• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Who was the best leader during WWII?

Who was the best actor in WWII?

  • Churchill

    Votes: 46 50.5%

  • Hirohito

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Hitler

    Votes: 4 4.4%

  • Mussolini

    Votes: 1 1.1%

  • Roosevelt

    Votes: 33 36.3%

  • Stalin

    Votes: 7 7.7%
  • Total voters
    91
Re: The second death of a nation

My vote has to go to Churchill.
 
Re: The second death of a nation

Soopairik said:
My vote has to go to Churchill.
Click to expand...

Thanx for trying to get us back on track,
Any explanation on why you chose Churchill?
 
B'smith said:
Stalin's forces were posed in OFFENSIVE positions, that's why Germany's outnumbered & outgunned military was able to overrun them.
Click to expand...

No, they weren't. In fact Soviet records and archives clearly show that the Soviets poured lots of resources into defense and fortifications along the border.

And that's not why Germany overran the Red Army so easily. The very idea of Soviet forces conducting any major offensive in 1941 is ludicrous. The Red Army was undergoing massive renovations and changes to doctrine, equipment, and training. That's why the Germans drove so deep, because of the incredibly poor state of the USSR.
 
Re: The second death of a nation

Quag said:
Thanx for trying to get us back on track,
Any explanation on why you chose Churchill?
Click to expand...

I just like how he refused to surrender even when a bunch of cities were getting demolished by the Germans. And Stalin would be a second choice for me, since he also refused to surrender, though on human rights, he was more cruel.
 
V for victory

Soopairik said:
I just like how he refused to surrender even when a bunch of cities were getting demolished by the Germans. And Stalin would be a second choice for me, since he also refused to surrender, though on human rights, he was more cruel.
Click to expand...

I've looked, but I don't find any British cities destroyed by the Germans in WWII. Could you list a few?
 
Jredbaron96 said:
No, they weren't. In fact Soviet records and archives clearly show that the Soviets poured lots of resources into defense and fortifications along the border.

And that's not why Germany overran the Red Army so easily. The very idea of Soviet forces conducting any major offensive in 1941 is ludicrous. The Red Army was undergoing massive renovations and changes to doctrine, equipment, and training. That's why the Germans drove so deep, because of the incredibly poor state of the USSR.
Click to expand...

One of the many historians who has reviewed more recent documents refutes your unsupported & outdated opinion:


"Exposing Stalin’s Plan to Conquer Europe:…"
https://www.counter-currents.com/201...onquer-europe/
https://www.counter-currents.com/2011/04/exposing-stalins-plan-to-conquer-europe/

EXCERPT "In Icebreaker, Suvorov details the deployment of Soviet forces in June 1941, describing just how Stalin amassed vast numbers of troops and stores of weapons along the European frontier, not to defend the Soviet homeland but in preparation for a westward attack and decisive battles on enemy territory.

Thus, when German forces struck, the bulk of Red ground and air forces were concentrated along the Soviet western borders facing contiguous European countries, especially the German Reich and Romania, in final readiness for an assault on Europe.

In his second book on the origins of the war, “M Day” (for “Mobilization Day”), Suvorov details how, between late 1939 and the summer of 1941, Stalin methodically and systematically built up the best armed, most powerful military force in the world — actually the world’s first superpower — for his planned conquest of Europe. Suvorov explains how Stalin’s drastic conversion of the country’s economy for war actually made war inevitable.

Stalin instead wanted the Soviet regime to take advantage of occasional “armistices” in the global struggle to consolidate Red military strength for the right moment when larger and better armed Soviet forces would strike into central and western Europe, adding new Soviet republics as this overwhelming force rolled across the continent."CONTINUED


AND


"Soviet offensive plans controversy"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_offensive_plans_controversy

EXCERPT "In the 1980s Vladimir Rezun, a former officer of the Soviet military intelligence and a defector to the UK, reiterated and explored this claim in his 1987 book Icebreaker: Who Started the Second World War (written using the pseudonym Viktor Suvorov),[4] and in several subsequent books. He argued that Soviet ground-forces were extremely well organized, and were mobilizing en masse along the German-Soviet frontier for a Soviet invasion of Europe slated for Sunday, July 6, 1941, but they were totally unprepared for defensive operations on their own territory."CONTINUED
 
B'smith said:
One of the many historians who has reviewed more recent documents refutes your unsupported & outdated opinion:


"Exposing Stalin’s Plan to Conquer Europe:…"
https://www.counter-currents.com/201...onquer-europe/
https://www.counter-currents.com/2011/04/exposing-stalins-plan-to-conquer-europe/

EXCERPT "In Icebreaker, Suvorov details the deployment of Soviet forces in June 1941, describing just how Stalin amassed vast numbers of troops and stores of weapons along the European frontier, not to defend the Soviet homeland but in preparation for a westward attack and decisive battles on enemy territory.

Thus, when German forces struck, the bulk of Red ground and air forces were concentrated along the Soviet western borders facing contiguous European countries, especially the German Reich and Romania, in final readiness for an assault on Europe.

In his second book on the origins of the war, “M Day” (for “Mobilization Day”), Suvorov details how, between late 1939 and the summer of 1941, Stalin methodically and systematically built up the best armed, most powerful military force in the world — actually the world’s first superpower — for his planned conquest of Europe. Suvorov explains how Stalin’s drastic conversion of the country’s economy for war actually made war inevitable.

Stalin instead wanted the Soviet regime to take advantage of occasional “armistices” in the global struggle to consolidate Red military strength for the right moment when larger and better armed Soviet forces would strike into central and western Europe, adding new Soviet republics as this overwhelming force rolled across the continent."CONTINUED


AND


"Soviet offensive plans controversy"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_offensive_plans_controversy

EXCERPT "In the 1980s Vladimir Rezun, a former officer of the Soviet military intelligence and a defector to the UK, reiterated and explored this claim in his 1987 book Icebreaker: Who Started the Second World War (written using the pseudonym Viktor Suvorov),[4] and in several subsequent books. He argued that Soviet ground-forces were extremely well organized, and were mobilizing en masse along the German-Soviet frontier for a Soviet invasion of Europe slated for Sunday, July 6, 1941, but they were totally unprepared for defensive operations on their own territory."CONTINUED
Click to expand...

You repeating the same claims by the same sketchy sources does not give them any more credibility no matter how many times you repeat yourself.

If Stalin had really built up "the world's first superpower" in 1941 your heroes in the Wehrmacht would have been utterly annihalted when Barbarossa launched. Instead, they achieved success because the Red Army was in no shape to strike and wouldn't have been for several more years.

Another pathetic attempt to justify Nazi aggression.
 
Tigerace117 said:
You repeating the same claims by the same sketchy sources does not give them any more credibility no matter how many times you repeat yourself.

If Stalin had really built up "the world's first superpower" in 1941 your heroes in the Wehrmacht would have been utterly annihalted when Barbarossa launched. Instead, they achieved success because the Red Army was in no shape to strike and wouldn't have been for several more years.

Another pathetic attempt to justify Nazi aggression.
Click to expand...

You neither knowledge nor sources to support your contentions.

Meanwhile, I'm tired of your puerile, dishonest & insulting Posts so welcome to my Ignore List
 
B'smith said:
One of the many historians who has reviewed more recent documents refutes your unsupported & outdated opinion:


"Exposing Stalin’s Plan to Conquer Europe:…"
https://www.counter-currents.com/201...onquer-europe/
https://www.counter-currents.com/2011/04/exposing-stalins-plan-to-conquer-europe/

EXCERPT "In Icebreaker, Suvorov details the deployment of Soviet forces in June 1941, describing just how Stalin amassed vast numbers of troops and stores of weapons along the European frontier, not to defend the Soviet homeland but in preparation for a westward attack and decisive battles on enemy territory.

Thus, when German forces struck, the bulk of Red ground and air forces were concentrated along the Soviet western borders facing contiguous European countries, especially the German Reich and Romania, in final readiness for an assault on Europe.

In his second book on the origins of the war, “M Day” (for “Mobilization Day”), Suvorov details how, between late 1939 and the summer of 1941, Stalin methodically and systematically built up the best armed, most powerful military force in the world — actually the world’s first superpower — for his planned conquest of Europe. Suvorov explains how Stalin’s drastic conversion of the country’s economy for war actually made war inevitable.

Stalin instead wanted the Soviet regime to take advantage of occasional “armistices” in the global struggle to consolidate Red military strength for the right moment when larger and better armed Soviet forces would strike into central and western Europe, adding new Soviet republics as this overwhelming force rolled across the continent."CONTINUED


AND


"Soviet offensive plans controversy"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_offensive_plans_controversy

EXCERPT "In the 1980s Vladimir Rezun, a former officer of the Soviet military intelligence and a defector to the UK, reiterated and explored this claim in his 1987 book Icebreaker: Who Started the Second World War (written using the pseudonym Viktor Suvorov),[4] and in several subsequent books. He argued that Soviet ground-forces were extremely well organized, and were mobilizing en masse along the German-Soviet frontier for a Soviet invasion of Europe slated for Sunday, July 6, 1941, but they were totally unprepared for defensive operations on their own territory."CONTINUED
Click to expand...

Regurgitating Book Review.... Originally published in the Journal of Historical Review 17, no. 4 (July–August 1998), 30–37. Online source: Suvorov's 'The Last Republic' (Review) Journal of Historical Review = The Journal of Historical Review is a non–peer reviewed journal published by the Institute for Historical Review in Torrance, California.

The journal was founded by the neo-Nazi Willis Carto.[1] Its subject is primarily Holocaust denial.[2][3][4] Its critics, including the Anti-Defamation League, the Danish Center for Holocaust and Genocide studies, and other scholars, such as Robert Hanyok, a National Security Agency historian
 
B'smith said:
You neither knowledge nor sources to support your contentions.

Meanwhile, I'm tired of your puerile, dishonest & insulting Posts so welcome to my Ignore List
Click to expand...

You really don't like people disagreeing with your nonsense...

Post #345 I addressed inaccuracies and nonsense written by Suvarov.

And you ran.
 
B'smith said:
You neither knowledge nor sources to support your contentions.

Meanwhile, I'm tired of your puerile, dishonest & insulting Posts so welcome to my Ignore List
Click to expand...

You continually source disreputable and indeed often outright Neo Nazi writers and expect anyone to take your word seriously on what's "ignorant". Highly amusing.
 
Jredbaron96 said:
No, they weren't. In fact Soviet records and archives clearly show that the Soviets poured lots of resources into defense and fortifications along the border.

And that's not why Germany overran the Red Army so easily. The very idea of Soviet forces conducting any major offensive in 1941 is ludicrous. The Red Army was undergoing massive renovations and changes to doctrine, equipment, and training. That's why the Germans drove so deep, because of the incredibly poor state of the USSR.
Click to expand...

Careful. You will end up on his "Ignore" list.
 
B'smith said:
One of the many historians who has reviewed more recent documents refutes your unsupported & outdated opinion:
Click to expand...

Ha ha.



EXCERPT "In Icebreaker, Suvorov details the deployment of Soviet forces in June 1941, describing just how Stalin amassed vast numbers of troops and stores of weapons along the European frontier, not to defend the Soviet homeland but in preparation for a westward attack and decisive battles on enemy territory.

Thus, when German forces struck, the bulk of Red ground and air forces were concentrated along the Soviet western borders facing contiguous European countries, especially the German Reich and Romania, in final readiness for an assault on Europe.

In his second book on the origins of the war, “M Day” (for “Mobilization Day”), Suvorov details how, between late 1939 and the summer of 1941, Stalin methodically and systematically built up the best armed, most powerful military force in the world — actually the world’s first superpower — for his planned conquest of Europe. Suvorov explains how Stalin’s drastic conversion of the country’s economy for war actually made war inevitable.
Click to expand...


Except Suvorov's "evidence" is all circumstantial with no actual concrete indications the Soviets planned to attack.

His biggest arguments for his case are that the Soviets built up a military for offensive operations and that Stalin wanted to invade Europe as soon as possible.

This arguments falls apart rather quickly though. Suvorov argued that the large number of tanks, aircraft, forward air fields and formation of paratrooper units meant that Stalin intended to attack. This makes no sense.

By the Soviets own admission, the majority of their tanks and aircraft at the onset of hostilities were obsolete. Of the 23,000 tanks the Red Army possessed, less than 15,000 were actually ready for combat due to poor maintenance and upkeep. The vast majority of Soviet tanks were also obsolete light tanks and tankettes, with modern T-34s and KV-1s being in short supply. The bulk of the VVS were slow and obsolete aircraft that were annihilated on the ground by the Luftwaffe. Soviet airfields were built close to the border because the Soviets at the time couldn't handle the logistical strain of supplying fuel to both their distant airfield and forward mechanized units. Most Soviet aircraft also had a relatively short range necessitating short distances for sorties.

The Red Army's own records clearly show they were short of trained technicians and radio operators, which crippled their ability to organize large mechanized forces. And lastly, most of the Soviet airborne formations were poorly trained and equipped. They weren't at all suited to any kind of operations, be they offensive or defensive.
 
Re: V for victory

southwest88 said:
Originally Posted by southwest88
I've looked, but I don't find any British cities destroyed by the Germans in WWII. Could you list a few?



OK, thanks for the link. London, Liverpool & Birmingham were not destroyed, though. Did you mean damaged, rather than destroyed?
Click to expand...

Yes, that's what I meant.
 
Re: The second death of a nation

Sweet dark skinned baby Jesus, what in the ****??? There is someone here actually making Germany out to be the victim of World War II??? Why do I get the feeling a certain poster in this thread has the following in his bedroom:
* Authentic SS uniform
*9mm Luger (purchased at a Strormfront "members only" concert and swap meet)
*Kar 98 rifle (purchased at a gun show in Muskogee OK)
*Various Nazi military flags
*Hitler Youth Knife
*Well read, slightly worn out copy of Mein Kampf
*Well read, slightly worn out copy of The Turner Diaries
*Various models of WW2 German tanks and planes all over the place, planes hanging from the ceiling
*Spinning Swastika screen saver

Not naming names...juuuuuuust sayin.
 
Jredbaron96 said:
Ha ha.






Except Suvorov's "evidence" is all circumstantial with no actual concrete indications the Soviets planned to attack.

His biggest arguments for his case are that the Soviets built up a military for offensive operations and that Stalin wanted to invade Europe as soon as possible.

This arguments falls apart rather quickly though. Suvorov argued that the large number of tanks, aircraft, forward air fields and formation of paratrooper units meant that Stalin intended to attack. This makes no sense.

By the Soviets own admission, the majority of their tanks and aircraft at the onset of hostilities were obsolete. Of the 23,000 tanks the Red Army possessed, less than 15,000 were actually ready for combat due to poor maintenance and upkeep. The vast majority of Soviet tanks were also obsolete light tanks and tankettes, with modern T-34s and KV-1s being in short supply. The bulk of the VVS were slow and obsolete aircraft that were annihilated on the ground by the Luftwaffe. Soviet airfields were built close to the border because the Soviets at the time couldn't handle the logistical strain of supplying fuel to both their distant airfield and forward mechanized units. Most Soviet aircraft also had a relatively short range necessitating short distances for sorties.

The Red Army's own records clearly show they were short of trained technicians and radio operators, which crippled their ability to organize large mechanized forces. And lastly, most of the Soviet airborne formations were poorly trained and equipped. They weren't at all suited to any kind of operations, be they offensive or defensive.
Click to expand...


Stalin was already expanding Westward and was a strong adherent of expansionist Leninist-Maxist doctrine. The existence of Soviet Paratrooper units alone supports the fact that Stalin was preparing to expand Westward.
I was in a paratrooper unit & know them to be useful only in Offensive operations. For what do you think Stalin's paratrooper units were stationed on their Western front. To drop Soviet paratroopers behind Soviet lines?

I've cited sources to support my contentions, would you please do the same.
 
Re: The second death of a nation

Lerxst said:
Sweet dark skinned baby Jesus, what in the ****??? There is someone here actually making Germany out to be the victim of World War II??? Why do I get the feeling a certain poster in this thread has the following in his bedroom:
* Authentic SS uniform
*9mm Luger (purchased at a Strormfront "members only" concert and swap meet)
*Kar 98 rifle (purchased at a gun show in Muskogee OK)
*Various Nazi military flags
*Hitler Youth Knife
*Well read, slightly worn out copy of Mein Kampf
*Well read, slightly worn out copy of The Turner Diaries
*Various models of WW2 German tanks and planes all over the place, planes hanging from the ceiling
*Spinning Swastika screen saver

Not naming names...juuuuuuust sayin.
Click to expand...

Damned revisionist history, always blaming the victim. "Hitler was a peace loving guy who only wanted what was best for Germany. Stalin, Churchill, FDR and all those dead Jews were the real culprits."

Amazing, isn't it?
 
B'smith said:
Stalin was already expanding Westward and was a strong adherent of expansionist Leninist-Maxist doctrine. The existence of Soviet Paratrooper units alone supports the fact that Stalin was preparing to expand Westward.
I was in a paratrooper unit & know them to be useful only in Offensive operations. For what do you think Stalin's paratrooper units were stationed on their Western front. To drop Soviet paratroopers behind Soviet lines?

I've cited sources to support my contentions, would you please do the same.
Click to expand...

Hitler was really saving the West from Russian aggression :roll:
 
B'smith said:
Stalin was already expanding Westward and was a strong adherent of expansionist Leninist-Maxist doctrine. The existence of Soviet Paratrooper units alone supports the fact that Stalin was preparing to expand Westward.
I was in a paratrooper unit & know them to be useful only in Offensive operations. For what do you think Stalin's paratrooper units were stationed on their Western front. To drop Soviet paratroopers behind Soviet lines?

I've cited sources to support my contentions, would you please do the same.
Click to expand...

You realize you just argued that Hitler was preparing for offensive operations long before HE started WW2 as the Germans had Fallschirmjäger units by 1936
 
B'smith said:
The existence of Soviet Paratrooper units alone supports the fact that Stalin was preparing to expand Westward.
Click to expand...

No, they don't.

I was in a paratrooper unit & know them to be useful only in Offensive operations.
Click to expand...

Oh really? What unit, what time?

For what do you think Stalin's paratrooper units were stationed on their Western front. To drop Soviet paratroopers behind Soviet lines?
Click to expand...

Maybe the expansionist, fascist power on their border might've been slightly concerning.


I've cited sources to support my contentions, would you please do the same.
Click to expand...

Historian Alexei Isayev, Pariahs, Partners, Predators: German-Soviet Relations, 1922-1941. Derek Watson, Teddy J. Uldricks, Roger Reese, and Robin Edmonds, just to name a few.
 
Fledermaus said:
Indeed.... He also does not take into account the fact airborne units can be air lifted to distant places.... And Russia is a HUGE country.
Click to expand...

A huge country at war with their own leadership. In fact, Stalin's regime may very well have collapsed had not Hitler galvanized them.
 
Fledermaus said:
Indeed.... He also does not take into account the fact airborne units can be air lifted to distant places.... And Russia is a HUGE country.
Click to expand...

Bah Russia had railways and stuff, besides most of it was empty wasteland why would a smart and wonderful guy like Hitler want a bunch of frozen wasteland?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom