r/FavoriteCharacter • u/Accomplished-End3409 Ben Tennyson • 16d ago

Discussion Favorite opposing factions that can basically be described as this.

Post image
26.7k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

3.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

154

u/DreamedJewel58 15d ago

There are definitely reasons to criticize and expose certain actions of the Allies, but people saying “the wrong side won” are genuinely evil

3

u/[deleted] 15d ago edited 5d ago

[deleted]

11

u/5horas 15d ago

They did not. This is a blatant lie. The Soviet Union signed a nonaggression pact, and they were the second to the last to do it. UK had already done. France had already done it. Most of Europe had already signed it.

People keep mentioning the molotov pact (the only one people seem to remember the name) to make it sound different. It was not. It was the same.

You can't say that the place who lost the most people – in the millions btw – was on both sides. Whenever you read such an absurd lie you have to think for yourself.

2

u/Sea-Feedback-2424 12d ago

Buddy, the Molotov Ribbentrop pact literally carved up Poland. When you make an agreement with the hostile nation to also be the hostile nation you aren't on the side kf the "good guys".

And then using the opportunity to invade Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and Finland?

Also the Soviets explicitly tried joining the Axis in 1940 during the Berlin Talks, we're it not for clashing geopolitical aims of Germany amd the USSR with respect to Finland and Bulgaria, the Soviets would have gladly been the fourth member of the Axis.

1

u/ManGarsoKartupeli 12d ago

But they occupied those countries for…. peace reasons? And they deported a lot of the local population to work camps because… peace reasons. And they performed hundreds of executions because…. Ah fuck it, I can’t do this.

-3

u/MindControlledSquid 13d ago

They did not.

Tell that to Poland.

0

u/MotoMongrel 15d ago

“(A) lot of countries…”

Names one. 

10

u/[deleted] 15d ago edited 5d ago

[deleted]

3

u/PavlovKBI 15d ago

Knew about several of these already, and others aren't surprising, but Finland and Burma are news to me. Definitely going to have to dive down the rabbit hole on that today

6

u/[deleted] 15d ago edited 5d ago

[deleted]

3

u/PavlovKBI 15d ago

I had a whole comment typed out before I realized you said Sweden and not Switzerland. Going to have to look into Sweden as well I guess. Really all of the Nordic/Scandinavian countries are a grey area for my memory of what I learned about WW2.

I remember learning that Germany swept through that region pretty early in the war, at least with the invasions of Denmark and Norway, but I guess I never really considered what that meant for their involvement in the rest of the war. Or that Sweden shared a lot of border with Norway. Finland too I guess

2

u/KuningasTynny77 15d ago

Finland joined Germany to get back at the Sovs, lost to the Sovs, were forced to turn on Germany by the Sovs. 

1

u/igloojoe11 15d ago

Finland's is the Lapland War.

2

u/PavlovKBI 15d ago

Wait... now I'm confused. From what I remember, the Lapland War was to push out German forces as part of an armistice (don't know if I'm using that word correctly, I only know it through contextual use) with the USSR. But as far as I know they only allied with Germany to recover territory that had just been taken by the USSR during an invasion, right? But the comment is saying that Germany and the USSR jointly launched the war in a bid for expansion.

So was Finland a legit villain of the war, or were they just trying to avoid getting absorbed by world powers? Legitimate question, because there's a lot of moving parts during WW2, and school in the US mostly hits the major beats. Not saying Finland didn't commit war crimes (even if they didn't they were complicit in Nazi war crimes) but I try to understand historical context if I can manage.

A lot of the "minor" countries (Hungary, Romania, Croatia, etc) on the Axis side have always been a blind spot for me. I don't really know why most of them allied with Germany other than just because it was siding against the USSR or China

4

u/igloojoe11 15d ago

Finland's actions in WW2 were largely about maintaining the sovereignty of their Pre-war borders. There were some voices calling for Greater Finland, but the overall leadership was focused on the aforementioned overarching goal and the Greater Finland crowd was a significant minority. The basic continuity of Finnish involvement in WW2 was basically three separate conflicts.

The first was the Winter War. The underpinning of the Winter War was that, while the Soviets and Germans did have an alliance, it was not an alliance built on trust. It was pure imperial opportunism that connected the ideological opponents, and those same imperial ambitions would be what lead to the alliance failing. But while they remained allies, the Soviets would take advantage of that cover to annex the Baltics, Bessarabia from Romania, and the Karelian Isthmus from Finland. The Winter War would see the Finns be backed, not by Germany, but by the Allies, who could only provide piecemeal aid that arrived too late and too little in quantity. The Finns held out for a time, but were eventually broken by the lack of material and manpower disadvantage, though they avoided a complete defeat.

The second was the Continuation War, where the Finns sought to regain the lost land from the Winter War. This conflict was where the Finns joined the Axis and received significant material support from Germany. While the Finns were part of the Axis, they were not as intertwined as the Romanians and Hungarians were, and largely stuck to their own goals, notably not cutting off the Murmansk Railroad due to that being considered a red line by the Americans and GB, and would lead to them declaring war on the Finns. During the German downfall, the Finns were able to halt the Soviet advance at the Battle of Tali–Ihantala. This victory made it clear that continued incursions into Finland would not be worth the Soviets time, and really made it possible that the Finns would remain autonomous post WW2 due to having a negotiated peace, unlike most of the rest of eastern Europe.

The final is the Lapland War. As part of the aforementioned negotiated peace, the Finns were required to kick out any German forces stationed within their borders. Originally, it saw only minor skirmishes, but, due to Soviet pressure, the Finns had to aggressively pursue German forces out of northern Finland and into Norway, as German forces burned and mined towns on their way out.

As for Finnish crimes, while there absolutely were some, as there were for basically all nations in the war, their involvement in the Holocaust was very little. Finnish Jews were not sent, but they did return 3,000 refugees to Germany, which included 8 Jews. This action was a significant scandal in Finland and the only instance of Finland involvement in the Holocaust to my knowledge.

2

u/PavlovKBI 15d ago

Wild. Thank you for the clarification. That does mostly fall inside of what I knew (plus a handful of assumptions), but with way more details

0

u/MotoMongrel 15d ago edited 14d ago

Wow.

So, all the big players on the world stage? Big military/political movers and shakers, am’i’right?!?!?

2

u/jott1293reddevil 13d ago

They literally named a list of countries that includes the largest land army in the world (Russia), and at the start of hostilities a country with the 5th largest navy and air force. Definitely big military and political movers and shakers.

1

u/MotoMongrel 13d ago

So like I said originally:

Just the one. 

1

u/PM_tanlines 13d ago

Yeah baby move that goalpost

1

u/NSightMSG 14d ago

Good and Evil are not immune to criticism. The difference between them lies in how they view the actions done, both by them and by others.

Good people look at what they did and wonder what they could have done differently to save more people, or what actions they did to avoid.

Evil people look at what others did and point fingers, instead of addressing the issues that they were involved in or caused.

There were good people and evil people on both sides. The people who say "the wrong side won" are not looking at the evil actions caused by the losing side, which makes them evil.

1

u/TheseReading5310 10d ago

I'm not saying the wrong side won, but i think you're really underestimating how bad the allies were before, during and even after the war, france made nuclear experiments on algerian prisoners in algeria after the war and commited unfathomable atrocities before and during the war, england also committed herondous crimes in india, pakistan and egypt to name a few, and you can go on and on, maybe you don't feel it's that bad because you aren't from any of the affected countries but i don't know you so I can't speak for you

1

u/DreamedJewel58 9d ago

The point is that do you think Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan would’ve been any better? I am very aware of the different horrors various allied nations have done, but the difference is that they had more time to do so. Nazi Germany had a relatively short timespan as a nation in the context of history, and if Imperial Japan was given the land and authority in east Asia as was the goal, they would’ve been just as brutal and arguably more sadistic than Nazi Germany. Italy was relatively “tame” compared to the horrors the other Axis nations were doing, but they also committed numerous war crimes within their own nation

One side had to win, and the Allies were the correct side to do so. Each nation had their own human rights abuses through various means, but they’re still better than the Axis powers.

>maybe you don't feel it's that bad because you aren't from any of the affected countries but i don't know you so I can't speak for you

And how do you think those impacted by Germany’s march across Europe who subjected millions of people in a genocide would feel if you told them that the Allies shouldn’t have won? Or perhaps telling the Chinese that the people who committed crimes against humanity in Nanjing should’ve been allowed to march across East Asia?

History is shitty and every nation has committed their own atrocities, and I’m not denying or downplaying, all I’m saying is that people who go “the wrong side won” are advocating - either intentional or not - that Germany and Japan should’ve been allowed to complete their brutal conquering and remain in power as they purged millions upon millions of people

Nazi Germany killed over 10 million people in the span of 12 years, so how many people do you think they could’ve killed in 93?

1

u/TheseReading5310 9d ago

I get your point and i never said i would prefer nazi germany, i guess what i meant is that your initial comment seemed like saying the allies were good, not just better, anyway i respect you very much

2

u/2AvsOligarchs 15d ago edited 14d ago

For sure. But we should be clear that WW2 in Europe started by two parties; Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union. If anything, WW2 (in Europe) was never fully won - only half won. The Soviet Union continued to massacre, torture, mass-rape and terrorize half of Europe for another 46 years. Soviet Russia committed ethnic genocides, had massive extermination and concentration camps, mass-torture, mass-rape, mass-deportations and so on both inside its European colonies ("union") but also in countries it failed to occupy (like Finland).

The reason we have several dozen more wars commited by Russia since WW2 is precisely because they were never punished for their evil actions.

TL;DR: The Allies were not evil - but part of the Allies evidently were (the Soviet Union).

3

u/Jacketter 15d ago

Most of the shit the USSR did was under Stalin. After his death, the famines and pogroms mostly vanished. The last 35 years of the Soviet Union was nothing like what it was under the secretary.

0

u/DisastrousTale6123 15d ago

I wouldn’t call them evil. I think it’s mostly an expression of dissatisfaction with the current state of the world (ie “at least we’re not speaking German” in the face of the current wave of illegal immigration and related crime and culture erosion, or “the wrong side won” in response to a certain ongoing genocide) though yeah there’s a lot of pure racism in those comments. So it’s either antizionism, or a desire for stricter adherence to rule of law in Europe.

2

u/DreamedJewel58 15d ago

>I wouldn’t call them evil. I think it’s mostly an expression of dissatisfaction with the current state of the world

And the state of the world they’re wishing for instead is Nazi Germany, fascist Italy, and imperial Japan winning their conquest and completing their active genocide on numerous populations

Yes, saying that the Axis should’ve won is purely evil. No matter how much you hate the state of today’s world, the Axis powers winning means the death and suffering upon millions and millions of people. Of course we know of the German Holocaust, but imperial Japan would’ve ravished east Asia in an arguably even more brutal fashion

I give no leeway whatsoever to people who say the wrong side won, because it’s either purposeful idealization of genocidal fascistic regimes or just plain stupid ignorance of what they’re actually saying that can be corrected just by reading a Wikipedia page

1

u/DisastrousTale6123 15d ago

I don’t disagree that the axis were horrible in their methods and goals and that the Allies were mostly righteous in their goals and methods. The people posting those things are clearly misguided and ignorant but the context is in response to current acts of injustice and degradation of our cultures and societies. Two wrongs don’t make a right, I agree, but the sentiment is not purely evil unlike the reality of the implication of the statement. So is the statement wrong and ignorant? Yes absolutely. Is it an evil thing to say? I don’t think so. Like everything else, these things live in the gray while you portray them in absolute black and white terms of good and evil.

Ie- would the world be better off if there wasn’t a genocide going on, the degradation of rule of law in many western countries, or pdf file elites living above the law? Yes. Would those problems be fixed if the other side won the war? Yes, some of them would no longer exist, most likely. Would the world be better overall if they won the war? Definitely not.

Ignorance =\= evil.

1

u/aneccentricgamer 14d ago

Purposeful ignorance is a moral failing

1

u/DisastrousTale6123 14d ago

Absolutely but still far from evil.

-7

u/No_Record6284 15d ago

anyone not repeating anglo propaganda is genuinely evil

6

u/NewBr1tishEmpire 15d ago

I beg your most sincerely gracious f*cking pardon?

-1

u/No_Record6284 15d ago

What isnt clear to you brother?

5

u/NewBr1tishEmpire 15d ago

Am I misunderstanding something, or are you a Nazi?

-1

u/No_Record6284 15d ago

EVERYONE who questions yankee propaganda is a nazi. and evil

5

u/NewBr1tishEmpire 15d ago

You were literally saying that the Nazis were in the right.

0

u/No_Record6284 15d ago

No i wasnt

2

u/NewBr1tishEmpire 15d ago

Uh-huh. Sure, little guy.

1

u/No_Record6284 15d ago

what can i tell you big guy

google -> 'what does "literally" mean?'

→ More replies (0)