IIRC it gets deployed against every ontologically evil designated enemy. I know it was deployed against Iraqis during the first Gulf War, with Hillary Clinton claiming Saddam was issuing his troops with Viagra specifically so they could [redacted] more. This is me misremembering, see replies.
I know it was deployed against Iraqis during the first Gulf War, with Hillary Clinton claiming Saddam was issuing his troops with Viagra specifically so they could [redacted] more.
I don't doubt r**e was a claim made against Iraqis too, but it's the absurd claim about soldiers taking babies from incubators that most sticks out in my memory when it comes to Iraq and the first Gulf War. However, Hilary Clinton talking about soldiers being given viagra was definitely about Gaddafi. Keep in mind who was in power when those respective conflicts were happening.
Hillary Clinton claiming Saddam was issuing his troops with Viagra specifically so they could [redacted] more
Wasn't that Gaddafi? The timeline doesn't match, since Viagra wasn't even on the market until the late 90s (hard to forget the time hack Viagra jokes were suddenly everywhere). Also, why would Hillary have said anything? H.W. Bush was president then.
you're rightCould also argue that Japan codified it during WW2 in the occupation of China and Korea. But rape as a weapon is a conservative tool. It's why conservatives oppose abortion so much.
the red army was the ONLY army in WW2 that punished soldiers who did this. Usually by a bullet to the head by the nearest political officer.
i think the amerikkkans hanged some black soldiers, but that might've been during WW1 and they were basically just lynchings
https://journals.openedition.org/rccsar/476 this is an interesting article about the way nato basically spun all the SA the red army did into the standard anti-communist points of: "hordes of asiatics doing horrible crimes constantly"
in the end though, show me an army that doesnt r#pe and i'll show you the unit manual for Starcraft 2, sadly
ONLY army in WW2 that punished soldiers who did this
we can avoid making an obviously false statement just to emphasize that the soviet military had policies against it.
At the very least, even if he's not into bad shit, its weird to flaunt your horniness in your username like that, especially in such a redditsh way. (exceptions made for @HornyOnMain@hexbear.net whom we love dearly)
"Lewds" isn't exclusively about kiddie creeping, but it's hard for me to shake the association with kiddie creeping because of decades of kiddie creepers on places like 4ch!n talking about "lewds" in the way that that typically meant there. 
The word is contaminated for me, and I see it as a warning sign when someone uses it openly like that.
The word is everywhere in weeb circles. I refuse to use it because if you're an adult you can just use the actual words when talking about sex.
"Lewd" is an oddly infantilizing euphemism, it's a word you'd use when talking about sex to someone who still giggles every time you say "penis", to whom sex is a naughty word. That's the vibe that that word gives me and why I don't like it.
The HornyOnMain arc of going from being overly horny on main to becoming anti horny on main and joining the 
but keeping the username
Red Army did this no more than the Western allies did correct?
absolute or per capita? there's no honest comparative assessments to my knowledge, and lingering perceptions of soviet violence on civilians is permanently tainted by late-war nazi propaganda.
but talking absolutely, if the american GI and soviet soldier had an identical propensity for abuse, more would've been done on the eastern front, with so many more soviet soldiers deployed on a wider front occupying more territory. and i'm not sure we should think the occurrence of war crimes was identical, the motives of reprisal & revenge didn't exist as strongly for people from new england than soldiers that might've been from regions that suffered massacres and sexual violence for years under axis occupation. it's ugly to think about but i really wouldn't be surprised if soviet soldiers were crime-ing at a bit higher rate for that reason. i read an account that directly tied an incidence of violence (that was punished with execution) with a leave to their liberated home village & hearing about the atrocities that occurred there.
Is there anywhere I can read more about the Wikipedia thing? Preferably more recently since the other article I can remember from Reuters is from 2007 lmao
Honestly, its possible thats the article I saw? So it might be old information. I'll keep that in mind for next time especially since yeah, I dont have the article handy and havent been able to find it when I went looking.
Here's the link to the 2007 for future reference. Most of the results that show up on Google are from Wikipedia itself (like this one) which comes with its own problems.
The biggest point to note, however, is that Wikipedia relies on third-party sources to back up their claims, and being a primarily english-speaking, west-hosted service, a lot of these sources will be sometimes biased and sometimes from authors who straight up make shit up. I found this Reddit post on r/communism from ~2yrs ago of a user who scrutinized the sources on its page for Another View of Stalin by Ludo Martens and found many anti-communist authors present.
"My mother grew up in the Soviet Union ... So I'm very conscious of what, what it can mean to make knowledge free, to make information free"
I want that to mean free information helps propel humanity forward but I feel like, with this being hosted on CBS, its meant to imply it can help bring these countries down and under capitalist control
OK that reuters article is definitly not what I saw. The one I saw was a critical article about a single guy who was not an employed fed but an avowed and commited anticommunist who had like 1/3 of the edits on the website. Wish I still had the article.
I want to piggy-back off this, since I got in a wiki-hole last night that found me reading about the Doctor's Plot. Along with Jewish artists being killed, post war Stalin, wiki would have me think, was a truly virulent anti-semite.
Anyone have more info about this that isn't tainted by anti-communist wiki-editors? What actually happened any why? I'm not here to have Stalin's saintly image upheld and the only thing he did wrong was stop at Berlin, but I'm hoping to have a better understanding of this period.
Maybe more importantly, I understand that when people, myself included, defend the USSR, we're not defending it wholesale and uncritically, though against western lies it can seem so, but try to come from a place of understanding the conditions that brought about the decisions that were made, and that in our own post-revolution experience, we wouldn't simply do exactly as the Soviets did, because our own conditions will be drastically different.
My friend who brought me to the ML side of things (i still technically call myself a Luxembourgist but whatever, I'm effectively an ML at this point) told me that the thing with the Doctor's plot is that it was genuinly kind of a legitimate bad on Stalin's part, but it wasn't motivated by genuine antisemitism, just old man paranoia. But idk thats a sourceless claim from a third party I bet someone else will come along with something better.
Espresso Stalinist has their flaws, but they hosted an interesting write-up about it https://espressostalinist.com/2014/08/24/the-doctors-plot/
Riumin's actions seem really suspect throughout the events
edit: oh and here is Bill Bland's book on the topic. https://www.marxists.org/archive/bland/1991/10/doctors-case-death-stalin.pdf
I will say the "rootless cosmopolitanism" campaign is pretty tropey and gross
From https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1931/01/12.htm :
Anti-Semitism
January 12, 1931
Reply to an Inquiry of the Jewish News Agency in the United States
In answer to your inquiry :
National and racial chauvinism is a vestige of the misanthropic customs characteristic of the period of cannibalism. Anti-semitism, as an extreme form of racial chauvinism, is the most dangerous vestige of cannibalism.
Anti-semitism is of advantage to the exploiters as a lightning conductor that deflects the blows aimed by the working people at capitalism. Anti-semitism is dangerous for the working people as being a false path that leads them off the right road and lands them in the jungle. Hence Communists, as consistent internationalists, cannot but be irreconcilable, sworn enemies of anti-semitism.
In the U.S.S.R. anti-semitism is punishable with the utmost severity of the law as a phenomenon deeply hostile to the Soviet system. Under U.S.S.R. law active anti-semites are liable to the death penalty.
J. Stalin January 12, 1931
First published in the newspaper Pravda, No. 329, November 30, 1936
You see present day Russians commiting systemic war crimes led by a man wanted for crimes against humanity and doubt that the USSR is an egregious perpetrator of war crimes. See the holodomor. Did you think they only did mass execution and starved children but didn't commit rape?
I'm gonna spare you a lot of trouble and tell you three simple facts
-
Modern Russia is not the USSR, Putin is not Stalin and conflating the two is ideological laziness
-
There is no clean war, if you somehow believe that there was ever a war without war crimes on both sides, I have several bridges to sell you in New York
-
The Holodomor is literally a fascist myth meant to minimize and justify the Holocaust. Most modern historians agree that at worst, it was a mismanaged famine and not an attempt to commit genocide
Jewish historians would call you a holocaust denier for validating the holdomor, the holodomor is direct Nazi propaganda, it's Nazi Holocaust minimization and apologia.
Double genocide theory is Holocaust denial.
I find your views interesting and would like to debate you in the marketplace 
of ideas
You see present day Russians commiting systemic war crimes led by a man wanted for crimes against humanity and doubt that the USSR is an egregious perpetrator of war crimes.
Insomuch as Russian warcrimes in Ukraine are even a thing (extant, but heavily exaggerated, and not out of line with other similar wars), the Stalin lead USSR and Putin lead Russia are completly different regimes. This statement is essentially racist because it implies that Russians are inherently inclined towards rape or something, because otherwise the Putin regime and the Stalin led USSR have nothing in common politically.
See the holodomor.
https://en.prolewiki.org/wiki/Holodomor https://www.reddit.com/r/TheDeprogram/comments/13vvvfs/new_way_of_determining_historical_truth_just/jm84jlj/
Did you think they only did mass execution
Executing Nazi POWs is not a bad thing. They were Nazis. The USSR actually held back on this as well.
starved children
There was no intentional starvation of anyone in the USSR.
Also naming the Soviet famine is literally stolen valor by Nazis. Using it as justification for lebensraum
The name Holodomor was chosen because it sounds like Holocaust. i.e the Holocaust of the would-be Aryan race lmao.
Very funny that they mention starving children considering peasant landlords were doing exactly that in direct defiance of the redistributive agenda of the Soviet state.
They want to feed little children during the famine? They should thank Stalin and the peasant armies for holding the Kulaks at gunpoint to give it to them.
Kulaks would have loved to starve them out, poor people and their children were useless eaters in their eyes.
Putin wanted by the ICC for war crimes, yet George W Bush and his criminal administration walk free. Wild.
The "Double Genocide" Theory - Jewish Currents https://jewishcurrents.org/the-double-genocide-theory
Stop engaging in Holocaust denial 