[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/his/ - History & Humanities


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: order no 227.jpg (10 KB, 265x190)
10 KB
10 KB JPG
Do western cuck liberal historians really think Stalin and the NKVD personally mowed down all deserting troops (read: penal battalions of disgraced rapists and criminals and people who are simply not very smart) with machine guns, after Order No. 227? If you think Stalingrad's Soviet troops were all killed by their own commissars, then how the fuck did they win the war? There weren't just endless reserves of troops, even if it was the Soviet Union.
>>
No, they don't. Which historians do you think say that?
>>
File: IMG_6428.jpg (50 KB, 1024x576)
50 KB
50 KB JPG
>>18224772
>cuck liberal
Ironic for you to insult historians, while not understanding how generalising is the first thing historians tend to look out for.



[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.