You must understand, the leading Bolsheviks who took over Russia were not Russians. They hated Russians. They hated Christians. Driven by ethnic hatred they tortured and slaughtered millions of Russians without a shred of human remorse. It cannot be overstated. Bolshevism committed the greatest human slaughter of all time. The fact that most of the world is ignorant and uncaring about this enormous crime is proof that the global media is in the hands of the perpetrators.
- White people: Remember 911
- White people: Remember the Holocaust
- White people: Remember The Alamo
- White people: Remember the American Revolution
- White people: Remember Pearl Harbor
- White people: Slavery? Come on are you still stuck on that? It's time to move on that was yearsssssss ago no one cares anymore
- ??????????????? Tumblr everybody
Blood Axis - Wir rufen deine WölfeWir rufen Deine Wölfe
und rufen Deinen Speer,
wir rufen alle Zwölfe
vom Himmel zu uns her.
Wir rufen Dich vor Allen.
Nun kommt die wilde Jagd,
nun laßt das Horn erschallen,
um keinen Toten klagt.
Der Feind ist schon verfallen,
eh daß der Morgen tagt.
Das Wild hat keinen Namen,
der Feind hat kein Gesicht,
das Aas hat keinen Samen,
gerecht ist das Gericht.
Die Ernte ist vergangen,
die Spreu ist täglich feil,
die Raben jetzt verlangen
ihr angemessnes Teil,
die Jagd hat angefangen:
nun hält uns, Herr, Dein Heil.
Friedrich Hielscher, 1979 (1902-1990)
We Asked a Military Expert How to Invade and Conquer Russia
In the past, when I’ve asked military experts from IHS Jane’s what it would take to conquer, say,America, or the UK, the idea of it actually happening in the near future was relatively far fetched. But recent events in Crimea have raised the very real possibility of conflict, so when I asked IHS Jane’s Konrad Muzyka what it would take to conquer Russia, it all suddenly felt very real.
No one wants to see Putin riding into battle on the back of a nuclear warhead, but that said, I’d like to make it clear that I, for one, welcome our new Russian overlords and would like to remind them that I could be helpful in rounding up others to toil in their underground vodka caves.
VICE: I’m going to begin with a classic cliche. Over the centuries, plenty of power-hungry leaders have tried to take on Russia, convinced that they would be the first to overcome the brutal Russian winter. How could a modern army deal with this ancient problem?
Konrad Muzyka: I agree that from a historical perspective this has been a problem many countries have succumbed to. But the advent of precision guided munitions and, more importantly, nuclear weapons have completely nullified the issue. Any potential conflict with the West would most likely be fought in the air, space, and sea. Any use of land forces would be limited to capturing strategically important facilities—bridges, airfields, and the like. Given the size of Russian territory, I don’t think anyone would be interested in moving their troops to Russia and holding them there.
So how quickly might any invading force find itself plunged into a nuclear winter?
Russia reserves the right to use nuclear weapons even in a regional conflict scenario. As such, any country taking on Russia needs to be aware of a dramatic and quick escalation that could take place. But this is a sign of weakness rather than strength.
In the days of the Red Army, it felt as though there was an endless supply of men ready to die in the name of Mother Russia. Is this still true? What’s their manpower like?
That’s true, but many of those sent into battle during the Second World War fought at gunpoint. Not only that of the Nazi Wehrmacht, but also that of their fellow Russian “comrades.” Retreat was usually forbidden, even in a tactical sense—those who were caught falling back were either shot on the spot or court-martialed… and then usually shot.
A few notes on the Ukraine situation.
1. I hope any tumblr rightists who are all pro-Russia realize that part of the Russian pretext for their annexation of Crimea is the fact that the Ukrainian pro-Europe coalition is in part made of nationalists who repeatedly have been referred to as “Nazis” and “fascists” by Sergey Lavrov and leftists in the media for wanting to speak their own language. We all know that if you use those words, leftists, no friends of nationalism in the first place, will stop at nothing to make sure they are eradicated, even if that means violating all of their liberal internationalist principles by allowing Russia to do as they please with Ukraine. There are some radical groups present in Ukraine (like there are everywhere in Europe at this point) but if you believe in the preservation of national cultures and identity, I don’t see how you could be on the side of Russia. To support Russia because you are a nationalist conservative Putin fan is to confirm liberals’ main suspicion and fear of nationalism….that nationalism can’t exist because overinflated patriotism just causes countries to turn on each other instead of maintaining a respectful distance from each other’s internal affairs.
2. The US has broken international law before with regard to invasion, it’s true. I personally don’t care as I don’t really believe in international law. Which leads me to my next point…in the international system, or in any moral situation whatsoever, does hypocrisy really matter? Does the fact that any moral actor committed an immoral act in the past prevent them from taking the inverse action when it IS morally appropriate? If that were true, to use a hurriedly made example, if Person A stole in the past, then he couldn’t stop Person B from stealing something. But in that case, isn’t he now doubly wrong, for stealing and then later failing to prevent a theft? Furthermore, while it is an extremely popular trend to characterize criticism from the Western world as coming from the US, that’s not accurate to this situation. The UK, Germany, Poland, Japan, and even the PRC (!!!) have condemned Russia’s actions. In fact, I feel the PRC feels especially betrayed by Russia, since they have always steadfastly stuck together in defense of the sovereignty of nations in the past (due to fears about legitimizing the overthrow of illiberal regimes like their own). Finally, as a corollary to that, while people like to make their tumblr copypastas about US hypocrisy, Russia is equally hypocritical in this situation as they have gone on record so many times (Syria anyone?) defending nonintervention and unquestionable sovereignty.
3. With this all said, I wouldn’t support a military solution, at least not at this point. Considering the radically different orientations of East and West Ukraine, the image of the country being torn apart is tragically true, especially considering the might of the forces pulling on them. The Ukrainian people have serious questions to answer about their own identity and future. The large pro-Russian sentiment in the East makes Western intervention problematic…can’t really liberate people who are perfectly happy with Russia’s intervention. I feel retaliation against Russia solely for the sake of violating international law and norms (part of a greater game that has nothing to do with the Ukrainian people) misses the point and would be a sad episode where we forgot that we need to be acting in the best interests of nations.
This is hurriedly done but I hope someone read it.