Comments by "MrSpamaccount" (@MrSpamaccount) on "BadComedian"
channel.
-
121
-
78
-
71
-
44
-
25
-
24
-
21
-
15
-
13
-
they were more likely to be evacuated and if not possible to do so - destroyed. difference is that when nazis did just the same when retreated from ussr it was all ok, though they did it in occupied foreign territory, not theirs. when finns did just the same during winter war it was all ok (in fact i think it is ok). and when soviets do this its suddenly not ok, evil regime bla-bla. napoleon was defeated by burning/evacuating fourage and food supply from moscow and by destroying places for his army to live in winter, beside partisan terror. i guess beria should have had all tank production facilities for germans, production lines, whatever they will find useful. the most adorable thing is - various scumbags use certain facts of resources destruction as an excuse for nazis to starve millions of soviet pows. at the same time when soviets captured berlin germans recieved better rations than soviet citizens back home. somehow they found resources to feed starving germans. plus millions of pows too. also the fact that there was no harsh famine in winter of 41, though it obviously was the time of hunger, hints me that amount of food destroyed by retreating soviets, to say humbly, is overexaggerated. thinking that nazis were providing rations for civilians from their supplies is kinda stupid to me, keeping in mind their policies in the east and attitude to pows. but yea, keep noticing how one does something debatable, and close eyes when others do the same, it is called bias if i'm not wrong. uh, and i wonder if some of "civilized" states would be attacked, would they gladly provide enemy with vital resources?
11
-
9
-
9
-
7
-
CoD always copypasted movies, this was a plain copy of "Enemy at the gates", moment was stupid, as in real life many soldiers drowned if their rafts or landing crafts were destroyed, because they were overequipped. Also bad filmmakers tend to pick extremes and turn them into absolute to bring out emotions. In context of WW2 attacks without weapons is a plain lie, but there were situations when soldiers had to defend with lack of arms, having only rifles and several machineguns, when should have been equipped with mortars, at guns etc. But this happened due to improper supply infrastructure and rapid actions of german troops, not because weapons were not given, there was just nothing to give at the moment.
But compare CoD1 and CoH2 and try to find more examples of such biased rusophoby in first game.
6
-
Lol. I think some poles still think that Poland always was PRL and USSR was always an ally of Poland. First of all NKVD had no motive to kill all valuable people, soviet method is to use valuable people in own interests, its Nazi method that was about getting rid of all kind of polish elite and Hitler spoke of it in plain text.
Our lovely Red Army, as it was told million times here, reached Visla right after Bagration operation. Your blame about not assisting your idiotic rebellion is just like a blame, that USSR did not take Berlin in summer of 1944. If your AK freaks did coordinate their actions with soviet side, everything would be different, but thing is nobody was going to coordinate anything, aim was in capturing Warsaw and start creating problems for soviet side. So having no possibility for assistance, no good reason to do this, no motivation to do this you find it acceptable to blame soviet side for not assisting rusophobes who'd backstab in situation when army is exhausted.
Truth is that everyone who joined Anders army was a fucking coward that escaped USSR after living here on soviet money away from the battle for 2 years. It depicts perfectly how much they wanted to fight. And the fact that they fought as a smaller partner of their british owners depicts them as fighters for independent Poland, of course. Cheap cowards. Poland is closer to reach from USSR than from Italy.
6
-
Let me cut grass with a lawn-mower having a paid worker do it and you clean up railroad station toilet with a toothbrush, and later we'll speak of our mutual contribution, with mine being more important.
Also speaking about major victories, Moscow, Stalingrad, Kursk, Bagration operation, Visla-Oder operation. Berlin, Vienna, Belgrade, Warsaw, Budapest, Manchuria, finally. Of course allies liberated more territories, especially when there were no enemies to liberate them from there.
6
-
6
-
5
-
***** Wtf, pole. NKVD could not order to kill anyone, NKVD can only fulfil order to do so. Russian soldiers destroyed houses, thats true. For instance in his memoirs pilot Dolgushin said how he was ordered to destroy a club building in some village using rockets, he flew and did it, somewhere after special order about burning houses in the frontline was recieved by troops in november of 1941. In this club he killed a good bunch of german officers. Now can you explain why this house STOOD and germans created an HQ there if everything was burnt because of scorched earth tactic? Its also fucking idiocy to say that houses were destroyed. For what fucking purpose? It was discussed million times here, why the fuck would somebody destroy a fucking house in summer? Who needs it, who would waste time destroying it, what the fuck are you trying to tell when you tell your wonderful revealing stories. Strategic objects were to be destroyed if could not be evacuated - its logical, any country would do this defending itself, and your american owners, for instance, would do it normally invading somebody like they did in Vietnam. Damned peasants huts or city buildings have NO strategic value, unless if there are troops defending in it or if it could be used by the enemy. By saying this shit about scorched earth involving houses, also speaking in tone of a tutor, who wants to tell russians what happened and what did not, being a polish brainwashed kid you just show yourself as an idiot, but its ok, all westerners do this, no problem if their faithful peons want to look the same.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
***** "but I find it interesting how American's elect their leaders and Russians still don't elect theirs. (You know they don't)"
Pha-ha-ha. Americans elect from 2 equally shitty candidates specially chosen by oligarchy for centuries and it is called elect. Russians elect from vast variety of shitty candidates, picking least shitty, and its called - they do not elect. With help of american friends russians enjoyed drunk swine who murdered thousands in Moscow in 1993, farce in Kiev compared to what happened back then is nothing, keeping in mind muscovites were defending legal already elected parliament, unlike kievans who fought for eligitimate coup. And you know what happened in 1996 - drunk swine and murderer was reelected, only because he was 'american' guy. When majority of russians votes for Putin - its called dictatorship and whatever. For some reason nobody yet forced me to vote for him or his party, and i always voted against.
"Also compare Iraq and Chechnya. Both were terrible wars, but the American government showed some restraint and care for civilian life in Iraq (You might disagree, but take a look at Chechnya's infrastructure after the war, and then Iraq's), where as the Russian government showed nothing but brutality in both Chechen wars. "
Yea right, evacuating settlements before operation began in Chechnya due to such thing that russian govt yet saw chechens as citizens of Russia is of course worse than bombing the hell out of sleeping Baghdad, Belgrade or Tripoli, it would be nicer if degenerates like you kept their mouths shut, if they can not retranslate anything but cheapest propaganda.
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
+Isaac Jones i do not see how barbarism of civilized germans was different from IS in eastern europe and especially in USSR and Yugoslavia. Well, i see how, they hid their crimes from the public. I do not see how barbarism of american soldiers who boiled japanese skulls for souvenirs was different from IS, dont see how its different from behaviour in Korea or Vietnam. These people are "civilized", but you label IS as barbarian because they are some filthy arabs or what? I dont remember " civilized" butthurt about absolutely similar islamic state that existed in republic of Chechnya under name of Ichkeria, everyone adored these freedom fighters, though they did just the same, shot every nonmuslim, traded slaves and cut heads making vids on camera. Only difference was they used VHS cams instead of 4K. But since it was a local problem for Russia, not a regional for whole middle east and europe, everyone was happily licking their asses.
3
-
3
-
Nope, AK wanted to 'liberate' Poland before soviet and loyal polish troops would. They made attempts to cross Visla and enter the city, but actually this needs a lot of planning and army to be ready. Red Army by that time just finished liberating Belorussia, after a rapid offensive and was exhausted, they did not, like polish resistance, sit on their asses for 5 years doing nothing. In addition to this, there was Nazi defensive doctrine of fortress cities, when german troops would concentrate there and defend them till the end. Obviously this needed preparations. Also it would be dumb, even if theoretically crossing Visla, to hold the bridgehead, and fighting for Warsaw at the same time. Finally Germans would necessarily organize a counter-attack on Warsaw if it fell, they would not need to cross any river to do this.
All these stories about Stalin betrayed Warsaw is bullshit. Its political mistake of asshole polish government in exile or polish resistance itself, poles should know better. Without Warsaw soviet troops sacrificed 600 thousand men liberating Poland, but asshole poles instead, having no respect to the dead, dare to blame those 600000 for not dying in even bigger numbers sacrificing themselves for rusophobic and antisoviet polish government. Just imagine how stupid poles do look from aside, and how laughable their accusations are.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Lion of Abruzzo artillery, even mortars shoot quite far and does not have to be near the village. In modern conflict in Ukraine its hardly trackable whether artillery is present or not in certain area with use of all modern reconnaissance capabilities, and you want to prove it with only saying that finns denied there was artillery? What if we would do the same using only german Nazi's opinion on Gleiwitz incident, blaming poles in beginning WW2. Similarly Hitler blamed USSR in attacking Nazi Germany on 22nd of June of 1941, no surprise various morons use it as quite a realistic version nowadays, and as political conjuncture changes we'll hear that Hitler was only defending himself, though at the same time nobody would say the same about Poland, because its in 'proper countries' club.
Keeping in mind whole 'winter war' began because of Leningrad (second largest city of USSR, Baltic fleet naval base etc) was in potential reach of finnish troops - 40km max and USSR wanted to secure its borders, contextually those were finns who, like poles, and well, lets be honest, like good 80% of European states (as we yet can not speak about their colonial possessions that often became pro-soviet after successful struggle for independence) were systematically anti-Soviet. As soon as soviet state was established finns attempted numerous efforts to capture soviet territory, and continued systematic provocations on the border. Why could not Mainila be one of these 'innocent' provocations, that became well-known only because it happened when USSR was not as weak as it (soviet Russia more correctly) was in early 20s.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
+Isaac Jones i'll make several comments as i dont feel comfortable making long ones on a tablet, not being able to edit and type them properly. Greens very likely would not be conscripted at all for reasons of being old, for political disloyality or for they already were dealt with in 37-38. On the other hand there were opposite situations, there was a man who was plotting murder of Stalin as a part of student terror group. He was to be arrested but managed to escape and later served in infantry and later airforce as an Il-2 gunner. NKVD was not almighty, add the factor that majority of rural population did not have id and their personal info often was written up from their words.
Back to burning civilians. I do not like simplifications too, but what i hate more is when extreme cases are being depicted as ordinary ones. Of course friendly fire on civilians could happen as it happened with the army itself, low skills of servicemen, their natural stupidity or wrong motivations (like civs who are under occupation are traitors too) can cause this happen. And i wont be surprised it happened. Aswell as it easily could happen in 44-45 when nazis retreated in Germany. But i do not want to see neither of these stories in game unless they are properly told. What i saw in game is unmotivated and what is more important illogical and pointless cruelty. And it obviously was used to depict average russian, since our good and noble protagonist is a jew, we only see russians as degenerates. His moronic commander, NKVD officer in Stalingrad and finally the moustache guy who shoots wonderful polish freedom fighters are all russian. If whole story is not rusophoby, what else is that? Why i did not see any nazi crimes on the other hand, when tens of thousands were committed in USSR including thousands when people were intentionally gathered in biggest building of the village and burnt there. THOUSANDS of such cases with evidence. But instead i was shown how russians committed such crime not by mistake, but by intent. Really? You want me to acdept this point of view only because obvious thing like friendly fire at own civs could have taken place? But its plain hypocricy. Its whitewashing of nazi crimes and sucking out new and new from a middle finger for soviet side.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Mmm, why you all are such idiots? you say more or less trueful things, except brutally murdered poles in mass graves, mass grave is a sign of Nazi einsatztruppen, soviet organs never mass executed anyone, but often used to bury criminals executed in one place, depending where a grave 'polygon' was placed, that might look like a mass grave, and somehow it is, but they did not gather there in several days, like in case of Nazi extermination actions and like in case with 'brutally murdered poles'. Not to say, Nazis openly said that they would execute poles, and they consequtively executed polish elite. To blame USSR in brutally murdering poles you need a motive for USSR, there is no such motive. One that Putin made up is cheap bullshit.
Finland was mobilized before Stalin invaded so its a question who wanted to attack first. USSR demanded finnish guarantees of neutrality, finns did not want to give them. Securing protection of second biggest city of USSR with naval base and strategic factories was vital.
Even not all active collaborants of Nazis were killed when in opinion of many in Russia they should have been, I don't know how it works for people who saw them as liberators, I hope that if smth like that happens to your country your neighbor would stand for the enemy and will point you out as a patriot, so you'll be put into some cage immediately. But judging by your speech you'll be first to run to the enemy with desire to collaborate.
'Half of country' taken by soviet-Nazi agreement was actually half of Belorussia and Ukraine that Poland captured from them in 20s. Since Belorussia and Ukraine were parts of USSR, we simply returned what belonged to us. So all these accusations are quite stupid. Speaking of theoretically accepting these lands as polish, would it be smart to let Nazis occupy whole Poland so they'll have a high start for their invasion?
Speaking of people waiting for Nazis, there are some funny cases of such in Grossmans diaries relic clowns said they used for the game. Like, one oldman prepared to meet the occupants. Made a dinner, gathered treats for them. They came into his house and simply robbed him. Liberated man hanged himself.
Other one was happily looking at a german soldier eating lard, once german left he found out that soldier stole his lard and got upset.
I guess later he was shot and put into gulag for letting Nazi soldier steal his lard, if I was a westerner i'd no doubt think this way.
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
***** i'm more than sure its because soviet historians had to operate real documents instead of fairy tales from the front told as chinese whispers. Censorship does not mean falsification, aswell as freedom of speech does not mean there's any chance to hear the truth.
I've had a history textbook in school brought with help of Soros fund in Russia that told russians that most important event and battle of WW2 was Normandy landing, and that had only 2-3 pages about WW2 at all. It is the alternative you suggest? Want me to believe its better than a censored soviet literature on this topic?
On the other hand - there's some story about one soviet heroic epic - 28 soldiers of Panfilov division. It was praised throughout whole soviet history because one soviet journalist (i'd repeat this - JOURNALIST) lied in a censored soviet newspaper (of course soviet press was censored, no sarcasm). Because his lie was not censored story became a heroic epic, though of course soldiers of Panfilov division were heroes and they saved Moscow in 1941 together with many other troops.
Lately, because there's a film being shot about these soldiers one smartass from russian state archive - absolute liberal, idiot, perestroyka lover, USA fan etc (note that, such a person is responsible for state archive in Russia) - revealed us documents that proved - story written in 1942 in a soviet newspaper was a lie, 28 soldiers did not stop whole german panzer division single-handedly etc etc. What we have to sum up - germans did not reach Moscow - i live a couple of kilometers from where they were stopped. Panfilov division participated in this. 28 of heroes were a myth of soviet propaganda that was launched by some stupid journalist. Since it became very popular - nobody dared to tell the truth, despite everything was investigated as soon as the war ended - its how soviet system worked. So what was done by evil soviet system - it documented FACTS that did happen and documented falsifications putting them into archive so they'd be revealed in future. What do western 'historians' typically do? They do not even bother to read russian sources. What would they find out if they cooperated with russian historians who have access to archives - truth. What do they do when they do not? Tell us bullshit - just like in this game.
1
-
Rex Talbot commies are antixenophobic by default. Problem is they do not exist in vacuum like sectants of sorts believe and personally may be xenophobic. Also, despite the hypocricy and attempts to construct a person without nationality, communists of 20th century did have nationalities and in USSR it was taken in account.
Also its sort of naive to believe these fairy tales about a person loving russians and hating commies, actually whole his speech proves the contrary. For nazi propaganda it was rather common to tell germans that everyone around them was untermensch, while germans were superior, while to locals this propaganda said that germans were their friends and all they want is to liberate them, typically, from evil Stalin. Same is typical for ukrainian nazi propaganda of modern time, they divide russians into two types, one of them, one who yaps the same their propaganda does, support them is a russian, a good boy, while everyone else is a mongol, muscovite degenerate, representative of golden horde and whatever you like. Also, when a person, you said he's from Spain, says that he hates communists, who are only guilty for attempt to keep his state safe from fascism, its double naive to believe he hates nazis. 99% of modern nazis say they hate nazis and Hitler in particular. Its like 'of course i hate Hitler, but...' And Hitler on his own is not as evil as he's depicted, system was antihuman, not only Hitler was a nazi, german people were supporting this too. Also its enough to look at what happens in europe nowadays with all this shit about allowing migrants come freely to turn population towards fascist state organization in nearest future. Evil commie social guarantees, working hour limit, guaranteed salaries and all that nasty shit europe recieved because USSR existed would be replaced with demand to adore the upper class and fulfil all their demands. And whoever supports left ideas would be pointed at moronic president of France Hollande, who allows homo marriages, at the same time does everything his american owners need to deepen migration crisis in europe, etc, given a choice of another moron or maybe a smart person, who knows, who would represent right ideas. Well, maybe there'd be smth 'mild' like european Thatcher, but it is very likely that situation very soon would look like 1930s, with lots of openly fascist regimes in the east of europe, quasidemocratic in the west, and, unfortunately, nobody to oppose them this time. Except, maybe, islamic state. But do we need to choose from two different fascist groups?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Lol, well, I guess its a lot more comfortable to be a slave in an own house, than in a Nazi camp, or, even as servant for noble Aryan burgers.
Speaking of showing its might. How many wars did USSR start intentionally. I'll be loyal to your finnish interpretation, even I have no proofs of USSR stands behind the provocation in Mainila, i'll count Finnish war as a soviet aggression. Other one is Afghanistan, which is hardly an open aggression too, but we'll count it. So I know of 2 major wars, you?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
О да, я это говно начинал смотреть. Думаю, посмотрю че-нить легкое про ВОВ, особенно конец войны, наверно что-то забавное. Сначала он ебал какую-то бабень, я стерпел, но следующей сценой было то, как они в усмерть ужирались. Этого я перенести не смог. Сколько это от хронометража, 15 минут? Я редко не досматриваю фильмы, которые изначально хочу посмотреть. Лютейшее дерьмище, авторы твари. Но вдруг я ошибался (нет), гг. Бегу смотреть обзор.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1