Progressive Politics

hideshow 20 child comments

parent

[–] frisbird@lemmy.ml -1 points 5 months ago (17 children)

Wtf? No. How do you even arrive at that conclusion? What I was saying is that NATO was staffed Nazis by people who supported Nazis, and when challenged with the idea that since the US fought the Nazis they therefore weren't on the side of the Nazis, I presented evidence for how many powerful interests in the US were actually pro-Nazi to the point of literally rescuing them, collaborating with them, paying them, hiring them, appointing them to positions of power, and supporting them economically and politically.

Nowhere did I say every single American is a Nazi or Nazi sympathizer. That's a strawman you made up so you don't have to deal with reality.

hideshow 17 child comments

parent

[–] Archangel1313@lemmy.ca 0 points 5 months ago (16 children)

Uh huh? And I was saying that your argument can also be applied to the Russians. That's how stupid it is.

hideshow 16 child comments

parent

[–] frisbird@lemmy.ml 0 points 5 months ago* (15 children)

No, what's stupid is you thinking that a non-aggression pact before the war is equivalent to saving 10k Nazis from justice after the war.

hideshow 15 child comments

parent

[–] Archangel1313@lemmy.ca 3 points 5 months ago (14 children)

Buddy, the Russians "saved" even more Nazis than the Americans did, for their research programs after the war.

hideshow 14 child comments

parent

[–] frisbird@lemmy.ml 0 points 5 months ago (13 children)

Yeah, that's not actually true and I encourage you to bring me evidence of it.

Meanwhile, you can read all about Operation Paperclip and Operation Gladio for the other side.

So please, present evidence.

hideshow 13 child comments

parent

[–] Archangel1313@lemmy.ca 4 points 5 months ago (12 children)

Yeah, that's not actually true and I encourage you to bring me evidence of it.

Ummm, ok...

It was called Operation Osoaviakhim.

hideshow 12 child comments

parent

[–] frisbird@lemmy.ml 0 points 5 months ago (11 children)

Yes, that was a single event in which the Soviets literally captured several thousand scientists and engineers as part of the war, made them POWs, and put them in GULAGS (labor camps) and forced them to work on science projects. That's not saving them from justice, that's literally punishment.

Operation Paperclip, on the other hand, made Nazis into millionaires, rehabilitated their public image, gave many of them fake identities, properties, high paying jobs, and even security details in some case.

In the case of NATO, it took Nazi officers and literally made them NATO officers. No punishments. No POW status. Just a high ranking leadership role in a trans-national nuclear military. The Soviets never did anything even remotely like that.

And then there's Operation Gladio where NATO, led by literally Nazis, organized Nazi collaborators throughout Europe into militias, armed them, trained them, protected them, recruited for them, and organized them into a large network of terrorists that could be used to fight against the Soviets.

Meanwhile in West Germany, Nazi politicians were being elected in the special government the US put together, while in East Germany not only were Nazi politicians imprisoned or killed, anyone supporting them was also imprisoned.

That you think "both sides are the same" is a serious problem for your reading comprehension, for your media literacy, for your grasp of history, and ultimately for any opinions you have on geopolitics because clearly you don't know how to defend against propaganda.

hideshow 11 child comments

parent

[–] Archangel1313@lemmy.ca 3 points 5 months ago (10 children)

They weren't "made POW's". Admittedly, their participation wasn't voluntary. But, they and their families were kept under rather decent conditions, and were instructed to teach Soviet scientists everything they knew about rocket technology. They were never really allowed to participate in that research however, which ultimately led to lackluster results.

Then, once the Soviets had determined that they could provide no additional information, they and their families were allowed to return to Germany. That doesn't make them POW's. They weren't punished for their roles in the German war effort. They were simply treated as useful sources of information, and then let go.

hideshow 10 child comments

parent

[–] frisbird@lemmy.ml -2 points 5 months ago (9 children)

They were quite literally prisoners of war, kidnapped at gun point during war time by soldiers who invaded Germany. They were managed by the same administrative body that oversaw forced labor. They were POWs by all definitions.

Yes, they were treated decently, because that's what is generally required to get people to do intellectual labor. The GULAG system generally did treat people decently, much better than the US prison system, that's for damn sure.

As for being released from the USSR and back to Germany, if they weren't POWs serving time in a forced labor arrangement, then why couldn't they go back to Germany until the Soviets released them? Their forced labor was their punishment. The Soviet GULAG system was literally founded on the idea that contributing your labor to society was exactly how you paid your debts to society. They were punished, they served time, and they were released. It's not like the Soviets brought military butchers back to integrate them into society, nor did they bring strategists and tacticians to integrate into their military structure. They wanted knowledge work, they got knowledge work.

As for the lackluster results, I'm sure you're familiar with the fact that there was almost zero rocket science happening in the USSR before and during the war. After forcing German scientists to train Soviet scientists, the Soviets developed an exact replica of the V2. I would say that alone demonstrates the success of the program.

But more to the point. They went from zero rocketry to the number two rocket science center in the world. Sure they didn't beat the Americans to a heavy launcher and the Saturn V became the gold standard. But the Soviets achieved over a dozen milestones before the US did with satellites, manned flights, probes on Venus, etc. If you think going from literally nothing to second place is lackluster, perhaps you have a bias.

hideshow 9 child comments

parent

[–] Archangel1313@lemmy.ca 3 points 5 months ago* (7 children)

They weren't "prisoners of war"...the war was already over when they were "recruited" at gun-point. They were also civilians, which makes it impossible to call them POW's unless you are also willing to admit that Russia committed war crimes just by capturing them..

And even if they were active combatants...once the war is over, you're supposed to let them go...unless they are charged with crimes committed in the act of service. Then they are expected to stand trial for those crimes, where evidence is presented to prove their guilt. That is typically reserved for high ranking officers, or political leaders.

None of that applied to Operation Osoaviakhim. What you are conveniently reframing, is called politically motivated "slave labor"...something the Soviet Union did to even their own citizens, if they refused to cooperate with the State. These people were scientists. None of them committed war crimes. If they had, then they should have stood trial with the rest of them at Nuremberg. But all this happened after those trials were over.

hideshow 7 child comments

parent

[–] frisbird@lemmy.ml 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (6 children)

But all this happened after those trials were over.

Oh. So the Soviets didn't save anyone from justice then? Glad we cleared that up. The US-Vatican collaboration protected Nazis from justice. The Soviet program did not.

They weren't "prisoners of war"...the war was already over

They were subjects of occupation. Sure, they weren't soldiers who were captured on the battlefield. They were considered part of war reparations. You're right, that's not how we use the phrase POW, but I don't have a better word for it. Politically motivated slave labor is a closer phrase. Perhaps it would more accurate Slave Labor As Reparations. Regardless of what we call it, the result was the same. They were not Nazis who were saved from justice, they were Nazis who were pressed into involuntary labor under the Soviet prison system (GULAG) as a form of reparations and then released after they had served their time. This is the opposite of what the West did when they protected thousands of Nazis.

These people were scientists. None of them committed war crimes.

Again, we finally come back to the point. The US-Vatican collaboration to protect Nazis included many many Nazis who committed war crimes.

As you have now stated about Operation Osoaviakhim: it did not target people who committed war crimes, it was done after the justice process, it was forced slave labor and not rehabilitation or masking of their public image or integration of Nazis into society.

So when Substack publishes an article about NATO dying and someone says "wait, isn't Substack profiting from Nazi shit", then I will repeat that it's appropriate since NATO was staffed with Nazis put there by Nazi collaborators and sympathizers in power in the West.

And when someone says "oh really? The people who fought the Nazis are actually Nazis" I will repeat the historical record regarding the US's Nazi rallies, their Nazi summer camps for kids, their high level collaborations between the largest companies and Third Reich, the organized ratlines, West German elections, NATO appointments, and Operation Paperclip.

And when someone says "oh yeah, well Stalin signed a treaty with the Nazis" I will repeat the history of nearly everyone in the war signing their own non-aggression pact with the Nazis and how a non-aggression pact does not equate to saving Nazis from justice.

And when someone says "well after the war the Soviets also saved Nazis from justice" I will repeat my demand for evidence and if they bring up Operation Osoaviakhim I will repeat the historical record that this happened after Nazis had been brought to justice, was a form of war reparations, was a punishment not a "saving", happened at gun point in a single day and resulted in forced labor of Nazis, and in no way attempted to rehabilitate the image, careers, political standing, or social integration of the Nazis in question.

So thanks for helping me refine my language, I appreciate it. And thanks for getting to the point where your own claims support my argument.

hideshow 6 child comments

parent

[–] Archangel1313@lemmy.ca 1 point 5 months ago (5 children)

Holy crap, buddy. You are a piece of work. I'm here thinking that working with Nazis in any way, is pretty fucked up, and should never be condoned.

But then here you are like, "Fuck that! It was great! And my side even threw in some slave labor and collective punishment, too!" As if adding human rights violations to the situation is actually what justified the whole thing.

Your moral compass is utterly broken, man.

hideshow 5 child comments

parent

[–] frisbird@lemmy.ml 0 points 5 months ago* (4 children)

Imagine being so morally opposed to putting Nazis to involuntary labor that you'd be willing to let your country be destroyed by the psychos that nuked 2 population centers because it would be immoral to learn rocket science.

This is what idealism does to people.

hideshow 4 child comments

parent

[–] Archangel1313@lemmy.ca 1 point 5 months ago (3 children)

Oh, right. Those pesky "ideals", like not kidnapping entire families and forcing them to help you build weapons. I mean, fuck those people for being born in the wrong country, amiright fascist? For someone who thinks Nazis don't deserve basic human rights...you sure sound a lot like one yourself.

And for the record...none of these places are "my country". This whole "my side", "your side" bullshit...is all you, buddy. You're all fucking degenerates, as far as I'm concerned. You justify all the same shit in the name of "my side good, your side bad".

You are no better than they are. Own it.

hideshow 3 child comments

parent

[–] frisbird@lemmy.ml 0 points 5 months ago (2 children)

As you yourself noted, they weren't kidnapped simply for being born in Germany. They were literal Nazis. They worked for the Nazi party developing weapons that would be used in the greatest war of aggression the world has seen up to that point and there weapons killed a lot of people. For someone who claims to have a moral compass, you sure do flip flop back and forth between "Soviets saved evil Nazis too" and "Soviets never should have harmed those poor innocent people".

As for using the word "degenerate", that's a hell of a choice given the context of our discussion. Maybe some of the Nazi rubbed off on you.

hideshow 2 child comments

parent

[–] Archangel1313@lemmy.ca 1 point 5 months ago* (1 child)

Why would the Nazi rub off in me? I'm not the one defending this shit. You are. I'm just trying the one pointing out your hypocrisy.

The fact that you're actively celebrating this shit like it's some kind of victory, is what makes you a degenerate. You and the Americans are all the same.

"Well, they paid Nazis to work for them. That's disgusting! At least our side kidnapped them. Because that's so much better!"

You're both trash.

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] frisbird@lemmy.ml 0 points 5 months ago

Again, go look up the word degenerate and try to understand it's relationship with the program of white supremacist eugenics.

As for celebrating that the Soviets kidnapped Nazi scientists and forced them to transfer knowledge, I don't know that I would say celebrate it. It was pretty hard on those families. And it was primarily to advance the state of the art in rockets which were primarily a weapons system. But I don't need to celebrate it. All I need to show is that my assessment was correct and that yours was incorrect, misleading, and based on your other comments either outright deceitful or exhibiting your total cognitive dissonance.

To whit - it was the Soviets that fought and repressed the Nazis. It was the Americans that saved them, integrated them, and internationalized them.

You have no refutation of this, despite attempting to argue against it - in fact your own positions support this position.

But somehow I am the problem. Because there can't be any room in your head for someone who says that Soviets were better than the allies on most fronts despite them also committing war crimes. Sorry not sorry. The reality is that the West was in the wrong, is still in the wrong, and despite all of the failings and atrocities of the USSR, they were on the right side of history.