Communism. Good or bad. What do you really know about Communism?

[Estreeter]

Originally Posted by scoundrel

You'd be more likely to eat the book than read it in there.

Resulting in Diarrhoea

[SanteeFats]

Hey there is nothing wrong with Commienism!! The guys on top like it just fine. Ask Stalin, Putin, Mao etc.

[bowlinggreen]

Originally Posted by SanteeFats

Hey there is nothing wrong with Commienism!! The guys on top like it just fine. Ask Stalin, Putin, Mao etc.

I wonder, if we let xyzde69 be on top and work his evil ways on society, would he ban porn as a counter-revolutionary influence?

[Roubignol]

Originally Posted by bowlinggreen

I read some of it a long time ago. It struck me as the sort of work that could suck you in if you "wanted to believe", sort of like the bible.

Not exactly... what you read was Milton Friedman's breviary.
That's your Bible, but that's not exactly the same concepts.

Originally Posted by otokonomidori

Who the f*ck bought it I wonder?

I had to read bits of it it at university and it certainly didn't strike me as something that could be turned into a massive Hollywood blockbuster.

Which chapters?

Originally Posted by Estreeter

I'd read this version

Did you understand this version?

Originally Posted by scoundrel

Plenty to do in a gulag. All that salt doesn't just dig itself.

That's fun, because Occidental Capitalist historians never get any reliable sources during that time (and even after that). So they extrapolated thanks to Soljenitsyn or obscure American historians.

But when Soljenitsyn wrote his last book about how the Jews were in the top of the Soviet leadership and contributed to execute or "starve" (a fact that is still not agreed by several historians) millions of Russians, suddenly, in the USA, he became... an antisemitic writter.

Capitalist masters are easely manipulating their stooges.

Originally Posted by scoundrel

You'd be more likely to eat the book than read it in there.

For sure... You are a nationalist.
I remember to have read your theories about "dying for the nation, giving everything for the nation, blah blah blah."

Nationalists hate Marxism, because they surf on the human divisions.

Originally Posted by SanteeFats

Hey there is nothing wrong with Commienism!! The guys on top like it just fine. Ask Stalin, Putin, Mao etc.

None of them used two nuclear bombs on women and children.
What you know about them, it's through your Capitalist propaganda newspapers or TV channels owned by billionaires.

What we know about Roosevelt and Truman was filmed and justified by the same propaganda as "the only way to find a peaceful solution".

[SanteeFats]

Originally Posted by xyzde69

Nationalists hate Marxism, because they surf on the human divisions.

None of them used two nuclear bombs on women and children.
What you know about them, it's through your Capitalist propaganda newspapers or TV channels owned by billionaires.

What we know about Roosevelt and Truman was filmed and justified by the same propaganda as "the only way to find a peaceful solution".

So the Rape of Nanking, the horrible mistreatment and murders of captives, etc. read this if you want;
http://www.pacificwar.org.au/JapWarC...WarCrimes.html



then there is this info ;


The war crimes involved the Imperial Japanese Army and the Imperial Japanese Navy under Emperor Hirohito and were responsible for the deaths of millions. Historical estimates of the number of deaths ranges between 3 and 14 million civilians and prisoners of war through massacre, human experimentation, starvation, and forced labor that was either directly perpetrated or condoned by the Japanese military and government.[4][5][6][7][8] Some Japanese soldiers have admitted to committing these crimes.[9] Airmen of the Imperial Japanese Army Air Service and Imperial Japanese Navy Air Service were not included as war criminals because there was no positive or specific customary international humanitarian law that prohibited the unlawful conduct of aerial warfare either before or during World War II. The Imperial Japanese Army Air Service took part in conducting chemical and biological attacks on enemy nationals during the Second Sino-Japanese War and World War II and the use of such weapons in warfare were generally prohibited by international agreements signed by Japan, including the Hague Conventions (1899 and 1907), which banned the use of "poison or poisoned weapons" in warfare.[10][11]



So the US was immoral for dropping two nukes to save approximately one million US causalities???

[Wendigo]

The Japanese for their countless vile atrocities brought disaster on themselves, I have no issue at all with the USA having chosen Japan as the target for the first atomic bombs, it quickened the end of the war.

You may want to bleat about capitalists having used the bombs first but be under no doubt if the USSR had those weapons at that time that Uncle Joe would have used them if pressed.

It's a sign of the restraint by all nuclear nations that despite all the brinkmanship and talk of the doomsday clock that no side has chosen to use nuclear weapons in anger since August 1945.

[bjcb0]

So the US was immoral for dropping two nukes to save approximately one million US causalities???

The number of casualties incurred by an invasion would have been vast: the projected allied invasion force was for 5 million US troops, together with smaller, but non-negligible, contributions from the British Commonwealth, dwarfing the Normandy landings. The Japanese death toll would have been enormous too.

[Arturo2nd]

Originally Posted by Wendigo

The Japanese for their countless vile atrocities brought disaster on themselves, I have no issue at all with the USA having chosen Japan as the target for the first atomic bombs, it quickened the end of the war.

You may want to bleat about capitalists having used the bombs first but be under no doubt if the USSR had those weapons at that time that Uncle Joe would have used them if pressed.

It's a sign of the restraint by all nuclear nations that despite all the brinkmanship and talk of the doomsday clock that no side has chosen to use nuclear weapons in anger since August 1945.

My high school history teacher was of German descent. While we were studying World War II he noted that the Germans, British and U.S. were all working to develop nuclear weapons during the war. He noted, "It was a good thing the European war ended when it did and that the Americans developed the bomb first. Otherwise, while they were all good little German girls and boys, they might have done something rash."

[weilercort]

Originally Posted by bowlinggreen

^ This appears to be the prevailing theory.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...Black-Sea.html

All blue-eyes everywhere owe it to one long-ago person. Fascinating.

Whoever it was, they must have fucked a lot.

Near the Black Sea? Hmm, reminds me of Clan of the Cave Bear, especially the movie version with Daryl Hannah. Daryl Hannah has blue eyes so....

[Estreeter]

Originally Posted by Wendigo

The Japanese for their countless vile atrocities brought disaster on themselves

Mate Why bother stating facts I mean you to should be defending the aggressor

This is what I mean by the soft left, and maybe a psychological thing they use

Originally Posted by xyzde69

None of them used two nuclear bombs on women and children.

See, he fails to mention Males, by only stating women and kids kind of adds to the horror,
Had he just said men it wouldn't seem quite as bad a thing it was.