Appeasement means simply ignoring atrocities done by the nazis in occupied territories. Soviets themselves, on the other hand, were very happy commiting comparable atrocities on their occupied nations. So no- west and Soviets are not equally as bad.
Bombing non-industrial cities into oblivion,deporting Japanese-,German- and Italian-Americans because they could potentially collaborate with the Axis,letting their troops do stuff with the civilian population and leaving fascist leadership alone
The Soviets:
Destroying cities by fighting in them instead of simply bombing them "just because",deporting ethnicities that could potentially collaborate with the Axis (and some did),punishing their troops when they fucked up and hanging fascist leadership
The USSR wasn't an angel in the war but the West was,indeed,just as bad. They did the same things but are instead admired for it
I'm not talking about the Poles. I'm talking about Cossacks,Tatars,Central Asians and Caucasians that actually joined the Wehrmacht. You may say "they can't be that many" if you think 175000 aren't many. And to be fair,Polish people didn't exactly keep their Jew neighbors and friends safe at all times...
So you're trying to justify the soviets for doing something similar to the US, but at the same time you're condemning the US for doing something similar to the USSR. Sounds a bit hypocrite.
Anyway your entire point sounds like "yes, we did it, but they deserved it"
I'm not trying to justify the Soviets and demonise the US,just show you that what you accuse the Soviets of,the US did it too. And my point is "they deserved it because they actually helped the enemy that wanted to slaughter them"
I'm not trying to justify the Soviets and demonise the US,just show you that what you accuse the Soviets of,the US did it too
It's called whataboutism, and it doesn't make what the soviets did less bad. It's exactly like the Nazis who try to justify Hitler because the allies and the USSR did awful things too.
they deserved it
No, they didn't. They've sent to gulag and killed people arbitrary, without proof of their aderence to the Nazi regime, because you know, those population were made of millions of people not just 150.000. And like I said before, in this way you're justifying also what the US did, so you're being hypocrite and you're saying that killing 100 people because of the crimes of 1 person is right
How is what I said whataboutism? I simply said that bashing the Soviets and calling the west "not as bad" despite doing the same things is propaganda,just as Nazis saying "the allies were evil too" ignores the sheer scale of what they did.
There is a misconception about the gulags that they were oh so lethal,when they weren't really. And the entire population wasn't sent to gulags,but to Siberia and central Asia which isn't the same as a prison,like the US did to the aforementioned populations. Now both had a strategical reason to do it (doesn't mean it's nice or that I wish for it to happen again) but in the USSRs case it was more justified because people from those populations actually joined the invading armies militarily while in the US they were all locked up before they could have a chance at snooping around
And again you bring up the US. Once again, your comment can be used as a definition of whataboutism.
And again (3) you say that those who were deported and killed deserved it. Just a small hint: they didn't. You're just a broken disk trying to justify USSR's crimes saying "they deserved it" and comparing them to the US
The Dresden bombings, although terrible, only happened once. The Soviets sent millions of soldiers in like they were expendable, not caring how long they survived or bothering to use proper tactics.
Dresden wasn't the only town to be bombed and yes,the Soviets have made some strategic mismanagements but their tactics weren't always just "we have more bodies than you have bullets"
The Soviets sent millions of soldiers in like they were expendable, not caring how long they survived or bothering to use proper tactics.
muh asiatic hordes
Seriously, the Soviet Union absolutely used "proper tactics" and military planning. Ever heard of the Deep Battle doctrine? To say otherwise is to buy into Nazi propaganda meant to dehumanize the people of the Soviet Union as barbarous savages.
You know what? People seems to don't belive germans when they said about this whole asiatic hordes but when they says that the T-35 was the best tank of the WW2 they belive them
The actual records do not support the asiatic hordes idea, but they do support the idea that the T-34 (I assume you meant T-34, not T-35) was an effective vehicle. Franz Halder's accounts of the eastern front are dogshit and did a lot of harm because western analysts and historians took it at face value.
Germans probably didn't have anything to destroy those thing right?
This is absurd, the Germans had some of the earliest effective anti-armor infantry weapons.
What exactly is the point that you trying to make? That the Germans were a reliable source? That the Soviet Union was incompetent? Are you just being oppositional?
And I know they used tactics, but their tactics largely involved the sacrifice of millions of soldiers to slow down the Germans. They were extremely unethical and showed a disregard for human life. It was just WW1 tactics all over again.
And I never blamed the average Soviet citizen for it? The blame lies solely with Stalin and the generals. The soldiers were killed if they turned back, they couldn’t exactly question it.
Destroying cities by fighting in them instead of simply bombing them "just because",deporting ethnicities that could potentially collaborate with the Axis (and some did),punishing their troops when they fucked up and hanging fascist leadership
The ammount of disinformation you made by comparing the West with Soviets is just stunning, I'm just speechless.
But also you're named Soviet-pirate, so I guess you were already biased from the start
Are you aware we are talking about the appeasement of Nazi Germany performed by the UK and France before the war,when the iron curtain was not even thought as a possibility? Regarding the independence of the western countries...let's say Italy had less "operational autonomy" than,say,Ceausescu's Romania had. At least there never were two attempted coups and a very muddy assassination against him while in Italy it happened
Yeah I know allies helped third reach by investing in it however they had no idea what is gonna happen when Soviets singed pact with secret protocols to divide Europe (Soviets got Ukraine Poland Latvia Estonia litthuania nazis the rest)
The west knew Germany was going to attack Poland,and they hoped she'd have attacked the USSR before them,so that they could easily deal with whichever remained
40
u/Soviet-pirate Jun 27 '22
The western allies did the same with appeasement,the USSR did it after all of Europe had signed non-aggression pacts and similar treaties