My head is about to explode...

Curios: how old is this fellow? My guess is that he's younger than mid-30's. It's one thing to read about Socialism and quite another to live in the daily evil of it. Another possibility: Socialism always benefits those at the top with 'privileged treatment', and he might have come from one of those higher-up families. Like anything, it's all smiley faces viewed from the top and a**holes when you look from down and under.
 
His response:

What the hell does it's current day population have to do with anything?

Hitler almost wiped out Judaism in Europe - and yet Israel still exists.

The Soviet Union lost 10's of millions during WW2 - as did Germany - and both of those countries are still around too.

The fact that Ukraine has 47 million people now - only proves there has been a lot of humping going on between then and now.
 
If I remember correctly, Ukraine used to be one big gulag, but maybe he's into that.

Got a Turkish guy I work with, same way, believes in islamic law and wants to go back to the days of the Ottoman Empire, and have the US run that way. F'n moron, laziest prick I ever met too, makes me look good atleast.
 
From the "History of Ukraine" Wiki page:

The precise number of Ukrainians murdered by Stalin's custom-made famine and firing squads remains unknown to this day. The KGB's archives, and recent work by Russian historians, show at least seven million died. Ukrainian historians put the figure at nine million, or higher. Twenty-five percent of Ukraine's population was exterminated in what is known as the Holodomor or Ukrainian Holocaust.

The Soviet Union suppressed information about this genocide, and as late as the 1980s admitted only that there was some hardship because of kulak sabotage and bad weather. Today, its existence is accepted.[by whom?] Non-Soviets maintain that the famine was an avoidable, deliberate act of genocide.

Facts about the Ukrainian Genocide:

(from http://www.faminegenocide.com/resources/facts.html )

1. Censuses

In late 1932 - precisely when the genocidal famine struck - the Central Statistical Bureau in Moscow ceased to publish demographic data.

The 1937 census was given top priority. The census director I. Kravel was awarded the Order of Lenin for his meticulous work. After the results of the 1937 census were submitted to the Government, the census was declared "subversive", its materials destroyed and the top census officials were shot for not finding enough people.

2. Harvest and Climatic Conditions

The "natural disaster" excuse to cover up the 1933 Famine-Genocide does not hold water. It was not caused by some natural calamity or crop failure:

The 1931 harvest was 18.3 million tons of grain.
The 1932 harvest was 14.6 million tons of grain.
The 1933 harvest was 22.3 million tons of grain.
The 1934 harvest was 12.3 million tons of grain.
In 1934 during the poorest harvest - a mere 12.3 - there was no massive famine because Stalin reduced the grain requisition quotas and even released grain from existing "state stockpiles" to feed the population.
The highest death rates were in the grain growing provinces of Poltava, Dnipropetrovsk, Kirovohrad and Odessa: usually 20-25%, although higher in many villages.

3. Laws and Decrees

The 7 August 1932 law drafted by Joseph Stalin on the protection of the socialist property stipulated the death penalty for "theft of socialist property". Ukrainian villagers were executed by firing squads for theft of a sack of wheat and in some cases even for two sheaves of corn or a husk of grain.
The 6 December 1932 decree stipulated a complete blockade of villages for allegedly sabotaging the grain procurement campaign - de facto sentencing their Ukrainian inhabitants to execution by starvation.
An unpublished decree signed by Molotov encouraged Russian peasants to settle into the empty or half-empty villages of "the free lands of Ukraine" [and North Caucasus also inhabited by Ukrainians and likewise devastated by the famine].
4. Means of Implementing Forced Collectivization and Draconian Grain Requisition Quotas

The All-Union Peoples Commissariat of Agriculture in Moscow initially mobilized some of its most reliable ‘25-thousanders' -Party members, majority of them Russians - and sent them to Ukraine to organize collective farms.
Further ‘thousanders,' the army, the secret police [GPU], the militia and armed brigades were sent into Ukrainian villages to force the farmers into collective farms and to supervise the Draconian grain expropriation and eventually the entire output of butter, corn, sugar beet, etc.
Local granaries in Ukraine held large stockpiles of ‘state reserves' for emergencies, such as war, but the raging famine did not qualify as an emergency.
5. Geography of the Famine

The 1933 Famine-Genocide was geographically focused for political ends. It stopped precisely at the Ukrainian-Russian ethnographic border.
The borders of Ukraine were strictly patrolled by the military to prevent starving Ukrainians from crossing into Russia in search of bread.
For example: The Kharkiv Province on the Ukrainian side was devastated while the contiguous Belgorod Province on the Russian side with similar climatic conditions and demographic profiles showed no evidence of starvation or any unusual mortality.
Armed GPU officers were also stationed to prevent starving Ukrainians from entering the zone near the Polish and Romanian borders. Those who tried to cross the Dnister River into Romania were shot.
6. Exports

The Soviet regime dumped 1.7 million tons of grain on the Western markets at the height of the Famine. It exported nearly a quarter of a ton of grain for every Ukrainian who starved to death.

7. Victims and Losses

At the height of the Famine Ukrainian villagers were dying at the rate of 25,000 per day or 1,000 per hour or 17 per minute.
By comparison the Allied soldiers died at the rate of 6,000 per day during the Battle of Verdun.
Among the children one in three perished as a consequence of collectivization and the famine.
According to dissident Soviet demographer M. Maksudov "no fewer than three million children born between 1932-1933 died of hunger."
80% of Ukrainian intellectuals were liquidated because they refused to collaborate in the extermination of their countrymen.
Out of about 240 Ukrainian authors 200 were liquidated or disappeared. Out of about 84 linguists 62 perished.
The Ukrainian population may have been reduced by as much as 25%.
8. Western Press Coverage

Foreign correspondents were "advised" by the press department of the Soviet Commissariat for Foreign Affairs to remain in Moscow and were de facto barred from visiting Ukraine.
Not a single Western newspaper or press agency protested publicly against the unprecedented confining of its correspondents in Moscow or bothered to investigate the reason for this extraordinary measure.
The majority of reporters feared losing their journalistic privileges and toed the line.
The only correspondents permitted into Ukraine were the likes of Walter Duranty of the New York Times who reported that there was no famine except for some "partial crop failures."
Star reporter Walter Duranty of the New York Times set the tone for most of the Western press coverage with authoritative denials of starvation and referred to the Famine as the "alleged ‘man-made' famine of 1933."
However, according to British Diplomatic Reports, Duranty off the record, conceded that "as many as 10 million" may have perished.
For his reporting Walter Duranty received the Pulitzer Prize for journalism. To this date the New York Times refuses to revoke the prize and still lists Duranty among its Pulitzer winners.
A number of intrepid reporters, such as William Henry Chamberlin, Harry Lang, Malcolm Muggeridge and Thomas Walker ignored the ban and reported on the Famine, substantiating their reports with photographs.
9. Collusion by Western Governments

Available archival evidence (such as reports sent in diplomatic pouches as well as coverage on the press by a few honest and courageous reporters who managed to penetrate into starving Ukraine) indicates that several Western governments (especially Great Britain, Canada and the United States) were well informed about the Famine-Genocide in Ukraine but chose to adopt a policy on non-interference in the internal affairs of a foreign sovereign state. Ironically, the United States recognized the Soviet Union in November, 1933.

Offers to aid the starving by numerous charitable organizations such as the International Red Cross, Save the Children Fund, the Vienna-based Interconfessional Relief Council and Ukrainian organizations in the West and Western Ukraine (occupied by Poland) were discouraged or blocked by their Governments.

10. Findings and Conclusions

The U.S. Congress 1988 Commission on the Ukraine famine in its "Investigation of the Ukraine Famine of 1932-1933" concluded that: JOSEPH STALIN AND THOSE AROUND HIM COMMITTED GENOCIDE AGAINST UKRAINIANS IN 1932-1933.


Your friend needs to get his head out of commie loving butt. There are people far better informed than him who agree that it did happen.

Like I said above - it appears the Ukranian genocide killed off all the smart people and only left behind the idiots - here's the corroborating evidence:

80% of Ukrainian intellectuals were liquidated because they refused to collaborate in the extermination of their countrymen.
 
If I remember correctly, Ukraine used to be one big gulag, but maybe he's into that.

Got a Turkish guy I work with, same way, believes in islamic law and wants to go back to the days of the Ottoman Empire, and have the US run that way. F'n moron, laziest prick I ever met too, makes me look good atleast.

This thread is the best evidence I have had in weeks that immigration is killing this country. Used to be people came here because they wanted to work and better themselves - now apparently we let in every Mexican seeking welfare for their 10 illegitimate children, we let in Turks who are not only lazy but want to turn the country into a caliphate, and we let Ukranians who would like to see a dictatorship.

WTF.
 
Last edited:
His response:


I just went and read thru the UK Wiki page he references - and I call double-secret retard on your Ukranian friend.

He is trying to use a page - that AT BEST - says that the death toll was 4 million - not the 6 million claimed by the "Ukranian nationalists" he seems to be trying to refute - and it also says - very clearly - that the famine was MAN MADE because of the policies of the Soviet government.

You say toe-may-toe - I say toe-maa-toe.

Basically his argument is: They're not as a big a bag of douchebags as you say they are - they only killed millions of people because they were stupid.
 
Nope, he was serious. That's what's so scary.

Heh. We did. He tried to say that it was good there and everyone had food. Had no answer when I asked him how many of his countrymen Stalin murdered other than to say that he wasn't there and didn't know about that. F'n clueless.

A Ukrainian apologist who has chosen to forget that 3 million of his countrymen were killed by a man made famine? His own countrymen should whip his ass until the facts sink in.

Is it possible that he is ignorant of the facts? Dictators are very effective at controlling the press and shaping the facts to their benefits.

OTOH, he could simply be an antagonistic fool.
 
Curios: how old is this fellow? My guess is that he's younger than mid-30's.

Yahtzee!! You got it. I'm not sure he's even 30.

Your cow-orker needs to get his head out of commie loving butt. There are people far better informed than him who agree that it did happen.

He is NOT my friend. He happens to work in the same department I do. Personally, I find him more than a bit obnoxious and do not like it when he invites himself to eat with is.

Is it possible that he is ignorant of the facts? Dictators are very effective at controlling the press and shaping the facts to their benefits.

OTOH, he could simply be an antagonistic fool.

I'd vote for an ignorant fool, actually.

Poison his lunch. Serious.

Not worth my time.
 
He is NOT my friend. He happens to work in the same department I do. Personally, I find him more than a bit obnoxious and do not like it when he invites himself to eat with is.


Sorry Dwarven - I knew he wasn't your "friend" by your earlier posts, I was typing fast and that word was the first one that came into my head. I was thinking of "friend" the same way you use "friend" to describe the kid who constantly picks his nose and talks too loud but can't seem to take a hint that you don't want him around when you are hanging out with the other kids in the neighborhood.

We have a guy like this at work too. He comes over, sits down with us at lunch - and proceeds to monopolize the conversation. Back a couple of years ago when the bailouts were first going on - a bunch of us were sitting around talking about it in the cafe at lunch. None of us agreed with it and thought the bailouts sucked. He came over - talked about how they were great and made comments about not wanting the value of his house (which he had just bought at the peak) - to go down and so forth. I laid into him - bigtime. I basically ran up one side of him and down the other every time he came out with another excuse. And without actually coming right out and saying - I told him he was stupid as dirt for buying a house at the peak of the market.

That solved the problem for over a year - he sat by himself and wouldn't go near us for a long time. Confrontation works.
 
. . . He happens to work in the same department I do. . . .

In *todays* workplace, you might be reasonable to be worried about YOU being reported to HR for harrassing him, especially for your hate-mongering emails to him leading to web sites with such graphic and vile material. You may create a work environment for his where he feels unsafe to be near you.

I hope you realize I find that absurd...

Your Mad-Ukranian needs to spend some time living in a dictatorship before he spouts off like that.
 
In *todays* workplace, you might be reasonable to be worried about YOU being reported to HR for harrassing him, especially for your hate-mongering emails to him leading to web sites with such graphic and vile material. You may create a work environment for his where he feels unsafe to be near you.

I hope YOU realize that I thought of that when I read his reply. I'm going to let it drop as I really don't need the hassle of getting fired over this sh*t. [thinking]
 
Back
Top Bottom