Whatever the stature the Soviets gained by defeating the Nazies was lost during the decades that followed. Like I said before, their actions arent excused by what they may have done in WWII. Isn't that what is said to the US?

[DanS]

"Go and save a dollar somewhere, Dans."

Well, what do you expect? We spent trillions of dollars and lots of sweat and blood putting the stake in the heart of communism.

I have no interest in seeing communism rehabilitated at the expense of facism.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
Is Israel an Asian country? Tell that to the Asians

The ME is part of Asia, that makes Israel an Asian country.

[Felch]

Originally posted by Serb
Then again, what you were waiting for? He declared war on you in 1941. Why you have start to fight only in 1944, if you didn't really need Soviets, you could easily crush nazi without millions casualties from your side (as you beleive) why you let Soviets to crush nazi major forces. You could done it yourselves, sure you were so strong.

This is why the Russian military always has, and always will suck giant balls. They have no concept of planning, or preparing, or strategy, or subtlety, or in fact, anything besides, "Me Serb, me like to grunt, me crush you with big stick. If me die, ten more Russians come and beat you with big stick."

America was preparing to invade during that time. In fact, we did invade, in North Africa, Sicily, the Pacific, and in Italy, prior to 1944.

[Ned]

WWII started because Britain chose to fight over the Polish Corridor. The problem was, Britain could not defeat Germany. They actually needed the USSR and perhaps the USA to defeat Germany.

One of the lessons Britain (and the US) learned from this is to not interfere in the "sphere" of influence of a superpower. Thus, even though we did not like what happened to EE, we in the West simply did not have the power to interfere without getting into a major war. Besides, it was not clear whether we could win any such war against the USSR.

But the real question here is what would have happened had Britain not started WWII? Would EE have been divided between Germany and the USSR? Or would these two have eventually gone to war with each other?

In the end, we got rid of Nazism the only way we could have gotten rid of it. We needed the USSR's help. The price we paid is occuppation of Eastern Europe.

So, in a sense, our hands off policy to Soviet occuppation was our way of saying thank you. For the same reasons, the people of EE should also say thank you. Nazism is dead and they are free.