Lurker > andel

https://www.reddit.com/r/HistoryWhatIf/comments/2qvlmw/what_if_trotsky_became_lenins_successor_instead/

i think that is a good post that could explain what would have happened had trotsky gained power. ultimately communism in russia would have likely lasted much less time

Garioshi posted...

Stalin's "socialism in one country" clashes horrendously with Trotsky's "permanent revolution". He was an agitator who sought to spread socialism beyond the borders of the USSR, and I have no doubt he would have used the military power of the USSR to quash the Nazis long before they got to the amount of power they did with Stalin.

while trotsky did believe in the idea of permanent revolution and forcibly turning europe communist that would have never actually worked out for him. if russia had tried to forcibly convert europe to communism they would have started a world war sooner and been crushed. the world was much more scared of communism than fascism pre ww2 and as soon as he tried to invade any allied country he would have been forcibly removed from power.

also he didn't have nearly the organizational aptitude stalin did and would have been removed from within pretty quickly

i thought this was gonna be about tim 'apple' cook

how tf are they 55 billion in debt? that is insane

Chunky posted...

Poland invaded the Soviet union successfully, and got them to sign for peace. This is actually part of the reason I mentioned Stalin, because he wasn't in power during the Polish-Soviet War, and they surrended much more quickly than Stalin would have. At least that is my understanding

Btw not saying I'm right (I'm most likely not lol), just trying to learn and get a better understanding

when the polish invaded it wasn't even formally the soviet union yet and that was a minor squabble over disputed territory, hardly the same as a proper invasion meant to topple the rulers of the country and take over the entire nation. that was also happening in the middle of the russian civil war. not at all like napolean invading russia or the nazis invading the soviet union.

Pogo_Marimo posted...

The only way practical way, in hindsight, that there would be a Soviet surrender is if the central political structure of the country collapsed due to, for instance, a coup. Something which came fairly close to happening specifically because Stalin was a wretched leader.

yeah, if barbarossa had been handled competently the nazis probably could have secured many more collaborators that were willing to install a puppet regime or something instead of solidifying stalin's power and uniting the entire machine against them. marching in and murdering everyone turns out to be an awful strategy when you don't have the overwhelming power to subjugate the population quickly. the nazis had the huge advantage at the time of stalin's utter incompetence as well as having much better technology and better commanders and forces in general, but the plan they came in with was just never going to work.

Chunky posted...

I agree. Stalin was a horrible military leader. But there's one important thing people are missing: his refusal to surrender even when they were getting crushed bad. I feel like any other person in that same leadership position would have surrendered after so many encirclements and defeats. To compare, France surrendered shortly after Paris was taken. Someone can correct me if I'm way off on this.

the french people were offered terms that didn't include the total annihilation of the population to make room for germans to settle. hitler and the nazis hated the french because of the role the french played in ww1 and the terms of the versaille treaty but they didn't view the french as subhumans who must be exterminated. the russians had nothing to gain by surrendering, they were being annihilated through death marches and laboring to death or just outright mass murder.

if the germans had handled the early stages of barbarossa differently and not just annihilated the people of everywhere they conquered there may have been more russian appetite for surrender.

ww1 and ww2 era mines still kill people as well. mines are internationally banned for good reason.

war is awful and the world wars were the most awful

also japan was doomed to fail in much the same way the nazis were. they had the same problem of not having access to nearly enough oil to fight a prolonged conflict. attacking america was really, really stupid and damned them to failure but in reality they were screwed regardless as they never had access to enough oil to continue fighting.

Big_Nabendu posted...

I believe the main reason why USSR defeated Germany, was because of USA contributions.
Land lease and constant bombing of Germany can not be overlooked.

the united states helping the soviets was hugely impactful but it wasn't the main reason the nazis lost in russia. the main reason the nazis lost was mounting an invasion they never had a real shot of succeeding with in the first place. the ussr was far too vast and the germans had too few resources to ever have any real chance of success. they united the soviet people in a way no leader ever could through the brutality of the nazi tactics and the fact that every soviet citizen was facing annihilation. the most impressive thing the soviets pulled off was moving entire factories east in a moments notice. the nazis were never able to curb soviet production which ramped up exponentially while nazi production continued to fall throughout the war.

ElatedVenusaur posted...

Yeah, the first paragraph is an often overlooked aspect of the Nazi invasion: there was, initially, a lot of good will towards Nazi Germany, especially in areas that had suffered terribly due to Stalin's policies, such as Ukraine, but the Nazis couldn't help but, well....be Nazis and genocide their sympathizers at least as hard as Stalin had. A more sensible force would have harnessed anti-Soviet sentiment in Ukraine and the Baltic to supplement the Wehrmacht (or at least secure vital supply lines), but, well, again...fascists simply aren't capable of being sensible in most instances.

yeah, the ideological purity the lunatic german high command showed really screwed them in many ways. they could have taken large swaths of soviet territory if they had truly collaborated with some of the people in the western ussr. if they had taken territory in the initial surge and sued for peace without seeking the destruction of the entire soviet state they could have momentarily ended the war in the east. of course that would never have worked for them long term and didn't solve their primary problem of having no oil and not enough munitions and other supplies, but it could have prolonged their war effort somewhat and prevented the immediate collapse that was coming.

the nazis were always doomed to fail in reality. they were never taking britain as they didn't have an adequate navy and they were never taking the ussr because they didn't have the manpower or resources. the only way hitler could have truly become the master of europe is if the european allies all surrendered quickly. of course that will never happen when you have nothing to gain and everything to lose by surrendering. they could never win in the east when the people there were all being murdered as soon as they claimed the territory.

UnholyMudcrab posted...

Then they also would have lost, because the longer the war takes, the more men and materiel the Soviets get to the front. There was no winning strategy for Germany.

yes, the only hope they had was to decapitate the leadership early on which was impossible for a couple of reasons. some of the russians in occupied territory at the beginning of barbarossa could have potentially been sympathetic to the germans and switched sides had the germans not been intent on going full genocide on all slavic people. many of the people in the western soviet union hated the soviet leadership but weren't offered any alternative to stand and fight when they realized the germans were committing wholesale genocide. also hitlers fascination with stalingrad was dumb and he isolated entire armies that were trying to capture oil fields the germans desperately needed.

hitler taking personal command while being an awful military commander doomed the nazis even further but realistically germany never had a chance due to the way they chose the fight the war and the fact america was supplying the soviets with huge amounts of armaments and supplies.

the russian military was so bad early mainly because of stalin. his purges of the top officers and refusal to believe overwhelming evidence that the nazis were invading put the soviets on the back foot immediately. the soviet state was largely incompetent and the military was grossly unprepared for ww2 but much of that is directly the fault of stalin.

despite all that the soviets did have a couple brilliant military commanders. zhukov was masterful and his tactical genius is a huge part or the reason the nazis stalled out and had to fight a war of attrition they had no chance of winning.

ultimately invading russia is a fools errand that has never worked for anyone and will never work. despite how incompetent the soviets and stalin were the country was just far too vast and they had far too many people to throw into the meat grinder of war.

Adam posted...

You just enjoy seeing the suffering of innocent people and families exploited for entertainment. But yeah, that's Hollywood 101.

>Nothing like a horror movie
>About a serial killer killing people



Your argument trash

you haven't presented any argument. saying "it's a horror movie" is dumb and shows you didn't even watch the show. you should probably try and understand what the show is about instead of making up false narratives tbh

BaphometFlux posted...

lol that dudes life must be sad as fuck if he came back to make topics like the harassment one and the Trump one.

what was the trump topic? is that dude a trumper also?

Adam posted...

Then they're immortalizing his pathetic ass even further.

It makes him look like fucking Michael Meyers.

no, you just don't understand television and how it works obviously. the show is fine and it is nothing like a horror movie at all.

i will never understand people that melt down about true crime content.

that topic he made like 15 min ago was weird af. should have known he was asking for a timeout

Adam posted...

Pot here's kettle fuck outta here

They're immortalizing a serial killer and making him out to be a movie villain.

that doesn't make sense. he was already 'immortalized' as he is one of the most famous serial killers in american history. the show makes him look like the absolute scum he is and it is a really high quality production in every aspect of the show.

lilORANG posted...

Everyone was into the Bundy stuff a few years ago. Why is everyone so opposed to Dahmer shows?

it has been a huge hit and the #1 show on netflix globally since it came out. there is a vocal extreme minority on the internet that is pressed about it but overall people appreciate it and it is hugely popular

anyone that claims that he is being glorified in the netflix show either hasn't watched it or doesn't understand what someone being glorified actually means.

the show is actually really well put together/acted/directed. it is creepy af and deeply unsettling but that is how a show about dahmer should be.

some of them have tried to claim she will run in '24. weird obsession they have tbh

skullbone posted...

So don't? Are we really so starved for entertainment in 2022 that we can't stop making these shows?

i don't think something possibly upsetting someone is a viable reason to not have it exist.

i am one episode into this show on netflix and so far it definitely doesn't paint dahmer in a positive light, at least in the first episode. it is exploring his earlier life which seems much more tasteful than just showing the guy commit murders

idk how anyone can make any semi modern true crime content that doesn't upset families of victims in some way. the show seems fine so far tbh

started first episode at work a little bit ago

i played it all day yesterday. had the day off and dedicated it to playing zero and it is just as amazing as i hoped it would be so far. just starting chapter 2 but had to come back to work today. will still play this evening when i get off

sounds like a great deal tbh. i love panera but sadly there isn't one in my immediate area

Cincinnati Bengals
Minnesota Vikings
Cleveland Browns
Dallas Cowboys
Detroit Lions
Indianapolis Colts
New York Giants
Philadelphia Eagles
New York Jets
Buffalo Bills
Los Angeles Chargers
Carolina Panthers
Green Bay Packers
Las Vegas Raiders
Tampa Bay Buccaneers
San Francisco 49ers

damn i thought my 9-7 would be terrible but seems like thats about average this week

Cleveland Browns
Chicago Bears
Tennessee Titans
Kansas City Chiefs
Buffalo Bills
Minnesota Vikings
Cincinnati Bengals
Philadelphia Eagles
New Orleans Saints
Los Angeles Chargers
Los Angeles Rams
Seattle Seahawks
Tampa Bay Buccaneers
Denver Broncos
New York Giants

Illuminoius posted...

3 was so bad that i dropped it as soon as the third party member join

i remember awful voice acting and boring combat and dumb writing and i don't know if it's worth pressing on past that

3 had flaws and was no where near as good as 2 but overall it is a good game imo. the combat was really good but definitely more convoluted than in 2 and took getting used to.

Irony posted...

Yeah, I like how SE thought it was best to remake 1 and localize it, but ignore the one with the most acclaim.

the localization of 1 on psp was amazing as well but 2 is one of my top 5 games of all time. it was one of the first rpgs i ever played through. originally rented it from blockbuster then bought it when i had to return. it still holds up though, i have played through it about every third year since the first time i played it

star ocean 2 is one of the greatest games of all time and they just never recaptured that magic. 3 was really good and it's been trash ever since

we have a new game coming to the west in one week also

yeah i had 120+ hours in each of the games, or at least 3 and 4 that i remember and i didn't 100% everything on the first playthrough

Gobstoppers12 posted...

At least poker, sports bets and fantasy sports have an element of genuine skill and strategy. Slots, roulette, and dice games are legit just pure luck with a dash of betting pattern knowledge.

fantasy sports and sports betting have no skill beyond who can get the best program to analyze stats

trump was already cheerleading the invasion when it happened. he is putins bitch so he would have done whatever putin told him to like usual

GranolaPanic posted...

Youre comparing the actions of the Cart Narc to the civil rights movement. This is an actual thing that youre doing.

no, i showed how dumb and illogical your statement was with an example.

idk why you are having a multi page meltdown about a harmless guy exposing scumbags on youtube but it is p weird

GranolaPanic posted...

I dont know if theyre scripted or not. But it doesnt change the fact that hes an attention seeking troll that doesnt really care if people return their carts. Hes only doing this nonsense for money and fame. His defenders do understand this, right?

If he legitimately cared, he wouldnt record or make a spectacle out of it to make a profit.

"if someone really believes in civil rights they wouldn't make a career out of it and just do it for free"

that's not how the world works. you can actually care about something and do that thing you care about as a career

never heard of the guy but after a quick google search it appears he is just another guy grifting incels.

i hope star ocean can go back to being amazing like 1/2/3. aside from legend of heroes and arc the lad (1-3) it is my favorite series (well the first two are)

Kansas City Chiefs
Cleveland Browns
Detroit Lions
Tampa Bay Buccaneers
New York Giants
New England Patriots
Indianapolis Colts
Baltimore Ravens
Los Angeles Rams
San Francisco 49ers
Cincinnati Bengals
Denver Broncos
Las Vegas Raiders
Green Bay Packers
Buffalo Bills
Minnesota Vikings

looking at the spreadsheet '15 was the first year i played and looks like i tied for 2nd and every other year i shit the bed early, including last year. let's hope the titans aren't a 7 point favorite that gets killed tbh

Los Angeles Rams
New Orleans Saints
San Francisco 49ers
Cincinnati Bengals
Philadelphia Eagles
Miami Dolphins
Baltimore Ravens
Washington Commanders
Carolina Panthers
Indianapolis Colts
Tennessee Titans
Minnesota Vikings
Kansas City Chiefs
Los Angeles Chargers
Tampa Bay Buccaneers
Denver Broncos

it is good, it is just trump cultists lashing out against it because they dare to feature women and people of color. the first two episodes are excellent

titans

yeah, the cops fucked up and the city will have to pay a lot for them being dumbasses

federal police always supersede local yokels anyway, those two cops are definitely fucked

BlueCrystalTear posted...

I saw something about all hell breaking loose and the house being divided. Will have to watch Wednesday's episode and, if it's any good, will get caught up.

Is this season lining up to be like BB15, in that it's a constantly amusing drama-fest where a bunch of assholes are giving each other comeuppances? If so... man, did BBUS need a season like that.

in the last day or so it has lined up more to be like bb6 or bb20 imo with a split house very likely after the next vote. the house has been very fluid so far which is always fun and now it seems to be settling into a two sided affair. none of the players are great at the game but bb6 was like that and easily one of the best seasons ever. it has great potential and there are a lot of interesting people on the feeds with only a couple outright duds

big brother feeds last night were so amazing with the leftovers alliance forming and a potential great blindside coming at the veto meeting today

so this week the feeds have been pretty good on big brother. right now the players are gaming hard but no one seems particularly good at the game outside of possibly michael. i think the season has potential to be entertaining for sure from here and am cautiously optimistic

Krojen posted...

44B still isn't that much money for Musk. If he wanted, he could pay it without selling a single share of Tesla or borrowing/leveraging any money.

He's an extremely impulsive baby so his buyers remorse could flip again or it's all just theatre.

no way he could do that. all his money is in stock, he doesn't have billions of dollars in liquidity. the original deal was structured around him getting loans against tesla shares

paloma is an absolutely fabulous player to watch on feeds. she is playing her ass off and is messy as hell while somehow controlling the house. it is amazing to watch her play and i hope she can continue this for a few weeks at least

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


yeah, it would leverage him to the hilt considering tesla has taken a nose dive since the initial offer. if he has to follow through he risks losing control of tesla and the value of tesla continuing to free fall