The JEWS killed Stalin and Destroyed the Soviet Union

[That NOS Guy]

Ironically, I was reading the Fifty Year War last night and Norman Friedman makes a good case for Leninism-Stalinism being about spreading the world revolution -- it's just that Stalin really miscalculated badly -- which does explain his absence for nearly a month in the summer of 1941.

Lenin yes, Stalin no. Stalin cynically abandoned communist movements when he saw fit, dissolved COMINTERN in 1943, purged the crap out of it in the 30s, supported "building socialism in one state", etc. Any rhetoric about world revolution used by Stalin was exactly that, empty words.

[Pelranius]

Stalin was willing to prop up some of the movements like the Chinese Communists and sundry groups in Xinjiang, but the help he gave them was often half baked at best.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Stalin was willing to prop up some of the movements like the Chinese Communists and sundry groups in Xinjiang, but the help he gave them was often half baked at best.

The thesis that Shep is referring to is that the massive military industrialization of the USSR under Stalin was to facilitate the conquest of Europe, and that Stalin only first bared his fangs in the Spanish Civil War. A new Five Year Plan was then prepared to incorporate the lessons of that war into the military buildup which would see the drive west begin in 1943 - 1944.

[Adrian Laguna]

The thesis that Shep is referring to is that the massive military industrialization of the USSR under Stalin was to facilitate the conquest of Europe, and that Stalin only first bared his fangs in the Spanish Civil War. A new Five Year Plan was then prepared to incorporate the lessons of that war into the military buildup which would see the drive west begin in 1943 - 1944.

I don't think Stalin's actions are consistent with such a hypothesis. It seems more reasonable that he was building up simply to ensure the Soviet Union's, and by extension his, security and prosperity. His catatonic reaction to Barbarosa can be explained as a failure to deal with a situation he had not expected and was totally unprepared for. Joe Hooker had the same problem in Chancellorsville, his telegraph machine failed, stiff winds brought down his observation balloon, and deprived of information he was expecting to have, the man lost his nerve.

[TC Pilot]

His catatonic reaction to Barbarosa can be explained as a failure to deal with a situation he had not expected and was totally unprepared for.

It's worth noting that Stalin's supposed dissapearance at the start of Barbarossa is a myth, which Stas has pointed out on several occassions by making reference to Stalin's secretary's notes, or somesuch.

Joe Hooker had the same problem in Chancellorsville, his telegraph machine failed, stiff winds brought down his observation balloon, and deprived of information he was expecting to have, the man lost his nerve.

That's not really the same thing. Stalin had more than enough notice that Barbarossa was coming, he just refused to act on the information he had.

[K. A. Pital]

Stalin had more than enough notice that Barbarossa was coming

With false dates ranging from January to late May, however. By the time June arrived, Stalin and the USSR had discovered lots of false invasion dates. The German desinformation was ultimately extremely successful.

The thesis that Shep is referring to is that the massive military industrialization of the USSR under Stalin was to facilitate the conquest of Europe

Which is for the most part false, because the USSR's industrialization of an overall weak agrarian economy did not allow for such grandiose feats even in Stalin's most wildest dreams; most of it was directed at internal militarization as well as defending against external threats which were considered possible (and many were indeed real). Basically, that's like saying the DPRK is ultra-militarized because it wants to put it's army to use and conquer the world. But the reality is that it doesn't, the Army is needed for internal reasons - to maintain a permanent mobilization economy, control and political objectives. Ultra-militarization often has other explanations than the simple "WAR". Or that Israel wants to conquer directly the entire Middle East because it's also a war economy. The reality is that it doesn't, it just protects from all possible large-scale attacks by maintaining a war economy. That may be paranoid, but it's hardly signifying an ability to conquer everyone.

[That NOS Guy]

The thesis that Shep is referring to is that the massive military industrialization of the USSR under Stalin was to facilitate the conquest of Europe, and that Stalin only first bared his fangs in the Spanish Civil War. A new Five Year Plan was then prepared to incorporate the lessons of that war into the military buildup which would see the drive west begin in 1943 - 1944.

I find that thesis ultimately quite funny. Stalin's programme of industrialization was as much as to "catch up" to the West then anything.

We are going full steam ahead along the road of industrialization to socialism, leaving behind out century-old Russian backwardness. We are becoming a metallic country, an automotive country, a tractor country. When we have put the USSR in an autoomobile, and the muzhik on a tractor, then let the estemmed capitalists, preening themselves with their "civlization" try to overtake us. We will see then which countries can be "classified" as backward and which as advanced. J.V. Stalin, Nov. 7, 1929