You mean like the Katyn massacre? Oh wait, that was the USSR, too...

The Nazis firmly believed that they were fighting a "preventive war". Why would they think that if the Soviets had been twiddling their thumbs instead of moving troops to the border.

uh, because Hitler was bat-shit crazy.

"You mean like the Katyn massacre? Oh wait, that was the USSR, too..."

The einsatzgruppen made Katyn look like Kent State by comparison, even if the evidence for Katyn wasn't highly suspect and didn't come from Nazi mouthpieces.

"because Hitler was bat-shit crazy."

That's the best you can come up with, so what, the Soviets weren't mobilizing their troops? Is this all commie fantasy? Whatever makes you feel better.

Hm, actually up to the day that the Germans implemented Operation: Barbarossa Stalin was actually slowing border defenses as to not offend the Germans.

Just because he wasn't as good at killing people as Hitler, doesn't mean he wasn't also a Genocidal maniac.

It makes no difference what both the Nazis and Soviets believed. Both sides were commiting atrocious acts of genocide, only the Soviets had been commiting them before the war even started.

At the time of the invasion, the Soviets had 110 infantry divisions along the western frontier, had called up 800,000 reservists in April-May, had transferred Siberian forces and eastern forces to the west, and had begun organization an army for the defense of Moscow.

"only the Soviets had been commiting them before the war even started. "

Right, all the reports of pogroms and paramilitary killings in Germany in the 1930s were myths...

you're forgetting the topic, its not who's worst Nazi Germany of USSR, it who would be a better president. I would pick Hitler, at least he put a little bit of trust in his friends, and political figures, Stalin would shoot his closest friends if he even slightly doubted you.

Nobody answered my question about the famines in British India, or for that matter in Ireland. Probably because it's only genocide if it can be useful anti-communist propaganda.

@Putin

What are you even arguing? Nobody here thinks Hitler was a good guy and we all agree that the USSR contributed greatly to the fall of the Axis.

Are you really arguing that Stalin was a pretty OK guy?

"I would pick Hitler, at least he put a little bit of trust in his friends, and political figures, Stalin would shoot his closest friends if he even slightly doubted you."

Right, Night of the Longknives was actually a picnic. Don't tell anyone.

Well, the Soviets were preparing for war but they were also making gestures against war, eg. slowing the build up of border defenses, actually ignoring German recon planes flying over their airspace, making trading agreements, etc. in hopes of keeping the pact intact.

"What are you even arguing? Nobody here thinks Hitler was a good guy and we all agree that the USSR contributed greatly to the fall of the Axis."

Really, could have fooled me. You seem to be equating the two sides, essentially implying that it didn't matter who won.

Russia did shoulder most of the burden in defeating the Nazi's. A pretty marvelous feat to be sure. Stalin... Stalin was a tool though. Much of the suffering his people felt during WWII was due to Stalin's poor decisions. During Hitler's rise to power, Stalin felt that having the hard line communists undermine the moderate socialist was a better play as then the communists would stand to gain once the Nazi's inevitably fell. Having most of your officer's executed prior to the war... brilliant. He was not prepared for the Nazi betrayal and refused to listen to solid reports testifying to the contrary. His military leadership during the early war was disastrous (even Trotsky recognized his military incompetence during the revolution). The one thing he did do right was eventually turn over military command to the professionals- something that cost Hitler dearly.

@ Putin

WTF are you talking about? Even though the Allies won, it doesn't mean that Stalin was a saint! He was still a horrible, horrible person.

well you have to consider the fact that there were 2 Hitlers, pre-extermination and extermination Hitler. during the extermination of the jews Hitler was heavily addicted to heroin and cocaine.

1. It was the Sovs who broke Hitler's spine. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. American, British, and French contributions added up to taking about a year off of the life of the Third Reich, maybe.

2. That said, the Sovs didn't do jack shit about the other formidable Axis power, except gobble up Manchuria long after the results of the Asian War had been decided. Well, I guess they kept a few hundred thousand troops of the Kwantung Army stationary, instead of releasing them to help tie down Burma a bit more effectively, but the point remains the same.

and also stalin killed 5 times more people then hitler ever did, and worse he did it to his own people, and if he were president of USA he would have dome that to us.

"and also stalin killed 5 times more people then hitler ever did, and worse he did it to his own people, and if he were president of USA he would have dome that to us."

More Nazi apologism. 5 times more people? Yes let's just make up numbers now. Then you accuse any skeptic of being a genocide denier or something.

"and worse he did it to his own people"

Hold up, so there were no German Jews? Or are Jews not capable of being German?
Reveals a lot, your comment.

"That said, the Sovs didn't do jack shit about the other formidable Axis power, except gobble up Manchuria long after the results of the Asian War had been decided."

The invasion of Manchuria ended the war in Asia. So I'd say that counts. But it's hard to fight a war with Japan while the Hun are pounding at the gates in Moscow. Had Japan decided to attack the USSR in 1941, the Axis would have won.

Okay, we seem to be getting off topic here. If I had to choose between Hitler and Stalin I would have to choose Hitler. Here are my reasons:

1. Both of these guys were terrible people. However, Hitler was a much more effective leader than Stalin ever was. Things actually got done.

2. Because this is the US we are talking about here, contstiutional tradition is much stronger here than in most other countries so if Hitler came to power it is very, very doubtful that he could do anything terrible without causing an outrage.

3. It is more likely that if Hitler came to power that capitalism would also remain intact which is what I would prefer.

Some people will find any excuse to express their adoration for Hitler.

Dear Putin,

You are an idiot.

Some people will find any excuse to express their adoration of Stalin.

"contstiutional tradition is much stronger here than in most other countries so if Hitler came to power it is very, very doubtful that he could do anything terrible without causing an outrage."

LOL! Ah yes, the Germans had no constitutional tradition. Burgesliches Gesetzbuch was a children's book.