SaddamHussein24 @ SaddamHussein24 @lemmygrad.ml

Posts

25

Comments

45

Joined

3 yr. ago

Wow, that must have been crazy, changing your whole worldview like that. I have not read Furrs book on Katyn yet, tho i have read his chapter on Katyn in "Blood Lies", so i do have a general idea of the evidence on Katyn. I agree, nazis did it most likely.

Lmfao, PiS is nuts. Btw, as a polish comrade, what is your take on Katyn? Do you agree with historians like Grover Furr that it was nazis who did it, not soviets? Or do you think soviets did it?

I love everytime Russia supposedly "poison" someone with ultradeadly chemical weapons yet they never die. Russia must have the worst hitmen ever.

Cope that "akchually Russia lost" while crying in silence

Many people will say what you say, that they are "evil genocidal mass murderers". However, i have read a lot on this, and i have found no evidence of this. The War in Croatia and Bosnia was started by the Tudman ustashe fascists and the Izetbegovic Al Qaeda jihadists. They wanted to create an ethnically pure Croatia and Bosnia respectively, and were very clear about it. Tudman as i said was an open admirer of the ustashe (croat fascist militia that fought with the nazis in WW2, they genocided hundreds of thousands of muslims and serbs) and a holocaust denier, who openly said that muslims and serbs had to be expelled from Croatia.

Same with Izetbegovic, who had fought in the Waffen SS during WW2 and was imprisoned for it under Tito. In 1983, Izetbegovic published his "Islamic Declaration", in which he advocated for a sharia law islamic theocracy in Bosnia, and he said this was only possible by expelling all nonmuslims, since "muslims and nonmuslims cannot peacefully coexist". In 1983, yugoslav courts ruled the Islamic Declaration promoted chauvinism and genocide, and sentenced Izetbegovic to 14 years in prison.

This is the type of people that ruled Croatia and Bosnia, bloodthirsty fascists. You would think that this would result in a prosecution right? And yet, while the police were hunting down Milosevic and Mladic, Tudman and Izetbegovic were calmly in their homes, undisturbed, they were never prosecuted. While Tudman and Izetbegovic were genociding serbs and each other, the serbs were trying to find antifascist allies against them. If Mladic was a "bloodthirsty butcher who wanted to kill all muslims", then why did he ally with Fikret Abdic, a muslim politician? Abdic, unlike Izetbegovic, was a secular social democrat and antifascist. He led muslim militias to try to overthrow Izetbegovic, and he proclaimed the Republic of Western Bosnia as a base to do so. This republic was allied with the serbs against the croat and muslim fascists during all of the war. Coincidentally, while Izetbegivic was never prosecuted, Abdic was immediately arrested and imprisoned for decades after the war ended. Its almost like this is a victors justice isnt it?

The serbs were only defending themselves from genocide, they didnt start that war and had no intention to "create a Greater Serbia" as the narrative goes. They were being expelled from their own houses, were they supposed to just let it happen?

Now on crimes committed by serbs. There was no genocide, this is a complete lie. However there were deportations on an ethnic basis. Was it good? Hell no! But you must understand this. You had big muslim population enclaves in serb territory. You have no way of knowing who supports Izetbegovic and who doesnt. You have to secure your territory, so you can only do 2 things. You imprison them all, which is terrible, or you send them to muslim territory, which is what they did. I agree, its terrible, but thats how war is, serbs didnt start that war, NATO and their puppets did. Besides, this was done in many other wars. Stalin did it in WW2 with ethnic groups that mass collaborated with the nazis, such as tatars or chechens, he deported them to Kazakhstan to secure the front. Now were atrocities committed? Ofc yes. But it was not a state sponsored thing, it was done by rogue units in the military and chetnik militias.

Now on the supposed "crimes" that Mladic and Karadzic committed that make up the so called "bosnian genocide". When you hear "bosnian genocide" you think hundreds of concentration camps right? Yet, if you look into it, the "tribunal" could only prove 2 events that make up this "genocide". The first is the Siege of Sarajevo, which was done first by the Yugoslav Peoples Army and then by the Army of Republika Srpska, and lasted 3 years. During this siege, many civilians died due to shelling. However, the serbs, since the beginning of the siege, had offered Izetbegovic to evacuate all the population, but he refused, he knew civilian deaths would help justify a NATO intervention. Yet somehow the serbs are to blame for the deaths.

The second event is the Srebrenica massacre of 1995. Now Srebrenica was a muslim enclave deep within serb territory. To avoid civilian deaths, it was declared a UN Safe Haven in 1993. UN peacekeepers were dispatched there. Their task was to protect Srebrenica from any possible attack by Ratko Mladics serb troops and to disarm the local Izetbegovic loyal muslim troops led by Naser Orics. But yet, UN peacekeepers did not disarm the muslim troops. This allowed Oric to use Srebrenica as a safe base from where to attack serb territory, since serbs couldnt go in to respond. From Srebrenica, Oric carried out hundreds of attacks on serb villages, torturing serb civilians to death with bayonets and knives, often ending with a beheading. After every new attack, the serbs would ask the UN to do their job and disarm Oric, but they refused. Oric also used UN helicopters to transport weapons from muslim territory to Srebrenica to continue his guerrilla operations.

So, after 2 years of the UN doing nothing and thousands of dead serb civilians, Mladic decided to do the job of the UN himself. He stormed Srebrenica and disarmed the muslim troops. Most of the muslim population was expelled to muslim territory, it is false that all the men were killed. Most of the dead men were soldiers. Now were atrocities committed? Ofc, but it wasnt ordered from above, much less a genocide. Coincidentally, Oric had already escaped Srebrenica by helicopter before the attack. In fact, the muslim police chief of Srebrenica at the time, has said that Izetbegovic knew the attack was coming and wanted it to happen. This makes sense since Srebrenica was the main justification for the 1995 NATO invasion of Bosnia.

Does this look like a bloodthirsty genocide to you? To me it doesnt. If you wanna read more on this i recommend the book "To Kill a Nation" by Michael Parenti and an RT documentary on Mladic ill link below.

https://youtu.be/2rHqcqI6e0A

https://youtu.be/YMD_hYuBTtE

And lets not forget the show trials against Slobodan Milosevic, Radovan Karadzic, Ratko Mladic and others. Milosevic was murdered by the EU nazis in prison, they didnt allow him medical treatment for his heart problems and he died of a heart attack. And the worst, even the fake tribunal had to admit he was innocent. That scum murdered an innocent man just for opposing US imperialism and neoliberalism.

"I love superior free western values. Russian patriots want to see their country invaded and balkanized. Yes i am a leftist, why you ask?"

-Zizek the nazi who supported the racist CIA separatist opposition in Yugoslavia (Slovenia) that broke up the country in the 90s

If supporting Russia, China, Iran, Cuba, DPRK, Syria, etc against US imperialism and wanting the US to be socialist and antiimperialist is "american exceptionalism", then i guess im an "american exceptionalist" too. The fact that you dont even know what Maupin and Haz actually believe yet you still have an opinion on them just shows you dont actually care about what they believe, you are just looking for excuses to repeat what moron lib debate bros say about them, that they are "evil fascists/nazbols american chauvinists".

America is a garbage country, i agree. I hate America a lot.

Of all the things you could critique of them, their supposed "preference for the middle class" is the worst you could pick. I have no idea where you deduced that they prefer the middle class. They literally ramble all the time AGAINST the middle class, saying they are "labor aristocrat urbanites" and "not true proletarians". I personally disagree with that analysis, i think the middle class is just working class benefiting from imperialism, and once the unequal exchange from imperialism goes away (as the global south becomes socialist), they will inevitably join the revolution as proletarians, as it will be in their class interests. Many already do so now, even against their class interests.

If you americans really think you will achieve revolution by constantly attacking your fellow ML comrades because you dont like their personality/persona/behaviour, instead of joining with them to fight against your imperialist government, then i have no words. But hey, you do you, im just a spaniard, my job isnt to build socialism in the USA (although the rest of the world would highly appreciate it if you got your act together). Im totally sure calling Haz and Caleb Maupin nazbols/fascists 100 more times will bring you to socialism soon.

Infrared is a youtube ML channel that focuses mainly on debates and general entertainment while also politically orientated. While the Infrared team consists of several members, the main member who does most of the content is Haz, a lebanese american man. Hes not very liked over here because he has several, lets say, controversial takes on some things, mainly relating to identity politics, LGBT, patriotism for the USA and the Trump movement. Hes also created an extreme macho persona in his debates and often says that his debate opponents are "beta cucks". Whether he is serious on this or its just a joke is up to you to decide. Finally he also often gets into drama with other leftist youtubers/streamers, which often degenerates into nasty insults and attacks.

Hes part of the wider american "patriotic socialist" movement associated with people like Caleb Maupin, who are also not very liked over here. I personally watch his content sometimes, and while i dont agree with everything he says i prefer to keep an open mind and not just shut off different perspectives, but thats just me.

What do you mean??? Isnt Biden basically a socialist now since now trans marines are dronestriking muslimos in Iraq????

-Some lib in the US

Marxist Paul is a maoist. He says China is imperialist. Not saying you shouldnt watch him, he has good videos, but keep that in mind. His takes on China and Russia are garbage "bothsideism" maoism. The fact is Russia is the best ally China has right now. They recently did joint air patrols in the East China Sea to scare Biden and are concluding military cooperation agreements. If you support China you must support Russia too. Doesnt mean you have to like Putin or his internal policies, but you must support him as long as hes allied with China. You cant say "i support Cuba, but not USSR". Nonsense, they were a bloc, you support none or all. Same now with China, Russia, Iran and the smaller allies. Its 1 bloc, they are all in this together, against US imperialism. Simple.

Also DPR and LPR used to be communist led. The early 2014 uprisings were literally led by communists. While they have lost a lot of influence in the government due to the 8 year ukrainian aggression and Putin preferring to prop up liberal allies instead, they nevertheless retain big influence on the movement. I recommend Russel Texas Bentley Telegram Channel (he had a youtube channel but got banned when RT got banned). Hes an american communist who has been fighting in DPR since 2014 in a communist battalion. Ill link it down here. DPR and LPR have suffered insane aggression at the hands of the west. They are antiimperialist, and while not explicitly with a communist government, the movement behind them is a very much progressive popular movement and with big communist influence.

His telegram channel: https://t.me/TXDPR

I personally thing that, as things are now, they are clearly winning, and if nothing changes, theyll probably win. Russia gains territory every day. They now control almost 1/4 of Ukraine, with all of Kherson, half of Zaporizhya, half of Donetsk, almost all of Lugansk and 1/3 of Kharkov regions. And all of this despite unprecedented western weapons supplies to Ukraine (more than 60 BILLION dollars) and Russia using minimal resources (only 200k troops). In the economic war, the victory has been crushing. The ruble is at its highest in years, despite Russia being now the most sanctioned country in the world. While in Russia inflation is staying low, in the west its skyrocketing. In Russia supermarkets are stocked, in the US there isnt even milk. I think Russia is clearly winning, and i honestly expected its economy to suffer much more. I definetely agree with you on Taiwan tho, the US may start shit there too.

They dont even realize that, even if Russia somehow thought they would take all Ukraine in 2 weeks and failed, they are still winning. Even if it takes them 3 years, if they achieve it theyll have won. These muppets think if you dont achieve every part of the plan exactly as was planned you automatically lost. Overdosing on copium.

Yes! I love the liberal cope everytime the DPRK tests a new missile. No motherfucker, you wont invade the DPRK, not unless you want to die in a nuclear holocaust. Cope.

Honestly the major antiimperialist players in Asia should create a "Warsaw Pact" to counter NATO, or maybe just join the CSTO. Russia, China, Belarus, Iran, Syria and DPRK should definetely consider it. Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua joining would also be cool, but i think that would provoke the US too much.

Btw dont know if you heard but Russia and China just did a joint air patrol in the East China Sea while Biden was in South Korea doing his warhawk stuff. China also held military exercises a few days ago practising a full scale invasion of Taiwan. The US better know what they are doing, the dumb fucks.

Yes! Russia and China had never been so united since the Sino Soviet Split. Also antiwest and procommunist sentiment is at an all time high in Russia, plus McDonalds and Pizza Hut finally left Moscow. Biden the senile managed to reverse (for the most part) the consequences of both khrushchevism and gorbachevism in one move! Thanks Joe! 😍

Im seriously wondering which last US president, Biden or Trump, accelerated the decline of the US empire more. I initially thought Trump was better in this regard and Biden would stabilize US power, but im being surprised every day.

Ahahahaha O7

This is about the Winter War and Continuation War. They were part of WW2. To understand them a bit of history is needed. Finland was part of the Russian Empire when the October Revolution happened. After the Revolution, Lenin proclaimed that all the constituent nations of the Russian Empire were now free to choose their own path. So Finland (and many other nations like the Baltics, Georgia, etc) declared independence. The Finnish Civil War broke out, between the finnish whites (monarchists/fascists/anticommunists), mainly composed of petty and big bourgeoisie who wanted to be completely independent from the USSR, be capitalist and ally with the German Empire (which at the time was still at war with the USSR since WW1 was still going on) and the finnish communists, mainly workers and peasants who were supporters of Lenin, had proclaimed the Finnish Socialist Workers Republic and wanted to join the USSR. While Lenins bolsheviks did help the finnish communists, the german advance was too much. Lenin had to sign the humiliating Treaty of Brest Litovsk, a peace treaty between the USSR and the Central Powers (Germany, Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire). The treaty ceded Finland, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Ukraine and Belarus to the German Empire and Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan to the Ottoman Empire. Thus, Lenin had to withdraw troops from Finland and stop helping the finnish communists. While they continued fighting, it was a lost cause and the german troops crushed them.

With the collapse of the German Empire at the end of WW1, german troops withdrew from Finland and Finland became completely independent. The new finnish state, far from the "wholesome liberal democracy" mainstream academia paints it as, was a right wing authoritarian regime. Communism was banned, and most of the finnish communists who had lost the Civil War were either massacred together with their whole families or imprisoned for a very long time. Massacres against communists were very common in the years after the war. As the 1930s arrived, Finland became more and more fascist and anticommunist. This placed them for a possible alliance with Nazi Germany against the hated communist USSR. The finnish bourgeoisie was more than happy to ally with nazism to destroy socialism. And so they did.

Now Leningrad (now Saint Petersburg), the most important city in the USSR after Moscow, was (and is still nowadays, which makes Finland joining NATO very dangerous) very close to the border with Finland, making an attack on Leningrad from Finland very easy. For this reason, in 1939, seeing the soviets the antisoviet alliance forming between Finland and Nazi Germany, they had to secure their borders. They invaded and liberated the Baltic States (who were also fascist anticommunist dictatorships allied with the nazis) and they tried to negotiate with Finland. They offered to exchange territory. Finland would give the USSR their territories surrounding Leningrad and the USSR would give Finland a territory of their choice. Finland refused. USSR even offered to just lease them or even buy the finnish territories but Finland refused to negotiate. Seeing the finnish nazi alliance was a done deal, the USSR in 1939 invaded Finland to protect itself. This was the Winter War. The plan was to invade and bring the finnish communists to power, as had been done in the Baltic States where it worked perfectly since communism was very popular there despite being brutally supressed. The finnish communists proclaimed the Finnish Democratic Republic, a socialist republic, in the areas liberated by the USSR.

Unfortunately, the plan didnt work, since finnish communism had been completely destroyed by the finnish fascists. While the USSR did manage to secure Leningrad, they failed to topple the finnish fascist regime. The small Finnish Democratic Republic joined the USSR as the Karelio-Finnish Soviet Socialist Republic (it later joined the Russian Soviet Republic where it remains today). In 1940 a peace treaty was signed and the Winter War ended. But Finland was still fascist and a nazi ally. So when Hitler launched Operation Barbarossa (the nazi invasion of the USSR) in 1941, Finland joined in in the invasion, seeking revenge against the communists. This was the Continuation War. In the end, Finland, along with its nazi allies, lost WW2. The finnish fascists were put on trial for war crimes and imprisoned. Communism was finally legalized and the Finnish Communist Party, a strong ally of the USSR, became a powerful force in finnish politics until its decline in the 1980s. Thus, it is thanks to the USSR and its crushing victory in the Continuation War that Finland is a social democracy today and not a fascist regime. Although its slipping back into fascism recently. These historical facts are being denied by the finnish government and historical revisionism openly promoted. Finnish schools teach that Finland was a "wholesom social democracy" and ebil russians invaded them for no reason. There is no mention of the fact that they were literally nazi allies nor of the numerous war crimes Finland committed both during WW2 and the Finnish Civil War.

So yeah, the dude here is honoring his nazi dad basically.

Uhhh no? Identity politics has nothing to do with this. The problem here is western exceptionalism, the belief that "the west", meaning the US empire, has the right to be the world police and that its political system is the role model to follow. Thats the origin of eurocommunism, which is what killed the western left. The idea that "we must have a democratic communism, because soviet, chinese and third world communism is authoritarian and undemocratic, while western democracies arent" is what killed the western left. The 3 strongest communist parties in Western Europe, the Italian, French and Spanish Communist Parties, were destroyed by eurocommunism. Thats the problem here, western chauvinism and propaganda. Identity politics, no matter what you think of it, has nothing to do with this and is totally irrelevant to my post.

I mean, i said what i said because in some socialist countries religion was very heavily suppressed imo, in Albania for example or USSR at times. Getting a Bible or a Quran was very hard and so on. I think assets of churches should be expropiated indeed. Churches should become like a kind of mass organization imo, with all its assets owned by the state and the organization also controlled by the state. The church functions as a church but is subordinated to the party and takes orders from it. Again, i think religious people who can think in a materialist way should be allowed to join the party. Ofc there should be high standard requirements, but if they meet them and are believers, i think its ok. I understand why you think this is impossible, since your country is full of religious nutjobs (no offense), but i can guarantee you its true. Here in Spain religion has much less influence in society than in Poland, and youll find many people who consider themselves catholic but dont appear like it at all. They rarely go to church, follow no restrictions associated with catholicism and dont care about what the Pope says about abortion, gays or some other thing. My mom is like that, shes a scientist so she can apply rational thinking, but she still believes. I often ask her why (im atheist), and she says it makes her feel protected during hard times. I think that these type of people, which believe me are very common here in western europe, should be allowed to join the party.

I also think you shouldnt discard the progressive potential for religion. I think religion is a tool, so its not bad by itself. Sure religion is very often used by reactionaries, but it can also be used progressively. Again what China did in Tibet, they picked a loyal Panchen Lama, and now he uses his strong influence as a religious leader to promote socialism, friendship with the chinese government and fights the tibetan CIA opposition. Indeed, the beliefs of the mainstream religions (islam, christianity, judaism and buddhism) are often quite compatible with socialism, since they promote friendship with others, helping the poor, solidarity, etc. Hell if Jesus Christ was alive today hed be 100% called a "communist" by the libs. Thats where christian socialism and islamic socialism comes into the picture. In countries with strong religious influence it can be a great way to strenghten socialism i think. Ofc you should be able to control the religious leaders for this to work, otherwise the reactionaries can use the religion against socialism. For example i think in Poland it wouldnt work, because the religious leader is the Pope, and hes in Rome so you cant control him. It could work tho in Russia for example, where you have the Patriarch of the Russian Orthodox Church there. You put someone loyal in charge, control him and use christianity to promote socialism. I think its an option as valid as state atheism. Both options could work in the appropiate material conditions i think. What do you think?