Vodka On Tap?

[Bleipriester]

Many of our Democrat posters, especially the Franklin Roosevelt groupies, may be away for part of the day, celebrating.....



Joseph Stalin, Russian in full Iosif Vissarionovich Stalin, original name (Georgian) Ioseb Dzhugashvili, (born December 18 [December 6, Old Style], 1878, Gori, Georgia, Russian Empire [see Researcher’s Note]—died March 5, 1953, Moscow, Russia, U.S.S.R.), secretary-general of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (1922–53) and premier of the Soviet state (1941–53), who for a quarter of a century dictatorially ruled the Soviet Union and transformed it into a major world power.


Joseph Stalin, 1950.Sovfoto
On This Day - Historic Events and People



Roosevelt: "I would rather lose New Zealand, Australia or anything else than have the Russian front collapse."
Robert Dallek, "Franklin D. Roosevelt and American Foreign Policy, 1932-1945," p. 338.


Yup!
'Russia Uber Alles'

What nation did Roosevelt represent, again?

A Russian front collapse would have meant the German final victory.

Nonsense.


Only Roosevelt groupies use that excuse.


"Between June 22, 1941, and January 31, 1942, the Germans had lost 6,000 airplanes and more than 3,200 tanks and similar vehicles; and no less than 918,000 men had been killed, wounded, or gone missing in action, amounting to 28.7 percent of the average strength of the army, namely, 3,2 million men.[33]

(In the Soviet Union, Germany would lose no less than 10 million of its total 13.5 million men killed, wounded, or taken prisoner during the entire war; and the Red Army would end up claiming credit for 90 per cent of all Germans killed in the Second World War.)
Clive Ponting, 'Armageddon: The Second World War,' p. 130; Stephen E. Ambrose 'Americans at War,' p. 72. ”



And this, the only logical conclusion:

"....realistically middle sized Germany could not defeat the much larger Ussr in the long term. Germany would have eventually surrendered to the western allies to prevent total occupation by the USSR ..."
So did the Red Army really singlehandedly defeat the Third Reich Stuff I Done Wrote - The Michael A. Charles Online Presence (comment)


Clearly, any explanation of Roosevelt's pro-Soviet policy cannot rely on the fear of Stalin quitting the war.

So...one more Liberal myth put to rest......yet the worship of Roosevelt continues unabated.


Liberalism is based on the unthinking acceptance of myth and fabrication.

Always.

So reread your comment. That front was basically the world war, a Russian collapse would have freed many divisions. It is because the Russian warfare was not like the British or American. It was like sending so much cannon fodder to overfeed the cannons.

What point are you attempting to make?

I already made it.

 

[Likkmee]

Vodka. Commie potato urine

 

[PoliticalChic]

Many of our Democrat posters, especially the Franklin Roosevelt groupies, may be away for part of the day, celebrating.....



Joseph Stalin, Russian in full Iosif Vissarionovich Stalin, original name (Georgian) Ioseb Dzhugashvili, (born December 18 [December 6, Old Style], 1878, Gori, Georgia, Russian Empire [see Researcher’s Note]—died March 5, 1953, Moscow, Russia, U.S.S.R.), secretary-general of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (1922–53) and premier of the Soviet state (1941–53), who for a quarter of a century dictatorially ruled the Soviet Union and transformed it into a major world power.


Joseph Stalin, 1950.Sovfoto
On This Day - Historic Events and People



Roosevelt: "I would rather lose New Zealand, Australia or anything else than have the Russian front collapse."
Robert Dallek, "Franklin D. Roosevelt and American Foreign Policy, 1932-1945," p. 338.


Yup!
'Russia Uber Alles'

What nation did Roosevelt represent, again?

A Russian front collapse would have meant the German final victory.

Nonsense.


Only Roosevelt groupies use that excuse.


"Between June 22, 1941, and January 31, 1942, the Germans had lost 6,000 airplanes and more than 3,200 tanks and similar vehicles; and no less than 918,000 men had been killed, wounded, or gone missing in action, amounting to 28.7 percent of the average strength of the army, namely, 3,2 million men.[33]

(In the Soviet Union, Germany would lose no less than 10 million of its total 13.5 million men killed, wounded, or taken prisoner during the entire war; and the Red Army would end up claiming credit for 90 per cent of all Germans killed in the Second World War.)
Clive Ponting, 'Armageddon: The Second World War,' p. 130; Stephen E. Ambrose 'Americans at War,' p. 72. ”



And this, the only logical conclusion:

"....realistically middle sized Germany could not defeat the much larger Ussr in the long term. Germany would have eventually surrendered to the western allies to prevent total occupation by the USSR ..."
So did the Red Army really singlehandedly defeat the Third Reich Stuff I Done Wrote - The Michael A. Charles Online Presence (comment)


Clearly, any explanation of Roosevelt's pro-Soviet policy cannot rely on the fear of Stalin quitting the war.

So...one more Liberal myth put to rest......yet the worship of Roosevelt continues unabated.


Liberalism is based on the unthinking acceptance of myth and fabrication.

Always.

So reread your comment. That front was basically the world war, a Russian collapse would have freed many divisions. It is because the Russian warfare was not like the British or American. It was like sending so much cannon fodder to overfeed the cannons.

What point are you attempting to make?

I already made it.

Try doing it in English this time.

 

[luchitociencia]

What the heck are you saying?????


Very slowly:

1. Stalin and Hitler were allies until Operation Barbarossa.

2. Hitler needed resources his middle-sized nation couldn't supply....the other totalitarian entity provided them.

3. Hitler gambled that he could take all of what he needed, conquer Russia, and the world.

4. To do so, he needed to do it in 2-3 months....Blitzkrieg.

5.Stalin was the smartest of the four dictators (Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, and Roosevelt).
His doctrines are in the ascendancy today.

6. Germany could never have forced Russia to surrender. Never.



Now....write in simple English.
What's your point?

Where were the Western allies troops according to your source?

You still mentioning the situation of German and Russian troops only.

If you want to make your point, then show the general view as I have asked you to make, show a map which backs up your "position". You'll see that by no means the failing of Russia should help the Western allies plans

 

[PoliticalChic]

What the heck are you saying?????


Very slowly:

1. Stalin and Hitler were allies until Operation Barbarossa.

2. Hitler needed resources his middle-sized nation couldn't supply....the other totalitarian entity provided them.

3. Hitler gambled that he could take all of what he needed, conquer Russia, and the world.

4. To do so, he needed to do it in 2-3 months....Blitzkrieg.

5.Stalin was the smartest of the four dictators (Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, and Roosevelt).
His doctrines are in the ascendancy today.

6. Germany could never have forced Russia to surrender. Never.



Now....write in simple English.
What's your point?

Where were the Western allies troops according to your source?

You still mentioning the situation of German and Russian troops only.

If you want to make your point, then show the general view as I have asked you to make, show a map which backs up your "position". You'll see that by no means the failing of Russia should help the Western allies plans

What does that have to do with the facts I stated??????


My points are....

1. Stalin and Hitler were allies until Operation Barbarossa.

2. Hitler needed resources his middle-sized nation couldn't supply....the other totalitarian entity provided them.

3. Hitler gambled that he could take all of what he needed, conquer Russia, and the world.

4. To do so, he needed to do it in 2-3 months....Blitzkrieg.

5.Stalin was the smartest of the four dictators (Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, and Roosevelt).
His doctrines are in the ascendancy today.

6. Germany could never have forced Russia to surrender. Never.




Now focus like a laser, and prove you understand the above.

 

[luchitociencia]

What does that have to do with the facts I stated??????


My points are....

1. Stalin and Hitler were allies until Operation Barbarossa.

2. Hitler needed resources his middle-sized nation couldn't supply....the other totalitarian entity provided them.

3. Hitler gambled that he could take all of what he needed, conquer Russia, and the world.

4. To do so, he needed to do it in 2-3 months....Blitzkrieg.

5.Stalin was the smartest of the four dictators (Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, and Roosevelt).
His doctrines are in the ascendancy today.

6. Germany could never have forced Russia to surrender. Never.




Now focus like a laser, and prove you understand the above.

You never have learned war strategy, didn't you?

First, the smarter of those four dictators was Hitler and he always will be. The other one's political system never proved to rise up their own country in ruins to become a super potency and own the entire world for 30 minutes in history.

You must learn war strategy in order to understand what president Franklin Roosevelt said.

This is why I suggested you to use a map.

Have your world map in front of you and tell me.

Where is Australia?

Where is New Zealand?

Where is Russia and where are the oil wells Hitler was fighting to own?

Can't you see it?

This is what president Franklin Roosevelt was saying while looking at the map, "hell with Australia, hell with New Zealand, who cares about those lands which are outside the borders of the war zone and the war place to concentrate the army forces".

Hitler was a land conqueror, he won't have enough logistic support trying to use Australia and New Zealand as strong holds if he wants to wing the war. Not at that point in the war.

Simple.

The cat has four legs, why are you looking for a fifth one?

 

[PoliticalChic]

What does that have to do with the facts I stated??????


My points are....

1. Stalin and Hitler were allies until Operation Barbarossa.

2. Hitler needed resources his middle-sized nation couldn't supply....the other totalitarian entity provided them.

3. Hitler gambled that he could take all of what he needed, conquer Russia, and the world.

4. To do so, he needed to do it in 2-3 months....Blitzkrieg.

5.Stalin was the smartest of the four dictators (Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, and Roosevelt).
His doctrines are in the ascendancy today.

6. Germany could never have forced Russia to surrender. Never.




Now focus like a laser, and prove you understand the above.

You never have learned war strategy, didn't you?

First, the smarter of those four dictators was Hitler and he always will be. The other one's political system never proved to rise up their own country in ruins to become a super potency and own the entire world for 30 minutes in history.

You must learn war strategy in order to understand what president Franklin Roosevelt said.

This is why I suggested you to use a map.

Have your world map in front of you and tell me.

Where is Australia?

Where is New Zealand?

Where is Russia and where are the oil wells Hitler was fighting to own?

Can't you see it?

This is what president Franklin Roosevelt was saying while looking at the map, "hell with Australia, hell with New Zealand, who cares about those lands which are outside the borders of the war zone and the war place to concentrate the army forces".

Hitler was a land conqueror, he won't have enough logistic support trying to use Australia and New Zealand as strong holds if he wants to wing the war. Not at that point in the war.

Simple.

The cat has four legs, why are you looking for a fifth one?

You're not able to concentrate, are you.


These are the facts, none of which are in question.

1. Stalin and Hitler were allies until Operation Barbarossa.

2. Hitler needed resources his middle-sized nation couldn't supply....the other totalitarian entity provided them.

3. Hitler gambled that he could take all of what he needed, conquer Russia, and the world.

4. To do so, he needed to do it in 2-3 months....Blitzkrieg.

5.Stalin was the smartest of the four dictators (Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, and Roosevelt).
His doctrines are in the ascendancy today.

6. Germany could never have forced Russia to surrender. Never.




I'm here to help....


5 Vitamins & Minerals To Boost Your Focus, Concentration and Productivity

• B-Vitamins. The B Vitamins are well known for improving energy, focus, and alertness. ...
• Vitamin D3. Vitamin D3 is one of the best supplements you can take if you're looking to boost focus & concentration levels. ...
• Omega 3 Fatty Acids. ...
• Vitamin C. ...
• Magnesium.

Try this regimen.....and....

Drop back in six months.....

 

[Bleipriester]

A Russian front collapse would have meant the German final victory.

Nonsense.


Only Roosevelt groupies use that excuse.


"Between June 22, 1941, and January 31, 1942, the Germans had lost 6,000 airplanes and more than 3,200 tanks and similar vehicles; and no less than 918,000 men had been killed, wounded, or gone missing in action, amounting to 28.7 percent of the average strength of the army, namely, 3,2 million men.[33]

(In the Soviet Union, Germany would lose no less than 10 million of its total 13.5 million men killed, wounded, or taken prisoner during the entire war; and the Red Army would end up claiming credit for 90 per cent of all Germans killed in the Second World War.)
Clive Ponting, 'Armageddon: The Second World War,' p. 130; Stephen E. Ambrose 'Americans at War,' p. 72. ”



And this, the only logical conclusion:

"....realistically middle sized Germany could not defeat the much larger Ussr in the long term. Germany would have eventually surrendered to the western allies to prevent total occupation by the USSR ..."
So did the Red Army really singlehandedly defeat the Third Reich Stuff I Done Wrote - The Michael A. Charles Online Presence (comment)


Clearly, any explanation of Roosevelt's pro-Soviet policy cannot rely on the fear of Stalin quitting the war.

So...one more Liberal myth put to rest......yet the worship of Roosevelt continues unabated.


Liberalism is based on the unthinking acceptance of myth and fabrication.

Always.

So reread your comment. That front was basically the world war, a Russian collapse would have freed many divisions. It is because the Russian warfare was not like the British or American. It was like sending so much cannon fodder to overfeed the cannons.

What point are you attempting to make?

I already made it.

Try doing it in English this time.

Again, if the Russian front would have collapsed that would have led to the German victory.

 

[wasrose]

What does that have to do with the facts I stated??????


My points are....

1. Stalin and Hitler were allies until Operation Barbarossa.

2. Hitler needed resources his middle-sized nation couldn't supply....the other totalitarian entity provided them.

3. Hitler gambled that he could take all of what he needed, conquer Russia, and the world.

4. To do so, he needed to do it in 2-3 months....Blitzkrieg.

5.Stalin was the smartest of the four dictators (Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, and Roosevelt).
His doctrines are in the ascendancy today.

6. Germany could never have forced Russia to surrender. Never.




Now focus like a laser, and prove you understand the above.

You never have learned war strategy, didn't you?

First, the smarter of those four dictators was Hitler and he always will be. The other one's political system never proved to rise up their own country in ruins to become a super potency and own the entire world for 30 minutes in history.

You must learn war strategy in order to understand what president Franklin Roosevelt said.

This is why I suggested you to use a map.

Have your world map in front of you and tell me.

Where is Australia?

Where is New Zealand?

Where is Russia and where are the oil wells Hitler was fighting to own?

Can't you see it?

This is what president Franklin Roosevelt was saying while looking at the map, "hell with Australia, hell with New Zealand, who cares about those lands which are outside the borders of the war zone and the war place to concentrate the army forces".

Hitler was a land conqueror, he won't have enough logistic support trying to use Australia and New Zealand as strong holds if he wants to wing the war. Not at that point in the war.

Simple.

The cat has four legs, why are you looking for a fifth one?

You're not able to concentrate, are you.


These are the facts, none of which are in question.

1. Stalin and Hitler were allies until Operation Barbarossa.

2. Hitler needed resources his middle-sized nation couldn't supply....the other totalitarian entity provided them.

3. Hitler gambled that he could take all of what he needed, conquer Russia, and the world.

4. To do so, he needed to do it in 2-3 months....Blitzkrieg.

5.Stalin was the smartest of the four dictators (Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, and Roosevelt).
His doctrines are in the ascendancy today.

gee I have to agree with

6. Germany could never have forced Russia to surrender. Never.




I'm here to help....


5 Vitamins & Minerals To Boost Your Focus, Concentration and Productivity

• B-Vitamins. The B Vitamins are well known for improving energy, focus, and alertness. ...
• Vitamin D3. Vitamin D3 is one of the best supplements you can take if you're looking to boost focus & concentration levels. ...
• Omega 3 Fatty Acids. ...
• Vitamin C. ...
• Magnesium.

Try this regimen.....and....

Drop back in six months.....

What the heck are you saying?????


Very slowly:

1. Stalin and Hitler were allies until Operation Barbarossa.

2. Hitler needed resources his middle-sized nation couldn't supply....the other totalitarian entity provided them.

3. Hitler gambled that he could take all of what he needed, conquer Russia, and the world.

4. To do so, he needed to do it in 2-3 months....Blitzkrieg.

5.Stalin was the smartest of the four dictators (Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, and Roosevelt).
His doctrines are in the ascendancy today.

6. Germany could never have forced Russia to surrender. Never.



Now....write in simple English.
What's your point?

Where were the Western allies troops according to your source?

You still mentioning the situation of German and Russian troops only.

If you want to make your point, then show the general view as I have asked you to make, show a map which backs up your "position". You'll see that by no means the failing of Russia should help the Western allies plans

What does that have to do with the facts I stated??????


My points are....

1. Stalin and Hitler were allies until Operation Barbarossa.

2. Hitler needed resources his middle-sized nation couldn't supply....the other totalitarian entity provided them.

3. Hitler gambled that he could take all of what he needed, conquer Russia, and the world.

4. To do so, he needed to do it in 2-3 months....Blitzkrieg.

5.Stalin was the smartest of the four dictators (Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, and Roosevelt).
His doctrines are in the ascendancy today.

6. Germany could never have forced Russia to surrender. Never.




Now focus like a laser, and prove you understand the above.

damn----I AM FORCED to agree with Pchic again------STALINISM
is all the rage------just a popular as was the miniskirt in the 60s.
The shorter the skirt and the more STALINIST <<< for POPULARITY

 

[PoliticalChic]

Nonsense.


Only Roosevelt groupies use that excuse.


"Between June 22, 1941, and January 31, 1942, the Germans had lost 6,000 airplanes and more than 3,200 tanks and similar vehicles; and no less than 918,000 men had been killed, wounded, or gone missing in action, amounting to 28.7 percent of the average strength of the army, namely, 3,2 million men.[33]

(In the Soviet Union, Germany would lose no less than 10 million of its total 13.5 million men killed, wounded, or taken prisoner during the entire war; and the Red Army would end up claiming credit for 90 per cent of all Germans killed in the Second World War.)
Clive Ponting, 'Armageddon: The Second World War,' p. 130; Stephen E. Ambrose 'Americans at War,' p. 72. ”



And this, the only logical conclusion:

"....realistically middle sized Germany could not defeat the much larger Ussr in the long term. Germany would have eventually surrendered to the western allies to prevent total occupation by the USSR ..."
So did the Red Army really singlehandedly defeat the Third Reich Stuff I Done Wrote - The Michael A. Charles Online Presence (comment)


Clearly, any explanation of Roosevelt's pro-Soviet policy cannot rely on the fear of Stalin quitting the war.

So...one more Liberal myth put to rest......yet the worship of Roosevelt continues unabated.


Liberalism is based on the unthinking acceptance of myth and fabrication.

Always.

So reread your comment. That front was basically the world war, a Russian collapse would have freed many divisions. It is because the Russian warfare was not like the British or American. It was like sending so much cannon fodder to overfeed the cannons.

What point are you attempting to make?

I already made it.

Try doing it in English this time.

Again, if the Russian front would have collapsed that would have led to the German victory.

1. It wouldn't have collapsed.
....the British colony of Singapore was left without air cover in order to satisfy Stalin's desire for the planes. Found in Paul Johnson's "Modern Times," 'included 200 modern fighter aircraft, originally intended for Britain's highly vulnerable base in Singapore, which had no modern fighters at all. The diversion of these aircraft, plus tanks, to Russia sealed the fate of Singapore." Johnson, Op.Cit., p. 386.

Singapore fell February 15, 1942.



2. Stalin never would have surrendered. This was a psychopath.
World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans. Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.



3. Roosevelt would have supported Stalin unto the last American soldier was dead.
FDR turned American war policy over to Koba....
Stalin determined the Allies attack would come via Normandy, and now the more advantageous, through Italy. Stalin wanted Eastern Europe left to his Red Army.
Stalin insisted all of Germany ‘pasturized,’ all industry destroyed, so that the Red Army has no opposition post war.

Patton wanted to keep the Germany army ready to resist Stalin....so Patton was removed.




Let me know when you need another lesson.

 

[PoliticalChic]

What does that have to do with the facts I stated??????


My points are....

1. Stalin and Hitler were allies until Operation Barbarossa.

2. Hitler needed resources his middle-sized nation couldn't supply....the other totalitarian entity provided them.

3. Hitler gambled that he could take all of what he needed, conquer Russia, and the world.

4. To do so, he needed to do it in 2-3 months....Blitzkrieg.

5.Stalin was the smartest of the four dictators (Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, and Roosevelt).
His doctrines are in the ascendancy today.

6. Germany could never have forced Russia to surrender. Never.




Now focus like a laser, and prove you understand the above.

You never have learned war strategy, didn't you?

First, the smarter of those four dictators was Hitler and he always will be. The other one's political system never proved to rise up their own country in ruins to become a super potency and own the entire world for 30 minutes in history.

You must learn war strategy in order to understand what president Franklin Roosevelt said.

This is why I suggested you to use a map.

Have your world map in front of you and tell me.

Where is Australia?

Where is New Zealand?

Where is Russia and where are the oil wells Hitler was fighting to own?

Can't you see it?

This is what president Franklin Roosevelt was saying while looking at the map, "hell with Australia, hell with New Zealand, who cares about those lands which are outside the borders of the war zone and the war place to concentrate the army forces".

Hitler was a land conqueror, he won't have enough logistic support trying to use Australia and New Zealand as strong holds if he wants to wing the war. Not at that point in the war.

Simple.

The cat has four legs, why are you looking for a fifth one?

You're not able to concentrate, are you.


These are the facts, none of which are in question.

1. Stalin and Hitler were allies until Operation Barbarossa.

2. Hitler needed resources his middle-sized nation couldn't supply....the other totalitarian entity provided them.

3. Hitler gambled that he could take all of what he needed, conquer Russia, and the world.

4. To do so, he needed to do it in 2-3 months....Blitzkrieg.

5.Stalin was the smartest of the four dictators (Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, and Roosevelt).
His doctrines are in the ascendancy today.

gee I have to agree with

6. Germany could never have forced Russia to surrender. Never.




I'm here to help....


5 Vitamins & Minerals To Boost Your Focus, Concentration and Productivity

• B-Vitamins. The B Vitamins are well known for improving energy, focus, and alertness. ...
• Vitamin D3. Vitamin D3 is one of the best supplements you can take if you're looking to boost focus & concentration levels. ...
• Omega 3 Fatty Acids. ...
• Vitamin C. ...
• Magnesium.

Try this regimen.....and....

Drop back in six months.....

What the heck are you saying?????


Very slowly:

1. Stalin and Hitler were allies until Operation Barbarossa.

2. Hitler needed resources his middle-sized nation couldn't supply....the other totalitarian entity provided them.

3. Hitler gambled that he could take all of what he needed, conquer Russia, and the world.

4. To do so, he needed to do it in 2-3 months....Blitzkrieg.

5.Stalin was the smartest of the four dictators (Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, and Roosevelt).
His doctrines are in the ascendancy today.

6. Germany could never have forced Russia to surrender. Never.



Now....write in simple English.
What's your point?

Where were the Western allies troops according to your source?

You still mentioning the situation of German and Russian troops only.

If you want to make your point, then show the general view as I have asked you to make, show a map which backs up your "position". You'll see that by no means the failing of Russia should help the Western allies plans

What does that have to do with the facts I stated??????


My points are....

1. Stalin and Hitler were allies until Operation Barbarossa.

2. Hitler needed resources his middle-sized nation couldn't supply....the other totalitarian entity provided them.

3. Hitler gambled that he could take all of what he needed, conquer Russia, and the world.

4. To do so, he needed to do it in 2-3 months....Blitzkrieg.

5.Stalin was the smartest of the four dictators (Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, and Roosevelt).
His doctrines are in the ascendancy today.

6. Germany could never have forced Russia to surrender. Never.




Now focus like a laser, and prove you understand the above.

damn----I AM FORCED to agree with Pchic again------STALINISM
is all the rage------just a popular as was the miniskirt in the 60s.
The shorter the skirt and the more STALINIST <<< for POPULARITY

Sad but true.

And today, half the Democrat Party wants Socialism/Communism.

 

[Bleipriester]

So reread your comment. That front was basically the world war, a Russian collapse would have freed many divisions. It is because the Russian warfare was not like the British or American. It was like sending so much cannon fodder to overfeed the cannons.

What point are you attempting to make?

I already made it.

Try doing it in English this time.

Again, if the Russian front would have collapsed that would have led to the German victory.

1. It wouldn't have collapsed.
....the British colony of Singapore was left without air cover in order to satisfy Stalin's desire for the planes. Found in Paul Johnson's "Modern Times," 'included 200 modern fighter aircraft, originally intended for Britain's highly vulnerable base in Singapore, which had no modern fighters at all. The diversion of these aircraft, plus tanks, to Russia sealed the fate of Singapore." Johnson, Op.Cit., p. 386.

Singapore fell February 15, 1942.



2. Stalin never would have surrendered. This was a psychopath.
World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans. Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.



3. Roosevelt would have supported Stalin unto the last American soldier was dead.
FDR turned American war policy over to Koba....
Stalin determined the Allies attack would come via Normandy, and now the more advantageous, through Italy. Stalin wanted Eastern Europe left to his Red Army.
Stalin insisted all of Germany ‘pasturized,’ all industry destroyed, so that the Red Army has no opposition post war.

Patton wanted to keep the Germany army ready to resist Stalin....so Patton was removed.




Let me know when you need another lesson.

When you compare the casualties it is x Russian civilians. But zero German civilians. Maybe they just rebrand fallen solders civilians.
And if Stalin would have surrendered or not, is not the topic. Enough troops would have been relocated to the other frontiers to stabilize them. That´s the point.

 

[PoliticalChic]

What point are you attempting to make?

I already made it.

Try doing it in English this time.

Again, if the Russian front would have collapsed that would have led to the German victory.

1. It wouldn't have collapsed.
....the British colony of Singapore was left without air cover in order to satisfy Stalin's desire for the planes. Found in Paul Johnson's "Modern Times," 'included 200 modern fighter aircraft, originally intended for Britain's highly vulnerable base in Singapore, which had no modern fighters at all. The diversion of these aircraft, plus tanks, to Russia sealed the fate of Singapore." Johnson, Op.Cit., p. 386.

Singapore fell February 15, 1942.



2. Stalin never would have surrendered. This was a psychopath.
World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans. Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.



3. Roosevelt would have supported Stalin unto the last American soldier was dead.
FDR turned American war policy over to Koba....
Stalin determined the Allies attack would come via Normandy, and now the more advantageous, through Italy. Stalin wanted Eastern Europe left to his Red Army.
Stalin insisted all of Germany ‘pasturized,’ all industry destroyed, so that the Red Army has no opposition post war.

Patton wanted to keep the Germany army ready to resist Stalin....so Patton was removed.




Let me know when you need another lesson.

When you compare the casualties it is x Russian civilians. But zero German civilians. Maybe they just rebrand fallen solders civilians.
And if Stalin would have surrendered or not, is not the topic. Enough troops would have been relocated to the other frontiers to stabilize them. That´s the point.

Stick to the facts.

Stalin provided the 'fuels' Hitler's troops marched on.

QED....no way he would have defeated Hitler.

And FDR was....as I have shown.....behind Koba all the way.


"According to Suvorov, Stalin planned to use Nazi Germany as a proxy (the “Icebreaker”) against the West. For this reason Stalin provided significant material and political support to Adolf Hitler, while at the same time preparing the Red Army to “liberate” the whole of Europe from Nazi occupation."
Viktor Suvorov - Wikipedia

.

"In 1945 Zhukov is reported to have said to US General Dwight D. Eisenhower, "If we come to a minefield, our infantry attacks exactly as it were not there." The shear weight of numbers eventually drove the Germans back, along with the Soviet leadership's determination not to relent, whatever the cost." Georgy Zhukov hero file | moreorless.net.au



Wise up.

 

[Bleipriester]

I already made it.

Try doing it in English this time.

Again, if the Russian front would have collapsed that would have led to the German victory.

1. It wouldn't have collapsed.
....the British colony of Singapore was left without air cover in order to satisfy Stalin's desire for the planes. Found in Paul Johnson's "Modern Times," 'included 200 modern fighter aircraft, originally intended for Britain's highly vulnerable base in Singapore, which had no modern fighters at all. The diversion of these aircraft, plus tanks, to Russia sealed the fate of Singapore." Johnson, Op.Cit., p. 386.

Singapore fell February 15, 1942.



2. Stalin never would have surrendered. This was a psychopath.
World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans. Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.



3. Roosevelt would have supported Stalin unto the last American soldier was dead.
FDR turned American war policy over to Koba....
Stalin determined the Allies attack would come via Normandy, and now the more advantageous, through Italy. Stalin wanted Eastern Europe left to his Red Army.
Stalin insisted all of Germany ‘pasturized,’ all industry destroyed, so that the Red Army has no opposition post war.

Patton wanted to keep the Germany army ready to resist Stalin....so Patton was removed.




Let me know when you need another lesson.

When you compare the casualties it is x Russian civilians. But zero German civilians. Maybe they just rebrand fallen solders civilians.
And if Stalin would have surrendered or not, is not the topic. Enough troops would have been relocated to the other frontiers to stabilize them. That´s the point.

Stick to the facts.

Stalin provided the 'fuels' Hitler's troops marched on.

QED....no way he would have defeated Hitler.

And FDR was....as I have shown.....behind Koba all the way.


"According to Suvorov, Stalin planned to use Nazi Germany as a proxy (the “Icebreaker”) against the West. For this reason Stalin provided significant material and political support to Adolf Hitler, while at the same time preparing the Red Army to “liberate” the whole of Europe from Nazi occupation."
Viktor Suvorov - Wikipedia

.

"In 1945 Zhukov is reported to have said to US General Dwight D. Eisenhower, "If we come to a minefield, our infantry attacks exactly as it were not there." The shear weight of numbers eventually drove the Germans back, along with the Soviet leadership's determination not to relent, whatever the cost." Georgy Zhukov hero file | moreorless.net.au



Wise up.

Wow, so your few troops would have defeated the Wehrmacht with Hollywood movies?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Try doing it in English this time.

Again, if the Russian front would have collapsed that would have led to the German victory.

1. It wouldn't have collapsed.
....the British colony of Singapore was left without air cover in order to satisfy Stalin's desire for the planes. Found in Paul Johnson's "Modern Times," 'included 200 modern fighter aircraft, originally intended for Britain's highly vulnerable base in Singapore, which had no modern fighters at all. The diversion of these aircraft, plus tanks, to Russia sealed the fate of Singapore." Johnson, Op.Cit., p. 386.

Singapore fell February 15, 1942.



2. Stalin never would have surrendered. This was a psychopath.
World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans. Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.



3. Roosevelt would have supported Stalin unto the last American soldier was dead.
FDR turned American war policy over to Koba....
Stalin determined the Allies attack would come via Normandy, and now the more advantageous, through Italy. Stalin wanted Eastern Europe left to his Red Army.
Stalin insisted all of Germany ‘pasturized,’ all industry destroyed, so that the Red Army has no opposition post war.

Patton wanted to keep the Germany army ready to resist Stalin....so Patton was removed.




Let me know when you need another lesson.

When you compare the casualties it is x Russian civilians. But zero German civilians. Maybe they just rebrand fallen solders civilians.
And if Stalin would have surrendered or not, is not the topic. Enough troops would have been relocated to the other frontiers to stabilize them. That´s the point.

Stick to the facts.

Stalin provided the 'fuels' Hitler's troops marched on.

QED....no way he would have defeated Hitler.

And FDR was....as I have shown.....behind Koba all the way.


"According to Suvorov, Stalin planned to use Nazi Germany as a proxy (the “Icebreaker”) against the West. For this reason Stalin provided significant material and political support to Adolf Hitler, while at the same time preparing the Red Army to “liberate” the whole of Europe from Nazi occupation."
Viktor Suvorov - Wikipedia

.

"In 1945 Zhukov is reported to have said to US General Dwight D. Eisenhower, "If we come to a minefield, our infantry attacks exactly as it were not there." The shear weight of numbers eventually drove the Germans back, along with the Soviet leadership's determination not to relent, whatever the cost." Georgy Zhukov hero file | moreorless.net.au



Wise up.

Wow, so your few troops would have defeated the Wehrmacht with Hollywood movies?

You must be from Switzerland, where the clocks aren’t the only things that’re coo-coo.

There are the folks who know, and the folks who don’t know, but you belong to the third group: the ones who don’t know, and don’t know they don’t know.



There is nothing in the post about either Hollywood, or movies.

Everything I post is linked, documented, and sourced.

You're a dunce who refuses to accept education.

 

[Bleipriester]

Again, if the Russian front would have collapsed that would have led to the German victory.

1. It wouldn't have collapsed.
....the British colony of Singapore was left without air cover in order to satisfy Stalin's desire for the planes. Found in Paul Johnson's "Modern Times," 'included 200 modern fighter aircraft, originally intended for Britain's highly vulnerable base in Singapore, which had no modern fighters at all. The diversion of these aircraft, plus tanks, to Russia sealed the fate of Singapore." Johnson, Op.Cit., p. 386.

Singapore fell February 15, 1942.



2. Stalin never would have surrendered. This was a psychopath.
World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans. Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.



3. Roosevelt would have supported Stalin unto the last American soldier was dead.
FDR turned American war policy over to Koba....
Stalin determined the Allies attack would come via Normandy, and now the more advantageous, through Italy. Stalin wanted Eastern Europe left to his Red Army.
Stalin insisted all of Germany ‘pasturized,’ all industry destroyed, so that the Red Army has no opposition post war.

Patton wanted to keep the Germany army ready to resist Stalin....so Patton was removed.




Let me know when you need another lesson.

When you compare the casualties it is x Russian civilians. But zero German civilians. Maybe they just rebrand fallen solders civilians.
And if Stalin would have surrendered or not, is not the topic. Enough troops would have been relocated to the other frontiers to stabilize them. That´s the point.

Stick to the facts.

Stalin provided the 'fuels' Hitler's troops marched on.

QED....no way he would have defeated Hitler.

And FDR was....as I have shown.....behind Koba all the way.


"According to Suvorov, Stalin planned to use Nazi Germany as a proxy (the “Icebreaker”) against the West. For this reason Stalin provided significant material and political support to Adolf Hitler, while at the same time preparing the Red Army to “liberate” the whole of Europe from Nazi occupation."
Viktor Suvorov - Wikipedia

.

"In 1945 Zhukov is reported to have said to US General Dwight D. Eisenhower, "If we come to a minefield, our infantry attacks exactly as it were not there." The shear weight of numbers eventually drove the Germans back, along with the Soviet leadership's determination not to relent, whatever the cost." Georgy Zhukov hero file | moreorless.net.au



Wise up.

Wow, so your few troops would have defeated the Wehrmacht with Hollywood movies?

You must be from Switzerland, where the clocks aren’t the only things that’re coo-coo.

There are the folks who know, and the folks who don’t know, but you belong to the third group: the ones who don’t know, and don’t know they don’t know.



There is nothing in the post about either Hollywood, or movies.

Everything I post is linked, documented, and sourced.

You're a dunce who refuses to accept education.

No, you are just pretending that America was so strong and easily would have defeated Germany, when it was in fact the Russians.
It is nothing new, you are not the only one who believes the US did the "heavy lifting". It is because the people in your country get fed with supremacy propaganda and when Uncle Sam pulps another empty desert, that serves as further proof.
In fact the US military had never to fight against a strong country that wasn´t already stressed to the limits.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. It wouldn't have collapsed.
....the British colony of Singapore was left without air cover in order to satisfy Stalin's desire for the planes. Found in Paul Johnson's "Modern Times," 'included 200 modern fighter aircraft, originally intended for Britain's highly vulnerable base in Singapore, which had no modern fighters at all. The diversion of these aircraft, plus tanks, to Russia sealed the fate of Singapore." Johnson, Op.Cit., p. 386.

Singapore fell February 15, 1942.



2. Stalin never would have surrendered. This was a psychopath.
World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans. Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.



3. Roosevelt would have supported Stalin unto the last American soldier was dead.
FDR turned American war policy over to Koba....
Stalin determined the Allies attack would come via Normandy, and now the more advantageous, through Italy. Stalin wanted Eastern Europe left to his Red Army.
Stalin insisted all of Germany ‘pasturized,’ all industry destroyed, so that the Red Army has no opposition post war.

Patton wanted to keep the Germany army ready to resist Stalin....so Patton was removed.




Let me know when you need another lesson.

When you compare the casualties it is x Russian civilians. But zero German civilians. Maybe they just rebrand fallen solders civilians.
And if Stalin would have surrendered or not, is not the topic. Enough troops would have been relocated to the other frontiers to stabilize them. That´s the point.

Stick to the facts.

Stalin provided the 'fuels' Hitler's troops marched on.

QED....no way he would have defeated Hitler.

And FDR was....as I have shown.....behind Koba all the way.


"According to Suvorov, Stalin planned to use Nazi Germany as a proxy (the “Icebreaker”) against the West. For this reason Stalin provided significant material and political support to Adolf Hitler, while at the same time preparing the Red Army to “liberate” the whole of Europe from Nazi occupation."
Viktor Suvorov - Wikipedia

.

"In 1945 Zhukov is reported to have said to US General Dwight D. Eisenhower, "If we come to a minefield, our infantry attacks exactly as it were not there." The shear weight of numbers eventually drove the Germans back, along with the Soviet leadership's determination not to relent, whatever the cost." Georgy Zhukov hero file | moreorless.net.au



Wise up.

Wow, so your few troops would have defeated the Wehrmacht with Hollywood movies?

You must be from Switzerland, where the clocks aren’t the only things that’re coo-coo.

There are the folks who know, and the folks who don’t know, but you belong to the third group: the ones who don’t know, and don’t know they don’t know.



There is nothing in the post about either Hollywood, or movies.

Everything I post is linked, documented, and sourced.

You're a dunce who refuses to accept education.

No, you are just pretending that America was so strong and easily would have defeated Germany, when it was in fact the Russians.
It is nothing new, you are not the only one who believes the US did the "heavy lifting". It is because the people in your country get fed with supremacy propaganda and when Uncle Sam pulps another empty desert, that serves as further proof.
In fact the US military had never to fight against a strong country that wasn´t already stressed to the limits.

"No, you are just pretending that America was so strong and easily would have defeated Germany, when it was in fact the Russians."


So I was correct, that there was no mention of Hollywood or of movies....

Watch me sink you again: can you quote me as saying what you just claimed?



Or....are you simply unequipped for this discussion, and just make stuff up?


Speak up, dolt.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. It wouldn't have collapsed.
....the British colony of Singapore was left without air cover in order to satisfy Stalin's desire for the planes. Found in Paul Johnson's "Modern Times," 'included 200 modern fighter aircraft, originally intended for Britain's highly vulnerable base in Singapore, which had no modern fighters at all. The diversion of these aircraft, plus tanks, to Russia sealed the fate of Singapore." Johnson, Op.Cit., p. 386.

Singapore fell February 15, 1942.



2. Stalin never would have surrendered. This was a psychopath.
World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans. Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.



3. Roosevelt would have supported Stalin unto the last American soldier was dead.
FDR turned American war policy over to Koba....
Stalin determined the Allies attack would come via Normandy, and now the more advantageous, through Italy. Stalin wanted Eastern Europe left to his Red Army.
Stalin insisted all of Germany ‘pasturized,’ all industry destroyed, so that the Red Army has no opposition post war.

Patton wanted to keep the Germany army ready to resist Stalin....so Patton was removed.




Let me know when you need another lesson.

When you compare the casualties it is x Russian civilians. But zero German civilians. Maybe they just rebrand fallen solders civilians.
And if Stalin would have surrendered or not, is not the topic. Enough troops would have been relocated to the other frontiers to stabilize them. That´s the point.

Stick to the facts.

Stalin provided the 'fuels' Hitler's troops marched on.

QED....no way he would have defeated Hitler.

And FDR was....as I have shown.....behind Koba all the way.


"According to Suvorov, Stalin planned to use Nazi Germany as a proxy (the “Icebreaker”) against the West. For this reason Stalin provided significant material and political support to Adolf Hitler, while at the same time preparing the Red Army to “liberate” the whole of Europe from Nazi occupation."
Viktor Suvorov - Wikipedia

.

"In 1945 Zhukov is reported to have said to US General Dwight D. Eisenhower, "If we come to a minefield, our infantry attacks exactly as it were not there." The shear weight of numbers eventually drove the Germans back, along with the Soviet leadership's determination not to relent, whatever the cost." Georgy Zhukov hero file | moreorless.net.au



Wise up.

Wow, so your few troops would have defeated the Wehrmacht with Hollywood movies?

You must be from Switzerland, where the clocks aren’t the only things that’re coo-coo.

There are the folks who know, and the folks who don’t know, but you belong to the third group: the ones who don’t know, and don’t know they don’t know.



There is nothing in the post about either Hollywood, or movies.

Everything I post is linked, documented, and sourced.

You're a dunce who refuses to accept education.

No, you are just pretending that America was so strong and easily would have defeated Germany, when it was in fact the Russians.
It is nothing new, you are not the only one who believes the US did the "heavy lifting". It is because the people in your country get fed with supremacy propaganda and when Uncle Sam pulps another empty desert, that serves as further proof.
In fact the US military had never to fight against a strong country that wasn´t already stressed to the limits.

I see that you didn't even try to dispute anything I posted here:


1. It wouldn't have collapsed.
....the British colony of Singapore was left without air cover in order to satisfy Stalin's desire for the planes. Found in Paul Johnson's "Modern Times," 'included 200 modern fighter aircraft, originally intended for Britain's highly vulnerable base in Singapore, which had no modern fighters at all. The diversion of these aircraft, plus tanks, to Russia sealed the fate of Singapore." Johnson, Op.Cit., p. 386.

Singapore fell February 15, 1942.



2. Stalin never would have surrendered. This was a psychopath.
World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans. Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.



3. Roosevelt would have supported Stalin unto the last American soldier was dead.
FDR turned American war policy over to Koba....
Stalin determined the Allies attack would come via Normandy, and now the more advantageous, through Italy. Stalin wanted Eastern Europe left to his Red Army.
Stalin insisted all of Germany ‘pasturized,’ all industry destroyed, so that the Red Army has no opposition post war.

Patton wanted to keep the Germany army ready to resist Stalin....so Patton was removed.




Let me know when you need another lesson.




Quite an education you're getting today, huh?

 

[Bleipriester]

There is no "it would´t have collapsed."
It is about what Roosevelt said and he was right. Because the Russian front was the most essentials, its dimension make all others look like sideshows.

 

[PoliticalChic]

There is no "it would´t have collapsed."
It is about what Roosevelt said and he was right. Because the Russian front was the most essentials, its dimension make all others look like sideshows.

I gave the stats on Germany's lost gamble of attacking Russia.

No....it wouldn't have collapsed, surrendered, or lost.

Hitler had no defense against those three great Russian generals....December, January, and February.


Now.....why your need to defend the most homicidal regime in history....?



Any errors here?


1. It wouldn't have collapsed.
....the British colony of Singapore was left without air cover in order to satisfy Stalin's desire for the planes. Found in Paul Johnson's "Modern Times," 'included 200 modern fighter aircraft, originally intended for Britain's highly vulnerable base in Singapore, which had no modern fighters at all. The diversion of these aircraft, plus tanks, to Russia sealed the fate of Singapore." Johnson, Op.Cit., p. 386.

Singapore fell February 15, 1942.



2. Stalin never would have surrendered. This was a psychopath.
World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans. Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.



3. Roosevelt would have supported Stalin unto the last American soldier was dead.
FDR turned American war policy over to Koba....
Stalin determined the Allies attack would come via Normandy, and now the more advantageous, through Italy. Stalin wanted Eastern Europe left to his Red Army.
Stalin insisted all of Germany ‘pasturized,’ all industry destroyed, so that the Red Army has no opposition post war.

Patton wanted to keep the Germany army ready to resist Stalin....so Patton was removed.




Bet you wish you had an education rather than an indoctrination, huh?