Tfw no cutie stalinist black gf

And yet they support North Korea, they even had an North Korea Ambassador sing for them

There's nothing wrong with North Korea, Americuck.

Except there is.

Lots.

...

actual arguments would be based on economics, not tour guides

If that tour guide said something like that and it was not true, he would be killed.

Also, if you are going to look at purely its system, then north korea is a fascist state with high emphasis on following the leader, racial purity, traditionalism and totalitarianism.

...

They are not even socialist, so they dont even count towards muh horrillions

it's just a variation on a theme

It makes it look like a fucking religion

Was Stalin shit with the military? He killed 3 of his best marshals out of paranoia.

Entirely justified paranoia - most were tsarists

Besides - his decisions were completely vindicated by the way events unfolded

I seriously think you'd justify anything done by him…

Why do you think purging tsarists from the military of a socialist country before total war is some sort of terrible crime?

I don't.

Then why are you shocked that I'm saying it was justified?

You do understand that the Stalin society's purpose isn't to canonise Stalin - but to provide a strong counternarrative to the lies of Western propagandists?

I remember being 13

Except the Red Army's performance was a catastrophe until Stalingrad and even then the causalities were hilariously high.

Except thats bullshit.

Go on, you gotta have to make some serious mental acrobatics to argue that the Russian war efforts before 1943 are a story of success

Spamming T-34 won the war, fine.

lmao, you cucks like those apes?

Kim Jong-il claimed that the DPRK had abandoned Marxism and Leninism for the Juche Idea in his speech Socialism of Our Country is a Socialism of Our Style as the Embodiment of the Juche Idea.

Not that the cosplay communists who unironically support the DPRK have actually read any of their literature.

...

yeah right, nice try wannabe marxist

Read a book or something. Three main battles of WWII: Moscow, Stalingrad, Kursk.

Hint: Stalingrad is in the middle.

And don't quote Wehrmacht statistics on me as proof.

Meme.

Soviets had a peculiar (read: biased) system for keeping track of tanks. During war even minor damage was enough (for factory) to consider tank destroyed and count repaired tank as newly produced (by the very same factory). Some people got executed after the war was over for messing around with numbers.

the Leninist theory presented in the situation of Russia where capitalism was developed to the secondary grade.
korea-dpr.info/lib/107.pdf

That'sSoCommunistWhoOwnsMoreCommisarUniformsThanBooks.jpg

No you see: that's propaganda. Literally communism. We should look to North Korea and be happy, because they are happy, everybody is happy!

Afterall, socialism is just the state owning property :^)

You obviously are incapable of reading

He isn't saying "we have abandoned marxism-leninism" he's saying "we couldn't accept every tenet of a european system as our society is vastly different - so we adapted the ideology to suit the situation in Korea.

Here's another quote from Kim Jong Il:

"The revolution in each country should be carried out responsibly by its own people, the masters, in an independent manner, and in a creative way suitable to its specific conditions. Independence and creativeness are the inherent requirements of a revolutionary movement, the communist movement."

Except I am supporting an actually existing country with a population of 20 million while you are wanking over theory

What did you expect? Not everyone is forming Vanguard party on frontlines.

He is still revisionist. You know that, right?

Yes - which is no reason not to support their fight against US imperialism. I swear people who won't accept anything other than perfect communism are no better than trots

Most leftists look like this, because most leftists are actual irl people, not memes on Holla Forums why are people surprised to learn this?

how many times must it be said

Well, I'm not suggesting that.

I.e. not suggesting "not supporting".

Are you sure they are ready to give up their chains?

She's pretty cute, too bad she falls for stalinist propaganda

Yes

Shut up

Leaving Zizek in the middle, it's one thing not to agree­ with a particular theory, and another entirely to dismiss it as posturing. "Try to find in all of the work you mentioned some principles from which you can deduce conclusions", Chomsky says. Yet, as much as hiding empty ideas or no ideas at all behind cult status is intellectually dishonest (Bernard-Henri Lévy, the self-imposed leader of the French "new philosophers" of the 70ies is a perfect example.), using this status as an a priori argument to claim an absence of theory is misleading.

Among the accused is Derrida. His concept of "deconstruction" fashioned and/or described the political process at play in France since the 1968 student uprising,which saw the downfall of patriarchal society, and led to a new (brief) era of declericalization. One might indeed wonder whether this concept isn't bound to lead to social nihilism one way or another, but one can't deny it promotes critical thinking and political empowerment. It is this very concept modern-day conservative pseudo-thinkers are raging against, because it's the antonym of identity politics…

Haha the future is going to suck.

qts

HELP HELP AM BEING REPRESSED!

Ok Stalin

And what's your point? Moscow was decided by the weather, Stalingrad can be ascribed to Paulus' idiocy that was based on an even more retarded order of Hitler, and Kursk was attrition warfare - quoting Kursk just reaffirms my argument.

Holy shit, I don't need Nazi propaganda to tell you that a lot of Soviet soldiers died. I mean, just look at Wikipedia for gods sake…

wtf, this doesn't diminish the actual number of tanks on the field.
See, contrary to popular belief the Wehrmacht didn't even have heavy tanks before late 1943. The Wehrmacht was pretty much reliant on horses and lacked sincere motorisation. The T-34 was easy to produce, heavy and at first, the Wehrmacht had no antidote for it. When the OKW realized their mistakes, it was already too late. The Tiger and the Königstiger were juggernauts that could take on ten T-34 alone, but a few shiny toys won't help you turn the tables like that especially after D-Day. Also there was the problem with the fuel.

However, what made the Wehrmacht superior was Führen im Auftrag. The concept of lower ranking officers acting independent and flexible allowed the Wehrmacht to pretty much outfox it's more static enemies. In the trains, the officers would sit and fraternize with the common soldier in the same car.

Meanwhile, the Red Army needed commissars to shot cowards Warhammer 40k style. With the Blitzkrieg idea, the Wehrmacht sliced through Russia like a hot knife through butter. It took severe failures on a strategic level, mismanagement in terms on equipment and basically Hitler being an idiot for the Soviets to outlast the assault, and the Stalin's purge made the last hope of having a proper defense vs Barbarossa go south.

Much of what you wrote reads like it came from a pop online journalist rather than grounded on reliable sources and analysis.

Hitler was not as incompetent as many think. The early successes resulted after Hitler quarreled with his command staff and often going against the grain of their recommendations. In almost every major decision of the war (including the horribly fated Kiev maneuver) he was motivated by understandable geopolitical interests, of which he had a better picture than his generals. Before chewing apart a-posteriori the effects of every decision he has made, ask yourself this question, dear user, in each of these situations, facing the same political considerations, would you have done better than Uncle Adolf?

The predominance of Russian armament manufacturing has nothing to do with the their equipment behind supposedly cheaper to produce, rather the inability of the Germans to adequately optimize mass production and use the necessary labor force. In the field of armament production the SU was more superior, better organized, more productive.

For a greater illustration of this point see here:
feldgrau.com/econo.html

Thirdly the role of "zagrad-otryads" (no doubt a stupid measure at a desperate time) was greatly overstated by some western journalists seeking to capitalize on the exotic nature of alleged Bolshevik brutality. But in reality this measure quickly proved itself unwarranted. The reason being is that it's simply ineffective. Shooting your own soldiers is going to cause you troops to run the other way, but usually to surrender. Much more potent in that regard was the role of NKVD in apprehending 187 000 people throughout the course of the war on charges of retreating without orders and of these only several thousand were put to death. The overwhelming majority were either promptly returned to the front formations or put into straf-bats. Some journalists later conflated the role of the two to create the myth that Soviet soldiers only went to the fight because there was a machine gun squad pointing at their back. Ironically the Germans also took up the policy of "executing fleeing troops" at the end of the war.

The Blitzkrieg was not a formal military theory, but rather a natural evolution of linear warfare. Mobile armored formations enable military operations be carried into the depth as opposed to just the breadth of a front. This concept was first expounded by Soviet theorists such as Triandaffilov and Isserson. Sadly the Purges prevented its adoption, but German military thinkers definitely caught wind, developing a similar doctrine based on penetration along a single focal point. The course of the war compelled the Soviets to dig up and reexamine this method of waging war, and its successful reintegration enabled the victories in Stalingrad, Kursk, Ukraine and elsewhere. Like you mentioned, the Soviet Union was inferior when it came to lower tactics level leadership, but unlike the Germans, they successfully managed to integrate the use of mobile formations in form of operable military doctrine. It was the correct deployment, logistical supply and execution of armored operations along a wide front, rather than just raw numbers, as most people are led to believe by post war anti-communist narratives, that was the deciding factor in SU victory.

I would not deny certain grizzly facts about the post victory Soviet presence in Europe such as tendency of Sov troops to LARP Taimanin Asagi in every German town they occupied. кто воевал имеет право, blt

Except that's exactly what he said, albeit in a way that makes it sound like it's just adjusting the theories for North Korean conditions
That's what he's trying to make it sound like, but it is, in fact, total abandonment, not mere adjustment for Korean conditions. Juche, for instance, rejects historical materialism for a "man-centered ideology". The rejection of historical materialism isn't some sort of adjustment for Korean conditions, it's a radical abandonment of the theory.

Full contrarianism.

Good to see that you're still helping us look good with this shit, commie.

...

Damn what a cutie. Especially with the mustache.

...

I guess you also think that Charles XII and Napoleon got defeated by winter as well.

You really need to educate yourself: Moscow was decided by Soviet administration. They've managed to create and field a whole new army within two months. And then they've made third. If anything (out of all the factors) was the crucial factor that decided the outcome of Moscow (and WWII), it was this. Well, that and Soviet ability to say "fuck it, we will fight anyway" (i'm looking at you, Poland, France, … and UK).

If anything should be ascribed to idiocy, it should be this sentence.

By the time Stalingrad happened Reich was basically defeated (yes, mid-42 it was effectively over). Hitler refused to accept it and attempted the only thing that could've helped (except immediately surrendering): get all the troops and throw them all at the most important point of Soviet infrastructure.

This wasn't dumb, it was desperate. Germans didn't have any other options at this point.

What argument? Kursk was after Stalingrad, you lunatic. I was simply informing you about the basics.

And what kind of attrition are you even talking? Over a third of Soviet economy was out of the picture during the first half of war. How the hell do you expect to wage war of attrition in those conditions?

Try stabbing yourself in the stomach and then wage "war of attrition".

Ye-ah… About that… You are aware that Wikipedia does not actually conduct any actual research? There is no University of Wikipedia or anything like that. You know that, right?

How does that correlate with this?

I'm actually getting a headache right now. I didn't even need to read further to know that I don't have anything sane coming.

This is trolling, right? I don't even want to drag in here ~700 thousand Mongolian horses in Soviet Army.

Compared to what? It's a fucking tank. It needs over 3000 details to function. Half of the Soviet factories are either getting bombed (Stalingrad's tank factory at some point was within hundreds of meters from frontline: "okay, comrade. Tank is finished. Drive it down the street and shoot some Germans"), getting relocated to Urals, or lost to Germans.

Not to mention T-34 circa 1941 was still a prototype, not even properly mass-produced (only ~1000 were made by the time war started), nor outfitted with all the necessary tech (no radios, for example).

Even by the end of 1942 (as per Aberdeen report in 1943) it was a clusterfuck. US specialists thought Soviets were messing with them and sent deliberately broken machine. Tank was considered non-operational.

tl;dr (in WH40k terms you are familiar with): Ork tek. Useable only by Soviet Army (a lot of conscripted engineers on the frontlines to keep things working).

Is this a joke?

Compared to what? Poland? Or France?

I'm not even going to touch your belief that Germans invented Blitzkrieg idea.

Are you channelling Ayn Rand here?