re: Greater Evil, Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia

quote:

---

Communism may have killed more people, but I don’t think there is anything more evil than systematically committing genocide against an ethnic group in an attempt to wipe them off the planet.

---

So if you had 2 serial killers and one killed twice as many,
But the other was ruthlessly efficient, he’s somehow worse?

quote:

---

Pulitzer

---

How his bullshite prize ever became to be revered, is still a mystery to me. Yellow bellied and fear mongering in his heyday. Dafuq.

Millions of deaths were a byproduct of the Soviets' failure to achieve communism.
Genocide was Hitlers' regime succeeding in its plan.

BOTH involved authoritarian regimes; so they both needed to go. Our forefathers took care of the NAZIS decisively. The USSR had to be bleed out more slowly, but they gone!

The Axis were foolish, rushed into starting too many fights, too quickly and got their shite ruined, promptly. The Soviets were fortunate enough to be geographically/situationaly more difficult to deal with militarily than the 3rd Reich was at the time.

So, due to military circumstances, the USSR was in too strong a position militarily to gain the needed political will necessarily to confront them in the 1950's or 60's. By then, they had nukes.

My assessment: extremist regimes (nationalists, communists, theocracy) are all shitholes, and enemies of democracy and humanity. The Soviets were in a superior position (to the Axis powers) from the get-go, so they survived long enough to be the greater threat over the long haul. The fact they call themselves a communist revolution, an inbread dynastic empire, or Rodinja's Slavic Nation or an Orthodox Christian Theocracy is completely irrelevant.

Needless to say, I much prefer the governments in Berlin and Moscow now.

quote:

---

greater evil to world peace and prosperity compared to Soviet Russia?

---

What does this mean? Which was more evil or more of a threat to world peace?

quote:

---

they have to be mutually exclusive

---

No...wasnt trying to be rude.. I honestly don't know what evil to world peace means. I guess the Soviets were more of threat because they had the power to end human civilization. But on the other hand they had leaders that were not insane enough to use it..not even in a limited capacity. If Hitler had developed atomic weapons first or if we had ended up in a nuclear stand off with them instead of the Soviets we would probably be back in the stone age right now.

For long-term effects and body count, I would say the Soviet Union and Red China. The reason Nazi Germany shocks people is how they were able to their dirtiest deeds in a very short span of time, and in a mechanical, efficient manner in the heart of what was supposedly the most civilized continent on the planet, whereas the Commies went for long-term consistency.

It's like comparing the careers of Sandy Koufax and Nolan Ryan.

quote:

---

Not really. While they absolutely got slaughtered in December 1939 due to overconfidence, they eventually wised up and crushed the Finnish army in February and March 1940. They only took small chunks from Finland because Stalin was afraid occupying the whole country would lead to Britain and France declaring war on the Soviet Union - and he didn't want that.

---

Bullsheeeit. Britain was too overwhelmed by Germany to give a shite about Finland. Germany, on the other hand, had more interest in Finland because of natural resources. What was the German to Soviet death rate again in 1942? That is the real representation of Soviet incompetence, bud.

Edit in case anyone brings up Finland's uranium resources, in 1939, developing "the bomb" was pure speculation and theoretical. It took huge amounts of resources to bring that to reality, not something that was a priority in 1939.

In the end the soviets slaughtered 25+ million of their own

And caused their own issues, not just in ideology, but for the generations to come.

Patton

quote:

---

What general was it that said we fought the wrong enemy?

---