|
JFairfax posted:I think the point is that even if they wanted to stop the rape of Germans by the Red Army, the Russian commanders would not have been able to for a host of organisational and logistic reasons. Yes, the strain on the Soviet command structure was incredible, and doubled by the existence of an overbearing party apparatus. The idea that they had the resources to particularly care about the ethical conduct of heir troops is dubious at best. Obviously this means I support rape. The other question is, would they have cared if they had that privilege. Also the idea that expecting an army made up of an incredible number of different groups, held constantly as near the breaking point of human capabilities as possible, to behave without discipline when given an opportunity, is racist or something. Those troops, coming from position of extreme destitution that haunted them their entire lives, acted as any such person would when given a free pass - when the Soviets camped near the village where my grandparents lived (which was in a friendly Slavic territory, in the very final days of the war), they took virtually everything they thought was of value, there was a unit of Far Eastern troops that took even the most mundane objects like the aforementioned lightbulbs because for them they were luxury items. Now compond this behavior by ethnic hatred and months of desensitization to violence (also advancing through hundreds of miles of burned land where tens of millions civilians were killed and all civilization systematically eradicated). Finally, yes generals were extremely angry about traffic jams. That is not an example of frivolous wasting of time, those traffic jams were crippling the army, and the Soviets went to extreme, seemingly counterintuitive lengths to relieve themselves of logistical problems because they were loving way over their head for much of the war. steinrokkan fucked around with this message at 09:00 on Feb 17, 2017 |
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 08:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 11:14 |
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:Explain in detail how raping civilians in occupied enemy territory is a defensive military action. It was a byproduct of military actions. I don't even see what the argument is about, nobody is saying that rape was defensible, the argument seems to be about whether Soviet soldiers should be posthumously indicted as war criminals or something.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 08:54
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:It was a byproduct of military actions. I don't even see what the argument is about, nobody is saying that rape was defensible, the argument seems to be about whether Soviet soldiers should be posthumously indicted as war criminals or something. The whole point of this thread is to debate whether or not a long-dead man should have been executed. Why shouldn't we indict Allied war criminals in the same manner? Nothing excuses war crimes, not even "war is hell, son". (Also you should read the thread. Rape is by no means a necessary byproduct of war, and the mass rapes committed by Allied troops are especially remarkable in their systematic nature)
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 12:29
|
|
|
If only the generals had been as angry about rape than about traffic jams...
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 12:31
|
|
|
The number of known cases of rape and sexual assault committed by Sherman's army during the Atlanta campaign, the March to the Sea, and the Carolinas campaign, is in the single digits. Considering that vengeance against civilian populations was a major part of the South Carolina portion and that this includes crimes against the black population, who most of the soldiers would not have seen as fully equal, we must be stunned at this incredible outlier in history, of soldiers that are human rather than subhuman wretches.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 12:53
|
|
|
Flowers For Algeria posted:If only the generals had been as angry about rape than about traffic jams... Well, they weren't. It would probably be more productive to ask why that was so. I personally think it was a combination of relatively abstracted command structure where the physical as well as institutional distance between the lowest and highest officers was incredible, of the ideological nature of the war, also due to the bureaucratization and "rationalization" of war under the auspices of the state which made focus on humanitarian concerns and personal ethics of commanders far less likely to come into play, and even unwelcome or disqualifying. Russian generals were probably also less likely to care out of vindictiveness, I will admit that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 14:23
|
|
|
It is more productive to engage in apologetics and justifications? This only makes sense if you wish to encourage rape and sexual assault in the future.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 14:28
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:The number of known cases of rape and sexual assault committed by Sherman's army during the Atlanta campaign, the March to the Sea, and the Carolinas campaign, is in the single digits. Considering that vengeance against civilian populations was a major part of the South Carolina portion and that this includes crimes against the black population, who most of the soldiers would not have seen as fully equal, we must be stunned at this incredible outlier in history, of soldiers that are human rather than subhuman wretches. First off, the life of a Civil War soldier was nothing like the life of an Eastern Front conscript. Second, Sherman wasn't the only Union general, and throughout the war there was an obvious shift from outrage sparked by any act of violence against civilians and their property, and even arresting officers not preventing property destruction, to tacitly endorsing wholesale destruction as a means to an end, which in practice entailed plenty of deaths and rapes, and supply units would scour the land for liquor and loot as much as legitimate supplies with little to no reprimand from their superiors.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 14:33
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:It is more productive to engage in apologetics and justifications? This only makes sense if you wish to encourage rape and sexual assault in the future. The fact it happened means there was a reason why it happened, or rather an enabling structural factor. Identifying this factor is key to understanding how to prevent events from repeating. Also it is going to uncover the fundamental injustice inherent to war, which makes clean, noble wars only a matter of historical revisionism. It's not as much apologetics of particular acts committed in war, but rather an indictment of romanticizing wars, in general or even in particular, by imagining they can be "improved". Because in war traffic jams will always be million times more important than civilian murders and rape. Brainiac Five posted:who most of the soldiers would not have seen as fully equal, we must be stunned at this incredible outlier in history, of soldiers that are human rather than subhuman wretches. Most Red Army soldiers had good conduct. This is hardly an argument against structural issues inherent in war, since it is at best an argument to a degree in which they manifest at different times under different circumstances. Also are you saying Russians were subhuman wretches? It seems that in a case where on the one hand hundreds of thousands conduct themselves perfectly, while on the other side millions act as a furious mob, there is something wrong with the latter group that can't be explained by chance. Are they, a representative sample of their nation, simply savages, or are they the product of something? steinrokkan fucked around with this message at 14:45 on Feb 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 14:35
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:First off, the life of a Civil War soldier was nothing like the life of an Eastern Front conscript. Second, Sherman wasn't the only Union general, and throughout the war there was an obvious shift from outrage sparked by any act of violence against civilians and their property, and even arresting officers not preventing property destruction, to tacitly endorsing wholesale destruction as a means to an end, which in practice entailed plenty of deaths and rapes, and supply units would scour the land for liquor and loot as much as legitimate supplies with little to no reprimand from their superiors. You ignorant sack of poo poo, the "wholesale destruction" is what I'm loving referring to! Don't talk about things you don't know poo poo about. steinrokkan posted:The fact it happened means there was a reason why it happened, or rather an enabling structural factor. Identifying this factor is key to understanding how to prevent events from repeating. Also it is going to uncover the fundamental injustice inherent to war, which makes clean, noble wars only a matter of historical revisionism. It's not as much apologetics of particular acts committed in war, but rather an indictment of romanticizing wars, in general or even in particular, by imagining they can be "improved". It is apologetics to claim that rape is inevitable and natural. It is apologetics to claim that believing eliminating rape is "romanticizing" war as a phenomenon. It is apologetics to ignore misogyny as a factor. All these are apologetics you are engaging in because you want to be a hard-nosed realist or some other infantile reason. Edit: You are also insisting that being poor or uneducated justifies rape by intimating the difference between ACW soldiers and WW2 soldiers in terms of behavior is explained by these factors. Brainiac Five fucked around with this message at 14:44 on Feb 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 14:42
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:You ignorant sack of poo poo, the "wholesale destruction" is what I'm loving referring to! Don't talk about things you don't know poo poo about. lol, ok, the Union army was literally a pure white crusader force shrouded in an aura of pure righteousness. Please continue with your fantasies of a squeaky clean war conducted by rational humans making no mistakes and committing no crimes and always first checking for collateral damage before making any decision, you are doing a lot of good with that. steinrokkan fucked around with this message at 14:58 on Feb 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 14:54
|
|
|
"War on drugs leads to organized crime and civil wars" "Why are you justifying organized crime and civil wars"
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 14:57
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:lol, ok, the Union army was literally a pure white crusader force shrouded in an aura of pure righteousness. So you spend a lot of time fantasizing about rapes that never happened, huh?
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 14:58
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:So you spend a lot of time fantasizing about rapes that never happened, huh? "The Confederate records were destroyed, but a perusal of only five percent of Federal records reveal that over thirty court martial trials were held due to instances of rape; hanging or firing squad being the usual punishment if convicted.[16]" "Crystal N. Feimster is no stranger to uncomfortable narratives. A feminist scholar in the department of African-American studies at Yale University, Feimster has spent much of her academic career addressing and unpacking the often-controversial stories woven through racial and sexualized violence. In a recent New York Times piece, Feimster writes that sexualized violence was “common to the wartime experience of Southern women, white and black. Whether they lived on large plantations or small farms, in towns, cities or in contraband camps, white and black women all over the American South experienced the sexual trauma of war.” She has found 450 court martial cases from the Civil War related to rape and other sexualized violence, but says that, as we still find today, the crime was “overwhelmingly underreported.” I spoke with Feimster about her research, and on the connection between what happened in the early U.S. conflict and what we’re seeing in places like Syria today." Also how much trust am I supposed to have in crime reporting in the loving 1860s in the middle of a war. You are relying on the judgment of white fighting men to determine their own culpability and the scope of their crimes, so excuse me if i do not put much weight in your arguments. A clean war is a war where the victims were never heard, and no records kept.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 15:06
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:"The Confederate records were destroyed, but a perusal of only five percent of Federal records reveal that over thirty court martial trials were held due to instances of rape; hanging or firing squad being the usual punishment if convicted.[16]" 450 cases over four years and hundreds of thousands of people is uh, much lower than the US Armed Forces commits against itself today. Assuming 99% of cases were unrecorded, that's still lower than what happens today in the US Armed Forces. You're presenting your case for rape and sexual assault as eternal and natural (one wonders at your personal reasons for doing so) by relying on evidence that shows they aren't and differ in different historical situations.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 15:12
|
|
|
"it's okay rape in armies isn't a systemic and fundamental problem with war itself, it's just a few bad apples"
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 15:30
|
|
|
JFairfax posted:"it's okay rape in armies isn't a systemic and fundamental problem with war itself, it's just a few bad apples" I see we have someone else eager to write rape off as a natural phenomenon that cannot be eliminated. Guilty conscience, perhaps?
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 15:36
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:I see we have someone else eager to write rape off as a natural phenomenon that cannot be eliminated. Guilty conscience, perhaps? IT CAN BE ELIMINATED BY NOT HAVING WARS YOU loving IMBICILE rape as a part of war is not a natural phenomenon like the weather, in a war people are able to kill who they like with impunity, some of them like it, they can literally get away with rape and a lot of people do this. also rape is used strategically, some commanders encourage it. this is not new or shocking information. if you support war, you essentially support rape.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 15:37
|
|
|
Flowers For Algeria posted:Rape is never committed in defense. It should be aggressively prosecuted. Allied commanders who let it happen should have been put on trial. Like, If you can look at a country that's been totally devastated, subject to extermination by a foreign nation, had to move vital industries several hundred kilometers over a rail network at breaking point, putting soldiers who can't speak to each other, into the field without any training (or hell, education), who are now engaged in a total + industrial war, subjected to the kind of conditions that are only really comparable to things like the ww1 trenches or particularly vicious civil wars, and then tut tut that said army wasn't morally pure and well behaved enough, you are an arrogant fool. Soviet commanders did what they need to do, to win the war, that they didn't start. Rape was never legal, it was always a criminal action. It happened because that's what the situation ensured was gonna happen. If you're not prepared to face that, if you're not prepared to acknowledge that context, you aren't ready to discuss what war actually is, or what war crimes actually are. You're just not.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 15:50
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:I see we have someone else eager to write rape off as a natural phenomenon that cannot be eliminated. Guilty conscience, perhaps? It could be eliminated if we only trusted our troops and supported them. That's the way towards progress against violence, sexual or otherwise. Also if we had charismatic, dashing, chivalrous leaders like Sherman who could tame the roguish nature of his men through sheer tyranny of will, and dispel the evil in the heart of men with a single word. The underreporting during ACW is going to hide far, far, far more than 99% of cases. I posted the two cases as two contrasting views, the former, de facto yours, which trivializes the structural problem by focusing on skewed statistics and the good will of your heroes, and the other, which actually unearths the unheard voices, and exposes them as a virtually endless quantity, deliberately pushed back.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 15:56
|
|
|
JFairfax posted:IT CAN BE ELIMINATED BY NOT HAVING WARS YOU loving IMBICILE You misunderstand, it's totally possible for commanders to turn blind eye to looting, pillaging, killing, but still make sure that absolutely no rape happens. That's how it works in the world of just, well disciplined armies of the past. When a Union general literally said he willfully closed his eyes to the atrocities his men brought upon their destination for two hours, I'm sure he actually secretly peeked to ensure no raping was going on. When hundreds of thousands of deserters roamed the countryside, they were secretly monitored that they would not misbehave. When supply troops left their commands for days to seek supplies, they never did anything wrong out of fear of shaming their generals. And when something did happen, you can be sure the victim could just march to General Grant and air their grievances. steinrokkan fucked around with this message at 16:04 on Feb 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 16:00
|
|
|
 stalingrad  villages tortured + killed by germans, russian soldiers look at them  heads of polish officers  russian pows in stalingrad http://www.elconfidencial.com/multimedia/ stalingrad  germans about to shoot women  dead russian POWs imagine seeing poo poo like this for a few years
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 16:01
|
|
|
It's extremely telling how not raping people is considered unrealistically heroic by y'all. You should turn yourselves in, or take other appropriate punitive measures if your country of residence has statute of limitations on your particular crimes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 16:06
|
|
|
if you train people to kill other human beings, rape loses its taboo status to them. hope this helps.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 16:07
|
|
|
JFairfax posted:if you train people to kill other human beings, rape loses its taboo status to them. Look, if condemning rape and rapists would mean condemning yourself, you should still have the courage to do so instead of aligning yourself with evil.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 16:10
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Look, if condemning rape and rapists would mean condemning yourself, you should still have the courage to do so instead of aligning yourself with evil. You are a child molester. Now that we have brought the discourse to your level, let us proceed. Brainiac Five posted:It's extremely telling how not raping people is considered unrealistically heroic by y'all. You should turn yourselves in, or take other appropriate punitive measures if your country of residence has statute of limitations on your particular crimes. You would rather whitewash history than admit that humans are susceptible to doing the most wicked things if pressed enough. Rape has been not only known as an individual crime during war, it has also functioned as a form of induction ritual: "former fighters describe participating in rape as a violent socialization practice that served to cut ties with fighters’ past lives and to signal their commitment to their new groups." It is not just a bunch of people failing due to their individual motives, it's the result of inherent forces war expresses on people engaged in it. steinrokkan fucked around with this message at 16:16 on Feb 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 16:10
|
|
|
It's extremely telling how Effectronica will go to bat for the concept of politically correct war
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 16:11
|
|
|
JFairfax posted:
Reverse GIS suggests that this is from the Katyn exhumation. "imagine doing poo poo like this for a few years" would be more appropriate. Or are you blaming the massacre on the NatSocs, even though the Soviet Government admitted (back in the late 1980s) that Stalin ordered it?
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 16:12
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Look, if condemning rape and rapists would mean condemning yourself, you should still have the courage to do so instead of aligning yourself with evil. are you actually retarded? rape is an awful thing and rapists in a time of war are awful people who should face justice for their crimes. however, none of this changes the fact that war creates the situations in which people rape. you are not going to be able to have a war without rapes occurring, just as you will not have a war without civilian casualties. it does not happen, will not happen and can not happen because that is the way wars work.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 16:12
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:You are a child molester. You're insisting rape is an inevitable phenomenon that cannot be stopped without eliminating violence, which is a handy justification for it. Why someone would attempt to justify it if they didn't have a skull that was caved in is, um, fairly obvious to me. Maybe you're just really stupid/enamored with how much of a realist you are?
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 16:14
|
|
|
Kopijeger posted:Reverse GIS suggests that this is from the Katyn exhumation. "imagine doing poo poo like this for a few years" would be more appropriate. Or are you blaming the massacre on the NatSocs, even though the Soviet Government admitted (back in the late 1980s) that Stalin ordered it? well yeah, in that case imagine doing that poo poo for a few years. rape doesn't seem like such a big deal then does it? the point is atrocities were committed on all sides and are awful, trying to eliminate a specific type of atrocity "our army doesn't rape" "our army doesn't kill women" "our army doesn't kill children under the age of 12" "our army doesn't rape children" "our army doesn't kill civilians" having these sort of aims when you are in a war or instigating is futile endeavour because war leads to all of these things.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 16:15
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:You're insisting rape is an inevitable phenomenon that cannot be stopped without eliminating violence, which is a handy justification for it. Why someone would attempt to justify it if they didn't have a skull that was caved in is, um, fairly obvious to me. Maybe you're just really stupid/enamored with how much of a realist you are? you think you can have war without rape?
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 16:15
|
|
|
Condescending to people in a disadvantage position, who lack any of the benefits of modern day comforts or security, who are victims of trauma and embedded in something akin to a dysopia, that they sometimes aren't sane, well adjusted and perfect little doves, has got to be one of the most liberal things ever. That, and going to great lengths to excuse the nazis, by drawing false equivocations between them and allied commanders.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 16:16
|
|
|
JFairfax posted:you think you can have war without rape? I don't believe rape is a natural and inevitable phenomenon everybody does, no.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 16:17
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:You're insisting rape is an inevitable phenomenon that cannot be stopped without eliminating violence, which is a handy justification for it. Why someone would attempt to justify it if they didn't have a skull that was caved in is, um, fairly obvious to me. Maybe you're just really stupid/enamored with how much of a realist you are? Once again: "War on drug causes a spike in organized violence and state vulnerability" "Why do you justify organized violence?" "Poverty causes people to mug others." "Why do you justify assault?"
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 16:17
|
|
|
Why do you all think rape is natural and inevitable? You just assume this without offering any reasoning, which leads me to believe that it derives from your subjective experiences.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 16:19
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:I don't believe rape is a natural and inevitable phenomenon everybody does, no. But you do believe war is a natural and inevitable phenomenon everybody does?
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 16:19
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Why do you all think rape is natural and inevitable? You just assume this without offering any reasoning, which leads me to believe that it derives from your subjective experiences. Do you think that saying "People do commit burglaries" makes you a burglar? Why do people commit rapes in peacetime? There must be a rational reason for it in each case, according to your logic. And does admitting that rapes happen in peacetime make you a rapist? Also prove that a higher portion of soldiers commits rape than civilians, if they think they can get away with it. I don't think so. I think war creates a form of lawlessness that empowers these rapists to act, and even to boast about it and use it as a tool of subjugating fellow soldiers, as commonly happens. steinrokkan fucked around with this message at 16:24 on Feb 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 16:21
|
|
|
Effectronica why do you think war is a natural and inevitable aspect of human nature?
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 16:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 11:14 |
|
|
steinrokkan posted:Do you think that saying "People do commit burglaries" makes you a burglar? Why do people commit rapes in peacetime? There must be a rational reason for it in each case, according to your logic. And does admitting that rapes happen in peacetime make you a rapist? You are claiming that rape is something that anyone would do and is a natural consequence of violence, so unless you are claiming to not be human yourself...
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 16:25
|
|