 |
| |
|
| |
|
|
Tripledoc
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dissident
He probably has no idea what happened in Afghanistan in the late 70's and 80's. He probably thinks the soviets did not cause any collateral damage. |
Clearly a lot of people died in Afghanistan during that time. However to say that the Soviet union was responsible for one million is far out. Certainly it cannot be proved. In fact there has been a long history of western socalled 'historians' piling on the casualty figures on such events as the 'Ukrainian hunger famine', the Stalin purges, 'the Great Leap forward' and the Cultural Revolution. There has been a consistent failure to bring forward anything resembling objective primary evidence. In fact a conservative study made of Soviets killed by Stalin would put it at a mere 6000. Tragic for them but sunstantially less than the 30.000.000 usually claimed. Also there has been a history of constant falsifying, fabricating, doctoring by especially people connected to the former Nazi intelligence services, The Us rigthwing press, from Randolph Hearst on down, and former collaborators. One instance is the Ukrainian Nationalists, who have consistently been lying and manipulating in order to achieve their political aims of an independent Ukraine, which now of course is a reality.
Because of the lack of any credible primary evidence, historians have resorted to make use of inherently very inprecise demographic 'evidence'. As has been shown several of thess studies contain blatant, but not so obvious, errors, like pushing a dot in percantages, that is mortality rates of 6.8 have been printed 68.0. This is just an example of how minor errors will of course have devestating consequences for a whole line of calculations.
Back to Afghanistan and the fatalities during the Soviet Union. One reason I am sceptical is, as has just surfaced, that the purported Soviet tactic of laying out anti-personel mines disguised as children's toys to specifically kill or maim children, has since been retracted. This retraction, not coincedentally, comes with the newly reported fact that children in Iraq, have been victims of the exact same propaganda, and refuse to take hand outs from American soldiers, believing it to be poisoned or mined, or otherwise dangerous. So, as has been seen, the blowback takes many forms.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MichaeltheGreat
|
|
Apolyton Grand Executioner
|
 |
mooning the house that Ruth built.
Oct 1999
time: 21:32
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by vee4473
I'm curious if this same post would have been made if during Bill clinton's administration, the 1993 failed trade center bombing had actually been successful in taking down the towers back then..
hmmm...
|
If they're responsible, string 'em up. Who cares what political party or ideology?
quote:
The president is at least trying to do something about terrorism, and to say that there has been no progress is just dumbfounding...
|
Pushing on a rope is also "doing something." The administration has the benefit of a mostly invisible, broadly defined (and the definition can be changed at will) "enemy" who can be cited anytime as the reason for almost any policy. There's always that "chatter" we never hear, about "no specific target," but there's a "credible threat."
And most likely, we'll be hearing the same stuff next year, and next year, and next year....
quote:
How about just supporting the country in this war instead of using every opportunity to try to seize a political advantage? |
The "war" itself is political. A vague enemy that is never and will never be ultimately defeated, and presto, instant justification for any policy, instant stifling of any meaningful debate or criticism, because you're either with us or you're with the terrorists.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Tripledoc
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by lord of the mark
This is the equivalent of holocaust denial. The Medvedevs, Marxist historians of the SU, have documented much higher figures. |
Well. The following hypothesis could be made. The Soviet Union deliberately falsified the casualties incurred during the Great Patriotic War, what we here in the West know as the Russo-German War. Conservative estimates say that this war caused in total 20.000.000 Soviet losses, of which 10.000.000 were combat fatalities. The motive of hiding the true casualty figures which I hypothesize to be nearer to the 50.000.000 mark, was that if that figure had indeed transpired at the time, the Soviet Union would have made themselves more vulnerable to what they percieved were the aggresive imperialist pretensions of the Western Powers. They had after all intervened on behalf of the Whites against the Reds during the Russian Civil War.
If we accept that the Soviets lost between 200.000 (Soviet claims)and 800.000 (German claims based on captured intelligence) during the short campaign that was the Winter War against Finland in 1939/40, and this operation only involved one front, then if we extrapolate that the Soviets had seven Fronts for four years against a much more technologically advanced, and capital heavy German army we say: 28 times 200.000 equals a mere 5.600.000, but 28 times 800.000 equals 22.400.000. That is only combat losses. Here we should add the conservative estimate of 3.000.000 Jews exterminated in the German occupied sectors of the Soviet Union, and 7.000.000 gentiles. This would lead us to the total combat and civilian losses of the Soviet Union of 32.400.000. This is, as noted still a very conservative estimate, since the vast superiority of the German military machine as compared to the Finnish has not been factored into the equation, neither has the intra Polish-Ukrainian Civil War, neither the Partisan/Civil War in the Ukraine, nor the losses incurred in the Campaign against the Japanese in 1945.
Indeed it would then not be hard to imagine that the Soviet losses would in fact have been higher than what has been stated from the records, demographic and from the Red Army. But being conservative the numbers would still be around 10.000.000 higher. Should this number then be subtracted from the 30.000.000 that Stalin was supposed to have killed so that the number should instead be 20.000.000, or should one consider if in fact the Soviets lost in all 60.000.000 under Stalins rule?
However I think that a case can indeed be made that the Soviet losses during the War should be substantially upgraded, and that would in turn make a case for a new investigation as to the factual number of fatalities that Stalin's peacetime regime should be made guilty of.
Last edited by Tripledoc on 23-12-2003 at 05:51
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:32.
Apolyton Time is 00:32. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
22-12-2003 09:20
My city is a significant area of concern for attack. I feel so special. 
.
|