hitler vs. stalin!

[stickybytes]

both of them are pretty infamous and fearful.

 

[RabidMongoose]

<insert inevitable comment about George W. Bush>

 

[kogase]

Uh, Stalin was alot cooler. I mean, people think of Hitler as a sort of "disgusting" evil, whereas people tend to think of Stalin as a sort of... "cool" evil. Like the badass villain in the movie that everybody likes. Reminds me of "Natural Born Killers", actually.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
<insert inevitable comment about George W. Bush>

How does he compare to Castro, North Korean guy, Saddam or any other Dictators out there???

 

[jackschmittusa]

Hitler had many terrible things done by his subordinates because they "understood" that he would want them done. He managed to surround himself with people who tripped over themselves trying to curry favor.

Stalin, on the other hand, prersumably gave the orders personally that killed as many as 30 million Soviets. Stalin probably had more Soviets killed than the Nazis did.

I would guess that Stalin was more powerful.

 

[nutxo]

Originally posted by: kogase
Uh, Stalin was alot cooler. I mean, people think of Hitler as a sort of "disgusting" evil, whereas people tend to think of Stalin as a sort of... "cool" evil. Like the badass villain in the movie that everybody likes. Reminds me of "Natural Born Killers", actually.

Stalin made hitler look like an amatuer.

38 million murdered and being a leftist made him cool though

:roll:

 

[ntdz]

Hitler was way more powerful.

 

[sandorski]

Hitler was more powerful, but overestimated his power. Stalin wasn't near as powerful, but used the power he had wisely(not the exact word I want, but should sufice).

 

[OFFascist]

I think Stalin would win in a fist fight just because when he grew up his life was tougher.

 

[OFFascist]

Originally posted by: jackschmittusa
Stalin, on the other hand, prersumably gave the orders personally that killed as many as 30 million Soviets. Stalin probably had more Soviets killed than the Nazis did.

Yeah I was watching something on the History Channel about Stalin, apparently he stayed up late at nights and personally went though the stacks of death certificates read some and signed off on them, and every once and a while he would let like 1 person off.

 

[imported_Condor]

Don't forget Lenin. He killed millions of Russians through starvation.

 

Hitler

 

[Zebo]

Hitler was a moronic two bit punk who commanded little power, more an opportunist. Stalin graduated with highest honors and outsmarted the idiot at every turn, even getting the Americans on his side. Stalin lived out his reign and legacy continued long after. Hitler died like a cornered dog that he was at 44. Stalin was even more successful at killing people what 30M vs 14M?. Stalin w/o a doubt was more powerful.

Another thing Stalin was into science.. Hitler was into the occult.

 

[GTKeeper]

They were both terrible terrible men. Stalin killed more of his own people than died in WW II.

 

[BBond]

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
<insert inevitable comment about George W. Bush>

You said it first. Are you finally beginning to WTFU?

 

[Necromant]

Caclulate. Hitlers soldiers murdered 26 mln of Soviet People, 6.5 mln polyaks, 1.6 mln Jugoslavia, 10 mln Jewish, 150 thous americans, 2.6 mln French, 700 thous Chekz&Slovak, 400 thous from GB, etc...
But, Who managed to win the WAR? --> Stalin!!! So he was more powerful!. Life was just a game for him (civilization IV ). And before his death in 1954 he wanted to conquer the world. He prepared so many weapons that after his death Hrushev couldn't imagine what he would do with all that bombs. Every 10 years Stalin cleared up all the goverment and people around him. He destroyed all the documents about his past. Nobody knows his real date of birth, his family, etc.
Before Becoming a history he was a terrorist

 

[Trente]

I hate them both.

 

[Zebo]

Stalin was a living god for 30 years in Russia with unbritled power. Hitler had his own people tyring to kill him his 11 short miserable years.

 

[kogase]

Originally posted by: nutxo

Originally posted by: kogase
Uh, Stalin was alot cooler. I mean, people think of Hitler as a sort of "disgusting" evil, whereas people tend to think of Stalin as a sort of... "cool" evil. Like the badass villain in the movie that everybody likes. Reminds me of "Natural Born Killers", actually.

Stalin made hitler look like an amatuer.

38 million murdered and being a leftist made him cool though

:roll:

Leftist? Heh, never really even occured to me. You're just grasping at straws. Political leanings don't matter that much when you're a psychopathic mass murderer.

 

[Malfeas]

Silly rabbits,

Stalin was a level 29 evil dictator/ level 24 psycotic murderer, whose fireball of doom could deal out 6D8 points of damage

Hitler was a level 27 evil dictator/ level 25 psycotic murderer, but his fireball of doom could only do 5D8 points of damage.

So overall I would give this match to Stalin, but he did have help from the Hall of Justice hereos, Captain America and Lord British.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Stalin was the more effective leader...unlike Hitler, Stalin had an appreciation and understanding of how to maintain his power base...he was also a better military strategist.

Were it not for Hitler, the German Army would have crushed the Allies...they were superior tactically, technologically and strategically...but Hitler over extended his military in invading the Soviet Union, which enabled the Allies to open a Western front.

 

[Zebo]

the German Army would have crushed the Allies...

Please. With what? sourkraut and beer? Once we got into war we steam-rolled them. Up and down afrika all the way though west europe we killed 4 of them for every 1 of ours and we were attacking, always harder on offensive in that age of war.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: Zebo

the German Army would have crushed the Allies...

Please. With what? sourkraut and beer? Once we got into war we steam-rolled them. Up and down afrika all the way though west europe we killed 4 of them for every 1 of ours and we were attacking, always harder on offensive in that age of war.

It would have been a bit different if Germany had been able to bring the its full forces to oppose the invasions.

Though they lost on the seas, so it would only be a matter of time before they became starved of strategic supplies.

Basically, it just would have taken a few more years and many more Allied lives.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Please. With what? sourkraut and beer? Once we got into war we steam-rolled them. Up and down afrika all the way though west europe we killed 4 of them for every 1 of ours and we were attacking, always harder on offensive in that age of war.

We defeated Nazi Germany because our overall strategic planning turned things into a war of attrition. At the outset of WW2, the German military had a significant technological advantage over the Allies, as witnessed by the overwhelming success of the blitzkrieg.

Unfortunately for the Germans, their technological superiority came with a significant logistical and sustainment burden...Hitler over extended his military by committing his forces to North Africa and opening an eastern front...he also foolishly eliminated his air superiority by ordering psychologically devastating but otherwise useless bombing raids over England. The Luftwaffe lost most of their experienced pilots and best equipment over the English Channel. He similarly lost most of his most battle hardened and experience divisions on the Eastern Front.

Once America entered the war, we were able to product equipment and supply troops from the geographic safety and isolation of the United States. Once we gained air superiority, we were able to effectively target and destroy the German industrial military complex. By the end of the war, our technology and military hardware could go head to head with German military equipment, as could our troops. Prior to that, American tactical ingenuity compensated for Germany's technological advantage.

Had Hitler concentrated on fortifying Fortress Europe as Rommel suggested, the Allies would never have penetrated the European mainland.

 

[Zebo]

Dude they would have never survived a landing in england let alone USA. The english had hit squads and terror sqauds all ready to take them to the jack shack. Talking out france or poland or egyptians is one thing but there is no way germany would have even beaten britain.