all 2 comments

[–]StillLessons 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

This would be an interesting debate in a more neutral context.

In the current "Russia hysteria" context, however, the surge in popularity of this interpretation is quite suspect.

[–]Pononimus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Suvorov is a well known Marxist and Communist and this is nothing more than revisionism of the worst sort. I don't even have to read it to know that it most likely contains passages that praise Stalin, call him a hero and try to make him out to be the true, great leader during World War Two. The reality: The USSR would have been utterly crushed by the Nazis if Stalin's Western Allie, The United States, hadn't been providing him and Russia with trucks, cars, planes, tanks, weapons, munitions, food, and everything else the Russians needed to fight the Germans. Stalin knew this and, although he was too arrogant to be grateful for the help, he still acknowledged it which is why he didn't push Churchill and Roosevelt too hard for a European invasion. So, without the direct help of the United States, there would not have been a Russia and Germany would have destroyed the Soviet Union. Also, let's not forget Stalin's other enormous blunder which resulted in a massive famine that swept the Soviet Union in the 1920s and killed millions; a famine which was relieved only with the help of... Wait for it... The United States when President Herbert Hoover sent two billion dollars worth of grain and food to a starving (and failing) Soviet Union and Americans to make sure it got distributed to the people who needed it. Stalin? A hero? No! He was an incompetent, bumbling megalomaniac and a homicidal fool!