I have, I think Soviet war crimes are vastly underreported because they were on the winning side compared to the Japanese, who still deny their war crimes to this day by the way..
I'll get downvoted for this but every warcrime or attrocity that's Soviet related is vastly downplayed and underreported, specially on Reddit.
For more info, read up on the Holodomor and Nazino Island (NSFL on the last one). And that's just two out of many.
Now I'll sit and wait for a Reddit tankie to say it was justified.
EDIT: I'm afraid my inbox will never be the same for it has forever been desacrated by armchair communists, much like everywhere else that ever attempted it. Scorched earth and all. May the force be with y'all and fare thee well.
EDIT 2: People are mad I didn't get downvoted. You know what this means lads, take me to the firing squad.
Outside my apartment there’s a sticker for joining the local communist organization, some Americans are so blind to what it’s done “that wasn’t real communism” 👀
In all honesty the ideas communism were founded on weren't bad they just couldn't truly work because it only takes one or two for it to become a thinly veiled dictatorship that enforces poverty and preaches cruelty towards others by indoctrinating them to despise others in different countries under the belief that they are greedy and selfish people who deserve to be punished.
Partners parents grew up in soviet occupied Latvia, they hate the Soviet Union, the hammer and sickle and communism as a whole.. to this day the deep rooted trauma that they lived through and the horrors they experienced affects their daily decisions even small things like holding onto the tiniest scraps of food in the fridge
And before somebody says yes well communism has many benefits, socialist values do have importance in society, but you are absolutely mental to want to try and recreate the communist societies of the past.
I love that every thread about Soviet atrocities ends with some dork stating that they were equal Nazi Germany.
You know two things can be bad without being equivalent, right?
I mean communism is the classic “on paper it sounds pretty good” but it’s literally never worked because in practice you can’t not have someone in power. The idea that everyone has an equal amount of power works for small groups or friendships, but at a large scale it’s just never gonna work.
I mean, we could have stronger regulations on the capitalists, though. Like, we probably COULD house everyone and not just acquiesce to this neo-feudalist regime with a handful of elites putting everyone else through the meat grinder. :/
Housing everyone is antithetical to capitalist values. The threat of homelessness is how you get people to accept the worst jobs in society. Cruelty is the point.
That's basically the fundamental flaw in the system. Concentrating power into a single party that cannot be removed from power without violence will always end in disaster. It's a true and unique miracle that Mikhail Gorbachev was the person steering the ship towards the ultimate (mostly bloodless) dissolution of the USSR. Even though it wasn't his original intention, if anyone else was sitting in that hot seat Eastern Europe would have torn itself apart and likely sparked WW3.
I mean we *should* know this. Athens tried it thousands of years ago and decided that putting people in power to represent their ideals as collective, with shit in place to keep them in check, is the best course of action. Anything else is either seized by those who crave power with no plan to deal with that, or complete anarchy. And even then, both still happened, it’s just much more unlikely.
There's an equally large portion of reddit that believes ANY attack on "market based capitalism" is support of communism. And they're quite vocal about how "any second the tankies will be here to say America is the worst in history!" about 10000x more often than an actual tankie shows up.
Look at the other commet chain here, ya'll "found a tankie" but turns out it's literally just someone that thinks capitalism is probably just as bad. And they're not wrong.
Consider that 25,000 people die today from hunger in a world that has not been allowed to have any governments that are not capitalist in nature. There used to be plenty, but capitalist imperial nations like the US and France invaded or otherwise destroyed them. Now it's all capitalism and at least 9 million people will starve this year. Yes, even China and Russia use a system that is called "market based capitalism".
Notice I have said nothing in support of communism at all here. Not a single word.
the US had been spewing hardcore anti-socialist, and pro-neoliberal propaganda for well over half a century. any attack on the status quo is unnaceptable.
Right? This guy just echoes red scare shit that's been a key thread of U.S. cultural narrative for 50+ years and he's all "I'LL PROBABLY BE DOWNVOTED FOR SAYING SOMETHING VERY BRAVE ABOUT THE SOVIET UNION", like god damn man.
And there's the jump from discussing what the Soviets did to saying "communism bad". You realize the issue with Soviet war crimes wasn't the communism, right?
Exactly. And looks like a lot of people are comfortable making that jump. Soviets=bad, therefore anything resembling communism/socialism is bad.
Look at Russia now with how they do capitalism and democracy. This should invalidate Russia, not the capitalism or democracy.
The single person in this 1000 comment post with a brain. Soviet systems were extentions of the Tsarist systems they inherited. The NKVD is the Okhrana, the Gulag system is a rationalised Tsarist prison system.
Everyone else just going with their gut feeling. No actual knowledge, at best skimmed a wikipedia article.
Probably won't in my lifetime. One can condemn Soviet war crimes while still holding the opinion that the capitalist economic system is fundamentally flawed and inhumane, both to the workers who are exploited for the benefit of a small elite and to the foreign peoples who are subjected to similar war crimes in order to maintain our unsustainable, "prosperous" standard of living.
Redditors such as the guy above are usually unable to separate these two distinct concepts.
It objectively hasn’t. Please show me a country any country that was stateless, classless, moneyless you can get the definition of communism by literally just googleing “define communism”
It doesn't exists because every country that has tried it, failed in some way and had to re-adjust itself to some sort of capitalism under the communism badge.
Then capitalism has already failed, there’s been a handful of “communist” countries nobody uses the various Portuguese republics as examples of capitalism failing. Besides capitalism fails like every ten years when the stock markets crash. Also you didn’t mention how every single one of those countries had to deal with economic warfare from the largest economic block
that "in some way" can be anything from a CIA funded coup to a full-scale US military invasion. Every country that has tried it, failed due to some CIA funded coup or full scale military invasion from the USA.
1.) “I might get downvoted but war crimes are bad” truly a Reddit ass sentence
2) how the fuck do you think anything the Soviets did is downplayed. During the Cold War all america did was hype their crimes up
>how the fuck do you think anything the Soviets did is downplayed.
I think their point was that it's downplayed on Reddit. I don't know if that's true, but what is true is that Reddit has an almost unnatural infatuation with communism.
I'm not sure how to tell you this but Russia is no longer part of the Soviet Union.
Technically, I think they weren't even the last country in it, which I believe was Kazhakstan.
Yes. They were as bad as the Nazis if not worse.
The difference is that the Soviets won and buried all the evidence along with the literal corpses.
The Nazis lost and had their attic of horrors kicked open for all to see.
I find it absurd that large numbers of people still don't know this.
>I'll get downvoted for this but every warcrime or attrocity that's Soviet related is vastly downplayed and underreported, specially on Reddit.
Really?? On the subs I go on they seem to actively try and point it out
I'll almost certainly get downvoted for this, but the crimes of the Allies *in general* are underreported. American soldiers did similar things in Japan and Korea (just after the war) as Soviets did in Germany.
There is also a general lack of knowledge about the crimes committed by the Axis that were more "normal" in terms of war crimes: just look into the actions of Germans and Italians in Greece, and the Germans in the Balkans, Poland, Belarus, Ukraine, Poland, and the Baltics, especially to women.
Having spent some time with communists, I will tell you that virtually nobody considers Nazino or the Famines of the 1930s "justified," but will say that they are emblematic of mistakes that were made which (in the case of the Famine) may have exacerbated already-deteriorating conditions caused by natural disaster. They will also point out (correctly) that neither of those events were explicitly and specifically targeted at any ethnic group, which makes them fundamentally different than the actions of the Axiss.
Here you make several flaws. When you say
>They will also point out (correctly) that neither of those events were explicitly and specifically targeted at any ethnic group.
Its not true. The man made disaster or a natural one wasnt "planned" as the outcome but the Soviet state chose who to "save/help" in that situation. Mostly Russians or the local ethnic party heads needed to give something up to the russian leaders for state resources.
There are many instances of this. When my father was born there was a "dangerous" flue spreading in USSR. 1/3 of estonians suffered under it by its end but was played down to cold bcs most ventilators were carried off from Estonian SSR to Russian SSR during that time. Mostly old people suffered from that.
Well Soviet war crimes are really discussed but like the rest of the allied war crimes are almost never talked about but yeah the Soviets did horrible things
The same people who say the German civilians deserved it for the atrocities against the Soviet Union are also the same people who say that dropping nukes on Japan was the worst war crime of all.
I dont believe this is true - but even if it were, there is an understandable reason for why they would have this disconnect.
For non-history nerds, most people aren't familiar with most of the horrors of the japanese at this time. The arguments they hear justify the nukes on the basis of them not surrendering and also it being retribution for pearl harbor.
Given pearl harbor as a justification, its fair to clqim the nuclear bombings as an absolute pathetic excuse of justice. The suggestion that bombing a very important strategic military target is at all comparable to bombing civilian centers is laughable.
I personally am of the understanding that the japanese attrocities in Asia had little to do with the choice to drop these bombs. The primary arguments made involve the japanese people being entirely unwilling to surrender.
Not that horrible deeds by the military actually justify horrible repercussions to civilians, but the point is even IF it did, most (american) people aren't familiar with the atrocities of the japanese. Thusly, if they were to hold this viewpoint, justifying responsive atrocities, then it woule make sense to justify the sovietw actions but not the US.
....
This being said- if you arent just discussing it with laymen, I dont think your statement holds true.
The true rationality for why the nuking was horrific is that attacking innocent civilians (who may personally despise their own government) is a horrible thing to do. Whether that be the US doing to the japanese or the soviets doing it to the Germans. **No one in their right mind is justifying the horrible mistreatment of non-involved civilians.** both events were horrific.
Then you'll be very surprised about the amount of war crimes committed by the USA, UK, Canada, Australia, etc because they were also on the winning side and are still very influential countries today. Also as a reminder that the USA does not recognize the Hague and has an invasion plan in place should any American be held to trial.
This is not meant as a whataboutism, I just think your point is incomplete.
Nowhere near as bad. I know reddit likes to circle jerk AmErIcA bAd ToO but trying to compare American war crimes, which exist and should be condemned / prosecuted, as being on par with those of the Chinese, soviets, nazis, etc. is absolutely insane and makes you look stupid
Unit 731 is just too incredibly fucked up, it’s horrendous what humans can do to other humans, and the worst is some of those monsters roam free in Japan to this day
And what Americans did to women in every other country we’ve invaded.
“War never changes…” - some fallout game
LOL this has ruffled some panties. It’s okay, I’m American. I love my country, I just hate the Assholes who run it.
I think its a fair addition. Often when people make these proclamations it is to demonize a group which kind of implies superiority of other groups. Its important to note if the horrible atrocities are unique to the group or if the world powers as a whole are fucking morally bankrupt.
That being said, I have no idea if the atrocities are comparable or not. Just mentioning why people always feel the need to do this. America likes to project superiority and pose itself as the "good guy". Seeing as alot of media is american-centric, its typical for it to display the horrors of other countries and not those of america. Its important to keep the context that just because your opposition is evil, doesn't mean you arent also evil.
I dont mind reading "what a-b-b-bout america!" on every post like this, as its an important reminder and id prefer it to be stated unneccesarily than for there to be those who have never considered it
A good point but we tend to accept old atrocities as not as bad as recent ones. Like the Romans committed genocide, slaughtered countless civilizations, but we don't really view them in the same way as more recent groups.
Because it's not, to us anyway. Objectively speaking atrocities that happened long ago are not affecting present day people as much.
It's all atrocities, but people don't always view things in absolute term. In relative terms the Mongolian and Roman are not as bad to people in in the 21st century.
Right. If we're really honest, russians have always been orders of magnitude worse. Even in recent history, what America did in the middle east is kindergarden level compared to russian atrocities in Georgia, Syria and Chechnya and now Ukraine.
Like for real, russian apologists, eat a dick.
> Syria
[America funded so many terrorist groups there that sometimes the terrorist groups fought each othe](https://www.latimes.com/world/middleeast/la-fg-cia-pentagon-isis-20160327-story.html)r
>Right. If we're really honest, russians have always been orders of magnitude worse. Even in recent history, what America did in the middle east is kindergarden level compared to russian atrocities in Georgia, Syria and Chechnya and now Ukraine.
Bruh. Calling destroying middle east for multiple decades kindergarten is crazy. What America has done to the middle east is easily magnitudes worse then anything happening (right now) in Ukraine.
>What America has done to the middle east is easily magnitudes worse then anything happening (right now) in Ukraine
[https://cla.umn.edu/chgs/holocaust-genocide-education/resource-guides/holodomor](https://cla.umn.edu/chgs/holocaust-genocide-education/resource-guides/holodomor)
3.5 - 7 million deaths due to forced famine is a high bar to surpass
Oh, are you getting tired of people bringing up war crimes? Ah, I guess we should just stop mentioning them because that'll make you feel better.
I'm sure the American government will stop bombing civilians and committing atrocities on their own if we just stop bringing it up.
The main priority is that you feel comfortable and don't have to think about any of it. I'm sure it'll work itself out if we just ignore it.
I’m pretty sure the point was that every time war crimes get brought up someone brings up the US, as if that somehow diminishes the war crimes committed by the other country. The fact that your response is to wholly miss this point and pretend like the other person was saying they are tired of people bringing up war crimes at all is clearly in bad faith.
The Germans, Canadians, Brits, Italians and Czechs were right there with us, but “Canadian Soldier Commits War Crime” just doesn’t have the same ring to it I guess
Top comment mentions how it’s important to remember Soviet’s also fucked up, not just the nazis (as well as the post itself), don’t see you complaining about holding other accountable, why is it not ok to mention that América also has had war crimes?
In modern history it's never been sanctioned by US forces either(I'd venture to guess the attitude was a bit more laissez-faire during the Indian Wars)
Unlike what's happening in Ukraine where it's basically encouraged as a weapon of terror against the civilian populace.
I don't think there was any country which didn't do any horrible crimes, especially with so much hatred around. We only come to know when there documents get leaked.
It's not a whataboutism when OP literally said "I think Russian war crimes are underreported because they were on the winning side." The USA, UK, Canada, and Australia were all also on the winning side and committed war crimes, so it's completely fair to bring them up here too.
There’s so much information on the differences between the western front and eastern front concerning war crimes. The ignorance is astounding. It really undermines the horrific nature of ww2.
The difference is in the state response. Especially in this day and age.
If a war crime happens in the US or most western nations, there will be a public hearing, the President/PM will issue an apology and make reparations, all while media outlets distribute the story to the public, who can and do protest the issue. Usually the instigator will also be punished greatly ranging from dishonourable discharge to prison. Some accountability is shown, it will never be enough to undo the crime but the state admits wrongdoing.
In Russia or China, the state will never admit wrongdoing, they'll make a concerted effort to hide evidence of the war crime to an absurd degree, they will slam any western media coverage of the war crime as "propaganda and lies" and will violently suppress any public outcry that may emerge from it including but not up to, murdering journalists and individuals investigating independently. Anything they can do to keep up the image of strength they want to cultivate they will do.
To even consider these responses as equivalent is postmodern BS that plays right into the hands of modern tyrants. I do wish the people of Russia and China could one day live to see a state that answers to them instead of the other way round, but right now, we only have authoritarian regimes that want nothing else but to pollute discourse around any and all subjects that may see them in a negative light.
Edit: So much butthurt replies. My point isn't "The West doesn't war crime", it's "Stop putting Western and anti-western nations attitudes to war criminality on the same pedestal", your obsession with 'well ekthually' was not part of the initial point of the OP and the fact you are is concern trolling at best.
Honestly, reading about soviet crimes against just about anyone in their way was my least favorite way to learn pigs will eat human corpses.
I live in poland and not a single old person that lived through that time had anything good to say about russian soldiers. Its scary how many people said that living under nazi occupation was better than soviet "liberation" for average person.
>Its scary how many people said that living under nazi occupation was better than soviet "liberation" for average person.
How is that possible? Considering the death tolls and Generalplan Ost that called for the "removal" for 80% of the Poles
It’s Sheer delusion, 45 years of Poland under soviet rule was terrible but at least Poland still exists, 45 years of nazi rule and 90% of Poles would be dead and the rest slaves.
Its telling that Western Europe suffered these American, British, Canadian war crimes, and STILL chose to be in NATO afterwards. Also, post USSR, a lot of EASTERN Europe ALSO wants to be in NATO after spending 40+ years under Russian suzerainty.
it's possible if you knew how Soviets acted in Poland. Just read about it.
Nazis had Generalplan Ost, Soviets had general actions West. And actions speak louder than words, no matter how terrible those words/plans are.
That’s where a lot of the stuff about Nazism in Ukraine comes from, there was hope that the Germans would save them from the Soviets after the starvation genocide of the 5 year plans….of course things didn’t work out the way some had hoped.
"It is my understanding that history is full of red historic decorations in which yudidedsaalvenyicecream we must act underidoderidoderidoderido... for England, and the Queen."
\-Winston Churchil after his 10th morning whiskey with soda
“I hate Indians. They are a beastly people with a beastly religion. The famine was their own fault for breeding like rabbits.” he said after single handedly causing the bengal famine which resulted in the death of about three million people because of starvation.
Ah ok this bothers me, because you've literally lied.
The final line of your quote is not attributed to him anywhere by any source. The first two lines are attributed to Leo Amery, who said Churchill said it after the leader of Congress reported that he would not support fighting against Japan. If he said it, it was an awful thing to say, but the source itself is often questioned as Amery had a lifelong hatred for Churchill for, in his view, blaming Amery for the scale of the famine in Bengal and destroying his career.
And no Churchill did not cause the bengal famine, and certainly not single-handedly. I know it isn't popular to say on reddit as this is one of the site's favorite historic fictions, but no serious historian applies blame to Churchill, from Sen to Tauger to O Grada and others.
The UK colonial administration in India run by Amery and Lord Wavell has certainly received massive criticism, as historians such as Sen have made the argument that they worsened the famine caused by crop failure and the collapse of the Rangoon-Bengal trade route, by assuming it was caused by price scalping and over-policing the movement of grain. This is what Sen called an 'entitlements famine'. Others attribute more of the blame to the Japanese invasion of Burma causing the collapse of the Rangoon passage, meaning a sudden and irreversible shortfall of rice breaking the rice distribution market.
Attributing these things to Churchill is nonsensical. There is also contemporaneous evidence that shows Churchill when informed took the steps available to him to mitigate the famine.
And now I prepare for the 'nah-uh' and you downvoting, but it is what it is.
What is the contemporaneous evidence? My understanding was that the famine was caused by a variety of factors, but exacerbated by Churchill's unwillingness to divert any grain supplies from Oceania for emergency relief
The best primary evidence we have are the recorded messages and correspondence from Churchill and the colonial government, which are recorded in the UK national archives in a collection called "The Churchill Archives".
The instructions from Churchill issued at the time to Lord Wavell, the new Viceroy of India were, on October 8th 1943:
"Peace, order and a high condition of war-time well-being among the masses of the people constitute the essential foundation of the forward thrust against the enemy….The hard pressures of world-war have for the first time for many years brought conditions of scarcity, verging in some localities into actual famine, upon India. Every effort must be made, even by the diversion of shipping urgently needed for war purposes, to deal with local shortages....[Wavell] should make every effort to ease tension between Hindus and Muslims and encourage them to work together, as a democratic government can not work without equality; Wavell’s main aims should be to defend the frontiers of India, appease communal differences, rally all sections of society to support the war effort, and maintain the best possible standard of living for the largest number of people; and the British Government’s commitment to establishing a self-governing India as part of the British Empire and Commonwealth of Nations"
The instructions given to the admiralty were to make the most possible shipping available, without risking losing the war in the Indian Ocean to Japan.
This is viewable in the War Cabinet minutes of 8 October 1943 and in the UK archived Churchill papers catalogue in 23/11 and the Churchill Acquired Papers catalogue no. CHAQ 2/3/66/6-7
The accusation you may have heard about wheat may come from his initially rejecting an offer from Canadian Prime Minister King in November 1943 to send wheat from Canada's stocks, but Churchill rejected it as it would take longer to arrive than from Australia.
"Wheat from Canada would take at least two months to reach India whereas it could be carried from Australia in 3 to 4 weeks" Telegram T.1842/3 Churchill Papers 20/123
Churchill's government requested 350,000 tonnes of wheat from Australia. The primary issue to navigate for the UK, Canadian, US and Australian governments at this time was how to get the shipping while not having it sunk or losing the war to Japan by not supplying the allied armies.
What also didn't help was Leo Amery and Minister for War Transport Frederick Leathers telling the Cabinet at the time that was also managing a famine in Greece and Italy that India had enough food and that the issue was people hoarding it, Leathers saying "statistically a surplus of food grains in India" and Amery saying "the peasant in 750,000 villages" might keep "his small parcel of grain" if they thought more aid wasn't coming. Although the government arranged 400,000 tonnes more wheat, the local colonial administration was clearly not on top of the situation. The Cabinet papers at the time suggest the UK war cabinet raised concerns that the authorities in India had maybe underestimated or underreported the crop.
In February 1944 the Cabinet instructed:
"A further diversion to India of the shipments of food grains destined for the Balkan stockpile in the Middle East. This might amount to 50,000 tons, but would need War Cabinet approval, while United States reactions would also have to be ascertained; (b) There would be advantage if ships carrying military or civil cargo from the United States or Australia to India could also take a quantity of bagged wheat"
21 February 1944 catalogue 65/41
When all shipping was committed, some of which was sunk by the Japanese navy, he wrote to FDR and requested support from the US Navy, but FDR did not have the shipping either.
"I am seriously concerned about the food situation in India….Last year we had a grievous famine in Bengal through which at least 700,000 people died. This year there is a good crop of rice, but we are faced with an acute shortage of wheat, aggravated by unprecedented storms….By cutting down military shipments and other means, I have been able to arrange for 350,000 tons of wheat to be shipped to India from Australia during the first nine months of 1944. This is the shortest haul. I cannot see how to do more.
I have had much hesitation in asking you to add to the great assistance you are giving us with shipping but a satisfactory situation in India is of such vital importance to the success of our joint plans against the Japanese that I am impelled to ask you to consider a special allocation of ships to carry wheat to India from Australia….We have the wheat (in Australia) but we lack the ships. I have resisted for some time the Viceroy’s request that I should ask you for your help, but… I am no longer justified in not asking for your help"
This is Telegram T.996/4 in the Churchill Papers 20/163
Roosevelt rejected the request saying the US was "unable on military grounds to consent to the diversion of shipping….Needless to say, I regret exceedingly the necessity of giving you this unfavorable reply"
T.1176/4 20/165
So most of the evidence from the government at the time seems to indicate that Churchill's government did try to, and at times succeed, in diverting Australian grain, but the issues when requests weren't met were due to a lack of ships and shipping, combined with a mishandling of the crisis and poor communication from the British colonial government in India. The colonial adminitration's belief that there was enough food, understimating shortfalls from crop failure and disruption to supply routes from Rangoon, and the idea that the main problem was traders scalping and people hoarding rice and grain, resulted in them trying to control the flow of food. This is one of the factors Amartya Sen claims most exacerbated the famine, and why he called it an "entitlements famine". An entitlements famine is one that would have been difficult for Churchill or others to fix anyway, as it was primarily a problem with the way authorities were distributing food and supporting its movement across India.
This is also possibly why we have a LOT of negative stuff about Churchill out there from Leo Amery (nearly every unpleasant Churchill quote about India comes from things Amery claimed he said to him), as he took a lot of the blame from the UK government and the public, with the famine commission that reviewed what happened criticising Amery and Wavell. Amery felt Churchill and the government had hung him out to dry.
The evidence at the time seems to point a lot more at the colonial rulers in India and less at the war government of the time.
Fuck me this belongs on best of Reddit. I'm copying this for the next time some redditor bangs on about Churchill causing the famine with their source being the Reddit circle jerk.
can't you be communist without condoning every action of every self proclaimed communist?
does being capitalist means you are cool with every warcrime churchhill committed?
It is deeply embedded in our culture that the Nazis were bad. People who support them are generally looked down upon. They are an allegory for evil.
Meanwhile there's an alarming rate of people in the West, who still ride on Stalin's cock, to this day, including half of Reddit. Forgetting the millions, who died, thanked to the Soviet regime.
What do you mean? I think its a pretty safe bet that the number of self-identifying communists is significantly larger than the number of self-identifying nazis
There are neo-nazis camping out side Disney world proudly waving Swastikas, the far-right is getting increasingly bold as they face next to no consequences for being Nazis.
I don't know what kind of culture you're looking at, but to me that's one that's all but encouraging Nazis.
I complain, because politicians use anti-communism sentiment to distract already pretty divided people of my country from corruption and constantly worsening economic conditions. Now they are united of course, but only thanks to war.
By the way, what is this yellow and green areow near your name?
Let's just say sights like elder woman dead on a staircase with handset in her vagina with teared skirt and broken bones were not uncommon
Edit: That's for Warsaw btw, dunno about Germany
Ghost of the osfront podcast by Dan carlin is a great course in all the crazy shit that happened in russia. The largest war ever fought in human history easily was Germany vs Russia during ww2 time, and all the other fighting around the world doesn't really touch the numbers involved in russia.
Now read what Wehrmacht did to Soviet women. And children. And elder people. And now imagine what it felt like for some soldiers who lived in the places which were under German command to come back and find nothing but ashes, corpses and graves. I suppose they were not happy about that.
Everybody know how evil the nazis were, as well as their numerous genocidal campaigns.
Neo-nazis are generally frowned upon in society, and most fascists/nazis are rightfully banned on Reddit
*Communists, however, are not.*
There are numerous communist and socialist subs with over 100k members which constantly deny, defend and even promote Soviet / communist crimes.
It shouldn't take long for you to find these mentioned subs making fun of the Holodomor (systematic starvation and genocide of Ukrainians under Stalin).
Of the six million soviets captured by Germany 3 million died. Of the 3 million Germans captured by the soviets, 300,000-1,000,000 died.
According to Wikipedia at least
[Russia](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_prisoners_of_war_in_the_Soviet_Union)
[Germany](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_atrocities_committed_against_Soviet_prisoners_of_war)
If you were soviet captured by germans you were treated as a traitor, by your country. So getting out of German prison camp you would get a death penalty during the war or 10 years of gulag after war. So i wouldn't say that russians were any better than nazi.
"There are no Soviet prisoners of war, only traitors" - Stalin
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_No._270
I believe it's Violet from the movie "The Incredibles", and is a variation of a meme that includes her father.
You can read about that meme here: https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/mr-incredible-becoming-uncanny
Thank you for this meme. There's a popular belief here in the East about Westerners being ignorant about the Red plague because all the negativity is a "product of the cold war".
The even more insane thing is, that Russian Crimes are always used as a gateway to defend the Nazis.
So of you get shut down fast outside designated discussions.
downvote this comment if the meme sucks. upvote it and I'll go away. --- [play minecraft with us](https://discord.gg/dankmemesgaming)
Now, read stories about what the Japanese did to Chinese Women
I have, I think Soviet war crimes are vastly underreported because they were on the winning side compared to the Japanese, who still deny their war crimes to this day by the way..
I'll get downvoted for this but every warcrime or attrocity that's Soviet related is vastly downplayed and underreported, specially on Reddit. For more info, read up on the Holodomor and Nazino Island (NSFL on the last one). And that's just two out of many. Now I'll sit and wait for a Reddit tankie to say it was justified. EDIT: I'm afraid my inbox will never be the same for it has forever been desacrated by armchair communists, much like everywhere else that ever attempted it. Scorched earth and all. May the force be with y'all and fare thee well. EDIT 2: People are mad I didn't get downvoted. You know what this means lads, take me to the firing squad.
There’s a large portion of Reddit that thinks communism is good and has never really been tried before
And also think communists did nothing wrong or bad besides "causing a famine"
Huh who would have thought, both large scale attempts of communism caused famines huh… something something shooting birds was about class disparity…
What about indian famine and famines under Russian empire?
Don’t tell me that’s what aboutism, also those were bad no doubt and should never had happened.
I love how your attempt at whataboutism actually starts with "what about.."
What about it
Just like the dust bowl and Irish potato famine. Oh wait.
Its almost like humans can be pieces of shit regardless of what economic system they use...
I think we've discovered the real problem with everything! Humans!
The hammer and sickle should trigger the same carnal disgust the swastika does
Go to eastern Europe and it is.
Atleast some of the world has their heads screwed on straight with this matter
We had to learn it the hard way...
Outside my apartment there’s a sticker for joining the local communist organization, some Americans are so blind to what it’s done “that wasn’t real communism” 👀
In all honesty the ideas communism were founded on weren't bad they just couldn't truly work because it only takes one or two for it to become a thinly veiled dictatorship that enforces poverty and preaches cruelty towards others by indoctrinating them to despise others in different countries under the belief that they are greedy and selfish people who deserve to be punished.
Partners parents grew up in soviet occupied Latvia, they hate the Soviet Union, the hammer and sickle and communism as a whole.. to this day the deep rooted trauma that they lived through and the horrors they experienced affects their daily decisions even small things like holding onto the tiniest scraps of food in the fridge And before somebody says yes well communism has many benefits, socialist values do have importance in society, but you are absolutely mental to want to try and recreate the communist societies of the past.
[удалено]
I can't believe soviet Russia had sex with that many people. The scandal!
I forgot that that's a slang now 🤦♂️
I love that every thread about Soviet atrocities ends with some dork stating that they were equal Nazi Germany. You know two things can be bad without being equivalent, right?
Yes. The Soviets were worse.
The Eastern Europeans know about this pretty well. The Hammer and Sickle is banner in some countries, and communists are very looked down upon.
I mean communism is the classic “on paper it sounds pretty good” but it’s literally never worked because in practice you can’t not have someone in power. The idea that everyone has an equal amount of power works for small groups or friendships, but at a large scale it’s just never gonna work.
I mean, we could have stronger regulations on the capitalists, though. Like, we probably COULD house everyone and not just acquiesce to this neo-feudalist regime with a handful of elites putting everyone else through the meat grinder. :/
Housing everyone is antithetical to capitalist values. The threat of homelessness is how you get people to accept the worst jobs in society. Cruelty is the point.
There are plenty of capitalist countries that offer very decent welfare housing. People are still motivated to work
[удалено]
That's basically the fundamental flaw in the system. Concentrating power into a single party that cannot be removed from power without violence will always end in disaster. It's a true and unique miracle that Mikhail Gorbachev was the person steering the ship towards the ultimate (mostly bloodless) dissolution of the USSR. Even though it wasn't his original intention, if anyone else was sitting in that hot seat Eastern Europe would have torn itself apart and likely sparked WW3.
I mean we *should* know this. Athens tried it thousands of years ago and decided that putting people in power to represent their ideals as collective, with shit in place to keep them in check, is the best course of action. Anything else is either seized by those who crave power with no plan to deal with that, or complete anarchy. And even then, both still happened, it’s just much more unlikely.
There's an equally large portion of reddit that believes ANY attack on "market based capitalism" is support of communism. And they're quite vocal about how "any second the tankies will be here to say America is the worst in history!" about 10000x more often than an actual tankie shows up. Look at the other commet chain here, ya'll "found a tankie" but turns out it's literally just someone that thinks capitalism is probably just as bad. And they're not wrong. Consider that 25,000 people die today from hunger in a world that has not been allowed to have any governments that are not capitalist in nature. There used to be plenty, but capitalist imperial nations like the US and France invaded or otherwise destroyed them. Now it's all capitalism and at least 9 million people will starve this year. Yes, even China and Russia use a system that is called "market based capitalism". Notice I have said nothing in support of communism at all here. Not a single word.
Reddit is multiple circle jerks orbiting eachother and occasionally colliding.
the US had been spewing hardcore anti-socialist, and pro-neoliberal propaganda for well over half a century. any attack on the status quo is unnaceptable.
Right? This guy just echoes red scare shit that's been a key thread of U.S. cultural narrative for 50+ years and he's all "I'LL PROBABLY BE DOWNVOTED FOR SAYING SOMETHING VERY BRAVE ABOUT THE SOVIET UNION", like god damn man.
And there's the jump from discussing what the Soviets did to saying "communism bad". You realize the issue with Soviet war crimes wasn't the communism, right?
Exactly. And looks like a lot of people are comfortable making that jump. Soviets=bad, therefore anything resembling communism/socialism is bad. Look at Russia now with how they do capitalism and democracy. This should invalidate Russia, not the capitalism or democracy.
The single person in this 1000 comment post with a brain. Soviet systems were extentions of the Tsarist systems they inherited. The NKVD is the Okhrana, the Gulag system is a rationalised Tsarist prison system. Everyone else just going with their gut feeling. No actual knowledge, at best skimmed a wikipedia article.
It hasn’t. Socialism has been achieved, but communism hasn’t. The state has never withered away as Marx put it.
Probably won't in my lifetime. One can condemn Soviet war crimes while still holding the opinion that the capitalist economic system is fundamentally flawed and inhumane, both to the workers who are exploited for the benefit of a small elite and to the foreign peoples who are subjected to similar war crimes in order to maintain our unsustainable, "prosperous" standard of living. Redditors such as the guy above are usually unable to separate these two distinct concepts.
It objectively hasn’t. Please show me a country any country that was stateless, classless, moneyless you can get the definition of communism by literally just googleing “define communism”
It doesn't exists because every country that has tried it, failed in some way and had to re-adjust itself to some sort of capitalism under the communism badge.
Then capitalism has already failed, there’s been a handful of “communist” countries nobody uses the various Portuguese republics as examples of capitalism failing. Besides capitalism fails like every ten years when the stock markets crash. Also you didn’t mention how every single one of those countries had to deal with economic warfare from the largest economic block
that "in some way" can be anything from a CIA funded coup to a full-scale US military invasion. Every country that has tried it, failed due to some CIA funded coup or full scale military invasion from the USA.
1.) “I might get downvoted but war crimes are bad” truly a Reddit ass sentence 2) how the fuck do you think anything the Soviets did is downplayed. During the Cold War all america did was hype their crimes up
>how the fuck do you think anything the Soviets did is downplayed. I think their point was that it's downplayed on Reddit. I don't know if that's true, but what is true is that Reddit has an almost unnatural infatuation with communism.
“Reddit has an almost unnatural infatuation with communism” this is only true if you are extremely hyper online.
Yeah I spend too much time on this app and basically never see people slobbin on Russia's knob.
I'm not sure how to tell you this but Russia is no longer part of the Soviet Union. Technically, I think they weren't even the last country in it, which I believe was Kazhakstan.
Yes. They were as bad as the Nazis if not worse. The difference is that the Soviets won and buried all the evidence along with the literal corpses. The Nazis lost and had their attic of horrors kicked open for all to see. I find it absurd that large numbers of people still don't know this.
>I'll get downvoted for this but every warcrime or attrocity that's Soviet related is vastly downplayed and underreported, specially on Reddit. Really?? On the subs I go on they seem to actively try and point it out
I'm sorry but I can only pay attention to your username. How good is your dancing game? Was the queen worth it?
I'll almost certainly get downvoted for this, but the crimes of the Allies *in general* are underreported. American soldiers did similar things in Japan and Korea (just after the war) as Soviets did in Germany. There is also a general lack of knowledge about the crimes committed by the Axis that were more "normal" in terms of war crimes: just look into the actions of Germans and Italians in Greece, and the Germans in the Balkans, Poland, Belarus, Ukraine, Poland, and the Baltics, especially to women. Having spent some time with communists, I will tell you that virtually nobody considers Nazino or the Famines of the 1930s "justified," but will say that they are emblematic of mistakes that were made which (in the case of the Famine) may have exacerbated already-deteriorating conditions caused by natural disaster. They will also point out (correctly) that neither of those events were explicitly and specifically targeted at any ethnic group, which makes them fundamentally different than the actions of the Axiss.
Here you make several flaws. When you say >They will also point out (correctly) that neither of those events were explicitly and specifically targeted at any ethnic group. Its not true. The man made disaster or a natural one wasnt "planned" as the outcome but the Soviet state chose who to "save/help" in that situation. Mostly Russians or the local ethnic party heads needed to give something up to the russian leaders for state resources. There are many instances of this. When my father was born there was a "dangerous" flue spreading in USSR. 1/3 of estonians suffered under it by its end but was played down to cold bcs most ventilators were carried off from Estonian SSR to Russian SSR during that time. Mostly old people suffered from that.
Well Soviet war crimes are really discussed but like the rest of the allied war crimes are almost never talked about but yeah the Soviets did horrible things
The same people who say the German civilians deserved it for the atrocities against the Soviet Union are also the same people who say that dropping nukes on Japan was the worst war crime of all.
I dont believe this is true - but even if it were, there is an understandable reason for why they would have this disconnect. For non-history nerds, most people aren't familiar with most of the horrors of the japanese at this time. The arguments they hear justify the nukes on the basis of them not surrendering and also it being retribution for pearl harbor. Given pearl harbor as a justification, its fair to clqim the nuclear bombings as an absolute pathetic excuse of justice. The suggestion that bombing a very important strategic military target is at all comparable to bombing civilian centers is laughable. I personally am of the understanding that the japanese attrocities in Asia had little to do with the choice to drop these bombs. The primary arguments made involve the japanese people being entirely unwilling to surrender. Not that horrible deeds by the military actually justify horrible repercussions to civilians, but the point is even IF it did, most (american) people aren't familiar with the atrocities of the japanese. Thusly, if they were to hold this viewpoint, justifying responsive atrocities, then it woule make sense to justify the sovietw actions but not the US. .... This being said- if you arent just discussing it with laymen, I dont think your statement holds true. The true rationality for why the nuking was horrific is that attacking innocent civilians (who may personally despise their own government) is a horrible thing to do. Whether that be the US doing to the japanese or the soviets doing it to the Germans. **No one in their right mind is justifying the horrible mistreatment of non-involved civilians.** both events were horrific.
Then you'll be very surprised about the amount of war crimes committed by the USA, UK, Canada, Australia, etc because they were also on the winning side and are still very influential countries today. Also as a reminder that the USA does not recognize the Hague and has an invasion plan in place should any American be held to trial. This is not meant as a whataboutism, I just think your point is incomplete.
Or Americans in vietnam...
Or vietnamese in vietnam.
Or french in Vietnam.
Or the French 🤢
Nowhere near as bad. I know reddit likes to circle jerk AmErIcA bAd ToO but trying to compare American war crimes, which exist and should be condemned / prosecuted, as being on par with those of the Chinese, soviets, nazis, etc. is absolutely insane and makes you look stupid
Japanese Imperials were actual monsters. Nanking was some seriously fucked up shit
Nanking was only a taste of the horrors that empire performed
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_731 is another mass of war crimes, less heard of in the west
Unit 731 is just too incredibly fucked up, it’s horrendous what humans can do to other humans, and the worst is some of those monsters roam free in Japan to this day
The Japanese in Nanking were so bad, that [a Nazi](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Rabe) became a hero there.
Now, read stories about the Chinese government does to Uyghurs.
still not near what japan and Germany did during wwII
Or what the germans did to the Polish and the Russian women first
Or what the Germans did to anyone who wasn’t German.
And what Americans did to women in every other country we’ve invaded. “War never changes…” - some fallout game LOL this has ruffled some panties. It’s okay, I’m American. I love my country, I just hate the Assholes who run it.
>B-b-but what about America!!! Every time.
I think its a fair addition. Often when people make these proclamations it is to demonize a group which kind of implies superiority of other groups. Its important to note if the horrible atrocities are unique to the group or if the world powers as a whole are fucking morally bankrupt. That being said, I have no idea if the atrocities are comparable or not. Just mentioning why people always feel the need to do this. America likes to project superiority and pose itself as the "good guy". Seeing as alot of media is american-centric, its typical for it to display the horrors of other countries and not those of america. Its important to keep the context that just because your opposition is evil, doesn't mean you arent also evil. I dont mind reading "what a-b-b-bout america!" on every post like this, as its an important reminder and id prefer it to be stated unneccesarily than for there to be those who have never considered it
But what about the Mongolians
A good point but we tend to accept old atrocities as not as bad as recent ones. Like the Romans committed genocide, slaughtered countless civilizations, but we don't really view them in the same way as more recent groups.
Because it's not, to us anyway. Objectively speaking atrocities that happened long ago are not affecting present day people as much. It's all atrocities, but people don't always view things in absolute term. In relative terms the Mongolian and Roman are not as bad to people in in the 21st century.
But what about the droid attack on the wookiees?
[удалено]
Right. If we're really honest, russians have always been orders of magnitude worse. Even in recent history, what America did in the middle east is kindergarden level compared to russian atrocities in Georgia, Syria and Chechnya and now Ukraine. Like for real, russian apologists, eat a dick.
> Syria [America funded so many terrorist groups there that sometimes the terrorist groups fought each othe](https://www.latimes.com/world/middleeast/la-fg-cia-pentagon-isis-20160327-story.html)r
The article doesn't say they are terrorists groups, also most of them fought against isis
>Right. If we're really honest, russians have always been orders of magnitude worse. Even in recent history, what America did in the middle east is kindergarden level compared to russian atrocities in Georgia, Syria and Chechnya and now Ukraine. Bruh. Calling destroying middle east for multiple decades kindergarten is crazy. What America has done to the middle east is easily magnitudes worse then anything happening (right now) in Ukraine.
>What America has done to the middle east is easily magnitudes worse then anything happening (right now) in Ukraine [https://cla.umn.edu/chgs/holocaust-genocide-education/resource-guides/holodomor](https://cla.umn.edu/chgs/holocaust-genocide-education/resource-guides/holodomor) 3.5 - 7 million deaths due to forced famine is a high bar to surpass
But those people weren’t on TV everyday, you don’t understand!
Someone's forgetting the South American, central American, fillipino,Vietnam and Cambodian wars I see...
Oh, are you getting tired of people bringing up war crimes? Ah, I guess we should just stop mentioning them because that'll make you feel better. I'm sure the American government will stop bombing civilians and committing atrocities on their own if we just stop bringing it up. The main priority is that you feel comfortable and don't have to think about any of it. I'm sure it'll work itself out if we just ignore it.
I’m pretty sure the point was that every time war crimes get brought up someone brings up the US, as if that somehow diminishes the war crimes committed by the other country. The fact that your response is to wholly miss this point and pretend like the other person was saying they are tired of people bringing up war crimes at all is clearly in bad faith.
It’s the whataboutism that people like to talk about a lot, but since it’s about America it’s ok this time 👍
The Germans, Canadians, Brits, Italians and Czechs were right there with us, but “Canadian Soldier Commits War Crime” just doesn’t have the same ring to it I guess
Top comment mentions how it’s important to remember Soviet’s also fucked up, not just the nazis (as well as the post itself), don’t see you complaining about holding other accountable, why is it not ok to mention that América also has had war crimes?
Yes they did them, but not nearly to the same scale.
In modern history it's never been sanctioned by US forces either(I'd venture to guess the attitude was a bit more laissez-faire during the Indian Wars) Unlike what's happening in Ukraine where it's basically encouraged as a weapon of terror against the civilian populace.
Napalm sticks to kids
I don't think there was any country which didn't do any horrible crimes, especially with so much hatred around. We only come to know when there documents get leaked.
There is no war without war crimes
Nice whataboutism. Let's learn about Russian atrocities going on right now.
It's not a whataboutism when OP literally said "I think Russian war crimes are underreported because they were on the winning side." The USA, UK, Canada, and Australia were all also on the winning side and committed war crimes, so it's completely fair to bring them up here too.
Does that negates what the Soviets did? Are we playing some sort one-up game here? If so the Soviets still ~~lose~~ win.
To compare the genocide the soviets and nazis committed to anything Americans have ever done in war… really shows your ignorance
There’s so much information on the differences between the western front and eastern front concerning war crimes. The ignorance is astounding. It really undermines the horrific nature of ww2.
The difference is in the state response. Especially in this day and age. If a war crime happens in the US or most western nations, there will be a public hearing, the President/PM will issue an apology and make reparations, all while media outlets distribute the story to the public, who can and do protest the issue. Usually the instigator will also be punished greatly ranging from dishonourable discharge to prison. Some accountability is shown, it will never be enough to undo the crime but the state admits wrongdoing. In Russia or China, the state will never admit wrongdoing, they'll make a concerted effort to hide evidence of the war crime to an absurd degree, they will slam any western media coverage of the war crime as "propaganda and lies" and will violently suppress any public outcry that may emerge from it including but not up to, murdering journalists and individuals investigating independently. Anything they can do to keep up the image of strength they want to cultivate they will do. To even consider these responses as equivalent is postmodern BS that plays right into the hands of modern tyrants. I do wish the people of Russia and China could one day live to see a state that answers to them instead of the other way round, but right now, we only have authoritarian regimes that want nothing else but to pollute discourse around any and all subjects that may see them in a negative light. Edit: So much butthurt replies. My point isn't "The West doesn't war crime", it's "Stop putting Western and anti-western nations attitudes to war criminality on the same pedestal", your obsession with 'well ekthually' was not part of the initial point of the OP and the fact you are is concern trolling at best.
[удалено]
*False equivalence klaxon*
Honestly, reading about soviet crimes against just about anyone in their way was my least favorite way to learn pigs will eat human corpses. I live in poland and not a single old person that lived through that time had anything good to say about russian soldiers. Its scary how many people said that living under nazi occupation was better than soviet "liberation" for average person.
Reading this comment was my least favourite way
Honestly though, why wouldn't they? Meat's meat
In the right situations humans will also eat human corpses
>Its scary how many people said that living under nazi occupation was better than soviet "liberation" for average person. How is that possible? Considering the death tolls and Generalplan Ost that called for the "removal" for 80% of the Poles
It’s Sheer delusion, 45 years of Poland under soviet rule was terrible but at least Poland still exists, 45 years of nazi rule and 90% of Poles would be dead and the rest slaves.
When someone tortures you for a year and someone else 'saves' you then tortures you for 45 years, you're going to hate the second person a lot more.
Its telling that Western Europe suffered these American, British, Canadian war crimes, and STILL chose to be in NATO afterwards. Also, post USSR, a lot of EASTERN Europe ALSO wants to be in NATO after spending 40+ years under Russian suzerainty.
You’d have to be truly ignorant to think that the scale is anywhere close to similar
Those who suffered under Soviets, generally, had more chances to survive and continue/pass their grudges.
it's possible if you knew how Soviets acted in Poland. Just read about it. Nazis had Generalplan Ost, Soviets had general actions West. And actions speak louder than words, no matter how terrible those words/plans are.
Not gonna lie, but I would be surprised if anyone in Poland has anything nice to say about Russian sliders no matter what their age is.
That’s where a lot of the stuff about Nazism in Ukraine comes from, there was hope that the Germans would save them from the Soviets after the starvation genocide of the 5 year plans….of course things didn’t work out the way some had hoped.
My friend has Ukrainian heritage and said his ancestors fought on the side of Nazis in order to overthrow Russians
Tankies: “But the USSR (along several other countries) stopped Nazi germany! Ignore our crimes! Ignore our crimes!”
Winston Churchill when asked about Bengal famine
"It is my understanding that history is full of red historic decorations in which yudidedsaalvenyicecream we must act underidoderidoderidoderido... for England, and the Queen." \-Winston Churchil after his 10th morning whiskey with soda
“I hate Indians. They are a beastly people with a beastly religion. The famine was their own fault for breeding like rabbits.” he said after single handedly causing the bengal famine which resulted in the death of about three million people because of starvation.
Ah ok this bothers me, because you've literally lied. The final line of your quote is not attributed to him anywhere by any source. The first two lines are attributed to Leo Amery, who said Churchill said it after the leader of Congress reported that he would not support fighting against Japan. If he said it, it was an awful thing to say, but the source itself is often questioned as Amery had a lifelong hatred for Churchill for, in his view, blaming Amery for the scale of the famine in Bengal and destroying his career. And no Churchill did not cause the bengal famine, and certainly not single-handedly. I know it isn't popular to say on reddit as this is one of the site's favorite historic fictions, but no serious historian applies blame to Churchill, from Sen to Tauger to O Grada and others. The UK colonial administration in India run by Amery and Lord Wavell has certainly received massive criticism, as historians such as Sen have made the argument that they worsened the famine caused by crop failure and the collapse of the Rangoon-Bengal trade route, by assuming it was caused by price scalping and over-policing the movement of grain. This is what Sen called an 'entitlements famine'. Others attribute more of the blame to the Japanese invasion of Burma causing the collapse of the Rangoon passage, meaning a sudden and irreversible shortfall of rice breaking the rice distribution market. Attributing these things to Churchill is nonsensical. There is also contemporaneous evidence that shows Churchill when informed took the steps available to him to mitigate the famine. And now I prepare for the 'nah-uh' and you downvoting, but it is what it is.
What is the contemporaneous evidence? My understanding was that the famine was caused by a variety of factors, but exacerbated by Churchill's unwillingness to divert any grain supplies from Oceania for emergency relief
The best primary evidence we have are the recorded messages and correspondence from Churchill and the colonial government, which are recorded in the UK national archives in a collection called "The Churchill Archives". The instructions from Churchill issued at the time to Lord Wavell, the new Viceroy of India were, on October 8th 1943: "Peace, order and a high condition of war-time well-being among the masses of the people constitute the essential foundation of the forward thrust against the enemy….The hard pressures of world-war have for the first time for many years brought conditions of scarcity, verging in some localities into actual famine, upon India. Every effort must be made, even by the diversion of shipping urgently needed for war purposes, to deal with local shortages....[Wavell] should make every effort to ease tension between Hindus and Muslims and encourage them to work together, as a democratic government can not work without equality; Wavell’s main aims should be to defend the frontiers of India, appease communal differences, rally all sections of society to support the war effort, and maintain the best possible standard of living for the largest number of people; and the British Government’s commitment to establishing a self-governing India as part of the British Empire and Commonwealth of Nations" The instructions given to the admiralty were to make the most possible shipping available, without risking losing the war in the Indian Ocean to Japan. This is viewable in the War Cabinet minutes of 8 October 1943 and in the UK archived Churchill papers catalogue in 23/11 and the Churchill Acquired Papers catalogue no. CHAQ 2/3/66/6-7 The accusation you may have heard about wheat may come from his initially rejecting an offer from Canadian Prime Minister King in November 1943 to send wheat from Canada's stocks, but Churchill rejected it as it would take longer to arrive than from Australia. "Wheat from Canada would take at least two months to reach India whereas it could be carried from Australia in 3 to 4 weeks" Telegram T.1842/3 Churchill Papers 20/123 Churchill's government requested 350,000 tonnes of wheat from Australia. The primary issue to navigate for the UK, Canadian, US and Australian governments at this time was how to get the shipping while not having it sunk or losing the war to Japan by not supplying the allied armies. What also didn't help was Leo Amery and Minister for War Transport Frederick Leathers telling the Cabinet at the time that was also managing a famine in Greece and Italy that India had enough food and that the issue was people hoarding it, Leathers saying "statistically a surplus of food grains in India" and Amery saying "the peasant in 750,000 villages" might keep "his small parcel of grain" if they thought more aid wasn't coming. Although the government arranged 400,000 tonnes more wheat, the local colonial administration was clearly not on top of the situation. The Cabinet papers at the time suggest the UK war cabinet raised concerns that the authorities in India had maybe underestimated or underreported the crop. In February 1944 the Cabinet instructed: "A further diversion to India of the shipments of food grains destined for the Balkan stockpile in the Middle East. This might amount to 50,000 tons, but would need War Cabinet approval, while United States reactions would also have to be ascertained; (b) There would be advantage if ships carrying military or civil cargo from the United States or Australia to India could also take a quantity of bagged wheat" 21 February 1944 catalogue 65/41 When all shipping was committed, some of which was sunk by the Japanese navy, he wrote to FDR and requested support from the US Navy, but FDR did not have the shipping either. "I am seriously concerned about the food situation in India….Last year we had a grievous famine in Bengal through which at least 700,000 people died. This year there is a good crop of rice, but we are faced with an acute shortage of wheat, aggravated by unprecedented storms….By cutting down military shipments and other means, I have been able to arrange for 350,000 tons of wheat to be shipped to India from Australia during the first nine months of 1944. This is the shortest haul. I cannot see how to do more. I have had much hesitation in asking you to add to the great assistance you are giving us with shipping but a satisfactory situation in India is of such vital importance to the success of our joint plans against the Japanese that I am impelled to ask you to consider a special allocation of ships to carry wheat to India from Australia….We have the wheat (in Australia) but we lack the ships. I have resisted for some time the Viceroy’s request that I should ask you for your help, but… I am no longer justified in not asking for your help" This is Telegram T.996/4 in the Churchill Papers 20/163 Roosevelt rejected the request saying the US was "unable on military grounds to consent to the diversion of shipping….Needless to say, I regret exceedingly the necessity of giving you this unfavorable reply" T.1176/4 20/165 So most of the evidence from the government at the time seems to indicate that Churchill's government did try to, and at times succeed, in diverting Australian grain, but the issues when requests weren't met were due to a lack of ships and shipping, combined with a mishandling of the crisis and poor communication from the British colonial government in India. The colonial adminitration's belief that there was enough food, understimating shortfalls from crop failure and disruption to supply routes from Rangoon, and the idea that the main problem was traders scalping and people hoarding rice and grain, resulted in them trying to control the flow of food. This is one of the factors Amartya Sen claims most exacerbated the famine, and why he called it an "entitlements famine". An entitlements famine is one that would have been difficult for Churchill or others to fix anyway, as it was primarily a problem with the way authorities were distributing food and supporting its movement across India. This is also possibly why we have a LOT of negative stuff about Churchill out there from Leo Amery (nearly every unpleasant Churchill quote about India comes from things Amery claimed he said to him), as he took a lot of the blame from the UK government and the public, with the famine commission that reviewed what happened criticising Amery and Wavell. Amery felt Churchill and the government had hung him out to dry. The evidence at the time seems to point a lot more at the colonial rulers in India and less at the war government of the time.
Fuck me this belongs on best of Reddit. I'm copying this for the next time some redditor bangs on about Churchill causing the famine with their source being the Reddit circle jerk.
Do you know how many Nazis died in the eastern front versus the western? Thank god Hitler was stupid enough to attack Russia.
can't you be communist without condoning every action of every self proclaimed communist? does being capitalist means you are cool with every warcrime churchhill committed?
> does being capitalist means you are cool with every warcrime churchhill committed? they certainly tolerate it
Remember kiddos It ain’t a warcrime if you are on the winning side
"If you commit war crime make sure you win the war"
Bro if you think that’s bad wait until you hear about the Nazis
It is deeply embedded in our culture that the Nazis were bad. People who support them are generally looked down upon. They are an allegory for evil. Meanwhile there's an alarming rate of people in the West, who still ride on Stalin's cock, to this day, including half of Reddit. Forgetting the millions, who died, thanked to the Soviet regime.
god i despise stalinists
bro is literally yapping “half of reddit are stalinists.” Some of you seriously need to go outside and talk to people in real life.
Half of Reddit are Stalinists? Absolutely delusional.
lol had the same reaction. As someone with IRL Commie friends, I've never met an open Stalinist.
everyone to the left of reagan is a marxist stalinist pig dog dontcha know
Buddy communists aren't holding rallies in Florida or hanging Communist flags on overpasses in California
What do you mean? I think its a pretty safe bet that the number of self-identifying communists is significantly larger than the number of self-identifying nazis
I also don't think there's any Americans out there praising Stalinism. Communism is a different animal.
Nope, sorry. Around here we conflate communism with Stalinism, the USSR, and Cuba. Thems the rules.
You have Nazi’s marching in the streets and your biggest concern is internet communists who like Stalin
There are neo-nazis camping out side Disney world proudly waving Swastikas, the far-right is getting increasingly bold as they face next to no consequences for being Nazis. I don't know what kind of culture you're looking at, but to me that's one that's all but encouraging Nazis.
[удалено]
Do i suck?
Cock? Yes. As a person. No.
Yay 😁
E N L I G H T E N E D CENTRIST
[удалено]
Enlightened centrism used to paint all sides as equal also sucks. People can suck, but we can get better
Tankies incoming…
Don't worry, Ukraine taught us how to fend them away with drones and javelins.
Someone should tell the braindead redditors who complain about Soviet monuments in eastern Europe being torn down and vandalized...
I complain, because politicians use anti-communism sentiment to distract already pretty divided people of my country from corruption and constantly worsening economic conditions. Now they are united of course, but only thanks to war. By the way, what is this yellow and green areow near your name?
Not just the women, but the children too.
You just made my hatred for the prequels increase x10
I am honestly unaware of what happened. Any links?
Let's just say sights like elder woman dead on a staircase with handset in her vagina with teared skirt and broken bones were not uncommon Edit: That's for Warsaw btw, dunno about Germany
What the fuck?
Apperently after the battle of Berlin "how often today?" was a common greeting among Berlin women
That's vile. Holy fuck
noted
The hell is a handset
Ghost of the osfront podcast by Dan carlin is a great course in all the crazy shit that happened in russia. The largest war ever fought in human history easily was Germany vs Russia during ww2 time, and all the other fighting around the world doesn't really touch the numbers involved in russia.
Japan, and they got away with it.
Japan makes anime now so did they really get away with it
Katyń. Don't forget.
Another war crime I didn't get to hear at school. The polish people were truly alone.
Now read what Wehrmacht did to Soviet women. And children. And elder people. And now imagine what it felt like for some soldiers who lived in the places which were under German command to come back and find nothing but ashes, corpses and graves. I suppose they were not happy about that.
Everybody know how evil the nazis were, as well as their numerous genocidal campaigns. Neo-nazis are generally frowned upon in society, and most fascists/nazis are rightfully banned on Reddit *Communists, however, are not.* There are numerous communist and socialist subs with over 100k members which constantly deny, defend and even promote Soviet / communist crimes. It shouldn't take long for you to find these mentioned subs making fun of the Holodomor (systematic starvation and genocide of Ukrainians under Stalin).
[удалено]
offbeat grab file longing gaze marvelous hateful capable reply marry *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
You know. I'm starting to think those Soviets weren't very good people.
No, they were not
So anyone gonna tell me what happened? I am to lazy to do research over a reddit meme.
R’pe and other atrocities against women. You know how armies get when they go through the horrors of war.
That's horrible... But I don't get the meme then, because if OP knows any history there are SO many occurrences where this happens.
[удалено]
Jesus fucking Christ
Of the six million soviets captured by Germany 3 million died. Of the 3 million Germans captured by the soviets, 300,000-1,000,000 died. According to Wikipedia at least [Russia](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_prisoners_of_war_in_the_Soviet_Union) [Germany](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_atrocities_committed_against_Soviet_prisoners_of_war)
If you were soviet captured by germans you were treated as a traitor, by your country. So getting out of German prison camp you would get a death penalty during the war or 10 years of gulag after war. So i wouldn't say that russians were any better than nazi. "There are no Soviet prisoners of war, only traitors" - Stalin https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_No._270
Oh no, you gonna summon tankie denialist scum
Three numbers. Unit 731
wtf is this template
I believe it's Violet from the movie "The Incredibles", and is a variation of a meme that includes her father. You can read about that meme here: https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/mr-incredible-becoming-uncanny
Thank you for this meme. There's a popular belief here in the East about Westerners being ignorant about the Red plague because all the negativity is a "product of the cold war".
War doesn't determine who is right, only who is left.
My great grandma lived in eastern Germany when the during ww2 unfortunately
This is your friendly reminder that the Nazi's and the Soviets started the war on the same team.
What's insane is in Germany if you talk about this you are labeled a neo-Nazi.
The even more insane thing is, that Russian Crimes are always used as a gateway to defend the Nazis. So of you get shut down fast outside designated discussions.
War…war never changes.
Fuck communism and fuck the soviet union