The Great Mistake - a Winter War escalates TL

burmafrd

Banned
Western media and the like have NEVER even tried to uncover the facts about the millions killed by Stalin before WW2. Even when Solzenitezen (Sp?) got his book out it was called fake by a lot of western sympathisers in the media. It was only after the fall of the Soviet Union and a lot of records that were finally made public that even part of the truth got out. Many records of what happened in the 20's and 30's were destroyed after Stalins death so that the real totals will never be known. But anyone claiming that the death total is much under 20 million is either blind or a sympathiser. Collectivization alone is thought to have killed at LEAST 5 million. I think closer to 10. Add the purges and all those that were worked to death or died of disease in penal battalions and gulags and you get at least another 5 million. At the very least Hitler was a poor second to Stalin in total number of murders and the like. Though both are probably pikers compared to Mao.
 
Western media and the like have NEVER even tried to uncover the facts about the millions killed by Stalin before WW2. Even when Solzenitezen (Sp?) got his book

He got himself in jail for trying to spread nazi propaganda in the Red Army, he would have been one of the first to face an execution squad.
He himself admitted he pulled facts out of his bottom and how many here would appreciate his politically incorrect outburt a few years ago?
No little reason why he was dismissed in the west, he just couldn´t know very much, least he was personally involved.

But anyone claiming that the death total is much under 20 million is either blind or a sympathiser. Collectivization alone is thought to have killed at LEAST 5 million. I think closer to 10.

14 millions is the population of the western ukraine. Between the death and the detentions, the Germans would have discovered massively depopulated if not completely empty regions and Goebbels, who wasn´t an idiot, would have had a field day.
Other claims are 30 millions, 50 millions and 110 millions in the soviet-union alone.
Let us see why even the western medias doesn´t insist too much on the subject. Simply, the soviet-union would have collapsed in a bloody revolution perhapse even before the start of WW2.
With such politics, without support from the populations, no major industrialisation would have been possible. There would have been no factories, no tanks, no aircrafts and no artillery. No massive amount of soldiers to engage most of the axis´s soldiers, since they would have turned their weapons against the Sovietic governement and overthrowed it, outright massacred the bulk of the communist party.
Instead the soviet governement survived defeats dwarfing that of Czarist Russia in 1/6 of the time.
Last but not least, while the formerly polish-controled ukrainian region saw great initial support for the axis forces much of the occupied soviet-union started to swarm with armed partisans very swiftly, why the hell didn´t the same didn´t happen after Stalin took power, if Stalinism really was as bad or worse than the axis occupation? So yeah.


Many records of what happened in the 20's and 30's were destroyed after Stalins death so that the real totals will never be known.

Krushnev was the one that wouldn´t have done so, because he needed the dirt to rise to power and secure it with his anti-stalinist politics.

It was only after the fall of the Soviet Union and a lot of records that were finally made public that even part of the truth got out.

The records state 730K execution sentences during the whole Stalin era, not tens of millions.

At the very least Hitler was a poor second to Stalin in total number of murders and the like.

And that is what it is all about.
 
Last edited:
Really are sticking up for Stalin, aren't you? I imagine you think the gulags were virtually resorts?


Nope, simple common sens.

You meant to tell me the soviet-union and the socialist bloc collapsed because of badly planned economy and poor living standards back in 91 but yet managed survived that ?!?

What these authors are claiming is state-sanctionned self-destruction, which would have either completely crippled the soviet-union as a great power or any power at all, to the level of Poland, yugoslavia and the Chinese nationalists if not even less.
Alternative is a bloody revolution, after which every communist would either be dead in the most gruesome manner or would have fled the country in a hurry, years before WW2 starts.


There is so much information out there that makes what you claim wrong yet you continue. To each his own I guess.

You are wrong on the order of thing, it is I that claim that this "information" wrong, not the other way around. Let us see what this "so much information" says.

hawaii.edu said:
With this understood, the Soviet Union appears the greatest megamurderer of all, apparently killing near 61,000,000 people. Stalin himself is responsible for almost 43,000,000 of these..

Pure unadultered partisan propaganda, ludicrous to the extreme too.

Hawaii.edu for example, the highest "democid" number for the soviet-union is given as 126 000 000, the population of Czarist Russia (which included much of Poland and baltic region) right before WW1 was only approx 50 millions higher.
The number of victimes claimed varies wildly, over 100 millions no less.
In comparaison, the holocaust stay near 6 millions, very rarely does it shift between 3 and 40 millions. Armenian holocaust stay at 1.5 millions.

.thepeoplesvoice said:
Stalin told Winston Churchill he liquidated 10 million peasants during the 1930s.




huffingtonpost said:
After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russians began taking down their statues of Josef Stalin,...

Hitler and Stalin were allies and started World War II in 1939 by both attacking Poland at the same time.

How are they going to so thoroughly unearth the darkest secrets of Stalin if they don´t even know basic history??
FTWDTK: Statues of Stalin where taken down in the 1950s and the Red Army entered Poland over 2 weeks after the Germans.
 
Last edited:
Stalin and Hitler were not allies, they merely had a nonagression pact. The Non-Agression Pact was no more an alliance then Chamberlain's Munich deal with Hitler. Stalin never gave 10 million as a number of the famine victims to Churchill and even if he did, ten million dying during the famine does not equel the ten million people being liquidated. Milions of people died during famines under the Czars or in British controlled India but no one ever calls that genocide.
 
I hope you don't mind me knocking off Hitler for story purposes.
I don't mind if you knock off Hitler for any reason.;) Or just because it's Tuesday.:p
Britain went to full war production as did the various Dominions such as Canada, South Africa, India, Australia New Zealand and so on.
What do you suppose they'd been doing?:confused:
...Japanese forces to cross quickly into Burma and Malaya while Japanese troops in China attacked the British concession of Hong Kong. It was meagrely defended since so many commonwealth troops had been concentrated in India and Britain itself. ...Roosevelt at this time still lacked a clear casus belli
Japan would never attack the Brits without attacking the U.S., too, given Lend-Lease (even stronger TTL, IIRC), which means attacking Pearl & P.I. to eliminate the obvious threat to Japanese SLOCs.
...New Guinea (in the last one the Australians scored a victory and prevented total occupation.
Of New Guinea? Or of Oz?:confused: (The latter was impossible...)
Roosevelt, in a show of solidarity, sent the Pacific fleet’s battle line to the Philippines.
Without the carrier scouting force?:confused: I find that extremely unlikely.
...declaration of war followed from Washington on February 18th 1942. The Philippines under general MacArthur resisted the attack heavily, but the aggressiveness of this assault along with the element of surprise forced him to leave for Australia
What, in a matter of days, when it took IJA over five months OTL?:confused::confused:
stating “I’ll be back.”
He's General Schwarzenegger, now?:confused:
...not knowing of Yamamoto’s use of naval airpower. His forces clashed with Japanese planes at Leyte Gulf. The battle was short as Japanese planes attacked with torpedoes and aerial bombs against the cumbersome battleships. His ships sank Kaga and crippled Soryu
Without any carriers in company, I seriously doubt Kimmel's Battle Line ever gets within gun range, let alone sinks one carrier and damages another.
Only USS Arizona returned
Cute.
...Like the British, the switched to night time raids...
Throwing out over a decade of doctrine?:confused: On what basis? Seeing they didn't despite heavy OTL losses...
...These raids, however, were 1000 plane raids
By what magic do they boost production so much to manage this in '41-2?
and so a German city was levelled daily
Who do you think you're kidding? This didn't happen with OTL 1944 weight of bombs, let alone '41's.
...Enterprise, Lexington and Saratoga.
Sara unharmed by IJN sub? How?:confused:
The battle line had to be restored as well and so USS Texas, New York, North Carolina, Washington, South Dakota, Indiana and Massachusetts were dispatched from the Atlantic...
All of which were too slow to operate in company with a carrier task force. Or is USN still convinced BBs dominate, despite the shellacking Kimmel took?
..to fight at Midway as the attack there had been postponed...
Without the Doolittle mission? IMO, that means there'd be no MI.
...had broken their codes and could read all of their transmissions.
That is drastically overstating American capability in 6/42.
...and Ranger
Not a chance. She was too small & too slow.
...replace Kaga with light carriers Shoho and Zuiho
Same as Ranger.
...Zuikaku and Shokaku were having repairs done after having encountered carriers HMS Formidable, HMS Victorious, HMS Indomitable, HMS Illustrious and light carrier HMS Eagle which had been transferred to the Indian Ocean as they weren’t much needed in the Atlantic...
Say what?:confused::confused: No use to defend against U-boats? No use on their OTL duties?
...Shokaku had suffered severe damage to her flight deck due to repeated bomb hits while Zuikaku had lost half her air arm...This was the first Allied victory in a long time and was a great boost to morale and in India were going better as well.
So mauling 2 IJN CVs isn't a victory? (I'd also wonder why four RN CVs, with better deck protection & the ability to operate TSRs at night, couldn't have sunk a pair of IJN CVs with less-capable damage control and no deck armor...)
...with the brand new P-51 Mustang...
When doctrine suggests not flying escorts? And when P-38s would be more numerous?:confused::confused:
...Douglas SBD-3 Dauntless dive bomber ...
:confused::confused:
...B-17 flying fortress ...
Not the longer-legged & heavier-bombload B-24?:confused:

And it gets no better...

I just can't let this one go...
... build the Volkswagen Beetle under license., making it a true ‘People’s Car’ which is what Volkswagen means. This design was so simple and cheap that it could easily be mass produced for little cost. Even today, millions of Chinese produced ‘People’s Cars’ are still in use in China and in the Third World. This was a family car, available for only 1.000 German marks and able to achieve a respectable speed of 100 km/h. Production wouldn’t cease until the early 1980s.
To begin with, it's Type 1, not Beetle; the factory didn't use the name Beetle or Bug til the new ('98) Beetle came out (on a Golf platform, BTW). Second, ending production in the '80s is nonsense. OTL, production lasted in Mexico til 2001; with the high demand in PRC, without the higher fuel economy & safety standards that killed U.S. imports, the Type 1 would stay in production much longer. (I daresay nothing the Soviet car industry can produce would offer real competition... I also rather doubt PRC's was any better, so the PRC Type 1s would bear the same relationship to Wolfsburg's as Ladas do to FIAT 124s...& the poor rep for "Mexican parts" would be orders of magnitude worse for "Chinese parts".:eek::eek:)
 
Last edited:
Here's an idea:

Perhaps the Court rules against the ban on the Nazis and Communists, citing the free-association provisions of the Constitution.
Actually, you might see SCotUS taking a view the states are able to do whatever they like, so long as it's not a federal ban. All it takes is right members. (Who they'd be, I'm not qualified to guess.)
 
Top