Posts from Sacred Haven of Debauchery Auto-translated

Why clear something for the sake of ideology? Indeed, it's easier to build something new in a different area, isn't it?

Was Chernobyl during Stalin's time? I didn't know that.

They didn't rob or kill civilians for their own purposes or just for fun. It was the policy of the party and personally of the commander-in-chief - Comrade Stalin. Otherwise, the retribution for the terror in the USSR would have frightened the Germans for a long time, who are now our best friends again.

The idea was that the towns and the heroes living in them, as well as the soldiers defending them, were all heroes. And when there's no town to defend, morale drops.

Is this information 100% accurate?

Are you aware that many people died on these construction sites, and many of them were by no means hardened criminals?

Protecting human life and family is the highest goal of any civilized country. "Love for one's homeland begins with family," as one well-known and intelligent person said.

In the 45th year, yes.

Construction everywhere was imperfect back then, and it still fails now. Criminals should work, not sit in cells and play "zone."

Nevertheless, the laws are so lenient that people go into it for profit, committing murder and robbery, and they don't care about other people, and the laws won't punish them in any significant way, except for spending the rest of their lives almost carefree in a cell. And before that, they might even be acquitted for lack of evidence and spend several years in more lenient conditions while the case is being dealt with.

So, if there was no terror, would they just rob and kill everyone? What a great logic:cool:

Nevertheless, the laws are so lenient that people engage in murder and robbery for profit, and they don't care about other people. The laws won't punish them in any significant way, except for spending the rest of their lives almost carefree in a cell. And before that, they might even be acquitted due to lack of evidence, and the case will be reviewed for several years in more lenient conditions.
In the USSR, if you killed someone, you were executed, and that was the end of it. If you stole something, you had to work it off. Fear was a powerful deterrent...
Unfortunately, nowadays, everything ends with the family. And that's a pity...

Ask the people of the "liberated" countries.

Criminals? And who were they? Probably murderers and rapists:)

So, are they all like that? This isn't the USSR, the Budyonovka hats are gathering dust in museums. But it's immediately clear what kind of mentality the "patriots-lovers of the USSR" have:rolleyes:

In '45, yes.

Convicts should work, not sit in cells and play "the zone."

Do you know that quite a few people died on these construction sites, many of whom were by no means the worst criminals?

Nevertheless, the laws are so lenient that people go into it for money, even if it means murder and robbery, and they don't care about other people, and the laws won't punish them in any significant way, except for spending the rest of their lives almost carefree in a cell.

Obvious consumption of Western propaganda.

Under Stalin, they could even execute people for a handful of grains (hungry children would pick up grains after the harvest). What a blessing that was! That's what order looks like!

It's better to be full and selfish than hungry and normal, right?

They tried to help everyone, not just themselves. Share a piece of cake with your neighbor, especially if the cake is shared... or will you eat it all yourself?) It's better to be full and selfish than hungry and normal, right?

That's some pretty nonsensical logic you've got there. Think about what you're reading. The idea of instilling party values in a society with high internationalist morals has always been present. It just wasn't always successfully implemented, or implemented immediately.
But there have been instances of this kind of practice. The US army was sufficiently undisciplined that when they arrived in Germany, they could do whatever they wanted – because they weren't given clear instructions. And they considered the Germans not only to be defeated, but also to be people they could profit from, given that they had only fought the German army from Normandy to the Elbe... The Allies didn't prosecute any German military leaders for war crimes, but they severely punished the Japanese, who had only attacked their largest naval base in the Pacific. They punished them severely, and the general responsible for only a thousand deaths in that war was the only one sentenced to death.

Clearly, you're swallowing Western propaganda.

Not just political prisoners and POWs, but everyone who was guilty. However, ordinary people also worked there... and they worked and died not out of fear of being killed for no reason, but for a higher purpose.

Not everyone, but are you saying that if there's an opportunity, everyone will necessarily engage in murder and robbery? Like people should always do what's easiest and most advantageous? And who would believe in humanity after that?

Nevertheless, the laws are so lenient that people go into it for the money, and they'll commit murder and robbery, and they don't care about other people, and the laws won't really punish them, except that they'll spend the rest of their lives almost carefree in a cell. And before that, they might even be acquitted for lack of evidence and spend several years in more lenient conditions while the case is being dealt with.

Firstly, it's debatable, and secondly, the Red Army also includes Afghanistan.

I agree, but read my post more carefully; I'll highlight it specifically for you:

The laws aren't lenient; or do you think spending the rest of your life in a cell is considered quite lenient?) I don't think it's much better than being shot, lol. And if the laws don't work correctly in the ex-USSR, then there is a problem, but it lies in something else.

I see that everyone is consuming propaganda, except for the fans of the USSR and Stalin in particular. But maybe it's the other way around?

And are selfish people abnormal?)
It's better to be alive and selfish than to starve to death in the name of good, which everyone will forget, right?