Victory for some...

For the Soviet Union the Second World War ended 70 years ago. For millions in Eastern Europe, it was the beginning of another occupation by an utterly fascist system, an occupation that would last around 45 years. For German women it was the beginning of a massive rape wave, perhaps the biggest in human history, with Russian troops defiling any woman they could find. Women as old as 80 years and girls as young as 8 years were raped. Millions were raped, and hundreds of thousands died as a result. There were roughly 200 000 victims of rape in Berlin alone. These weren't merely reprisals for all the horrors that Nazis had inflicted on Soviet citizens; on their way toward Berlin, the Russians raped Belarusians, Poles, Ukrainians, Jews and even Russians liberated from labor camps and wives of German communists. This was officially encouraged, even if nominally banned. The higher-ups encouraged the mass rapes as a means to terrorize local populations and to reward Soviet soldiers. At the end of the day Soviet authorities, kinda like the modern Finnish justice system, did not consider rape a serious offense. Hitler himself had contributed greatly to the peril of German women (and civilians in general) by preventing the evacuation of German civilians in places such as East Prussia, where the Russians really went cavemen on the local population.

Unlike Germany, Russia, as a victor, has been unwilling to learn from history even though their current problems with their "near abroad" and with NATO expansion have everything to do with Soviet/Russian history of repression. Poland and the Baltic states are now NATO members because of their repression under Russian rule. World War II began with a joint Nazi-Soviet attack on Poland. Tens of thousands of important Poles were massacred by the Soviets during this first occupation period. Later, as the Germans were being pushed back, Stalin couldn't have cared less about liberating anyone; Poland was merely another territory to conquer and hold, which is why he prevented the United States from aiding Polish partisans (the Home Army) in their desperate struggle against Germany. Today's Ukraine is divided over Russia because Stalin first starved the Ukrainian population to death (Holodomor), then resettled the country with Russians. (Mistakes such as this and the purges almost cost the Soviets the war.) The entire population of Crimea was deported and replaced with Russians. After the war Stalin downplayed the importance of the Holocaust because the plight of the Jewish people didn't fit the general history of the "Great Patriotic War", and because so many Soviet citizens (including Ukrainians and non-Soviet Poles) had actively participated in the genocide.

Of course, there is little question the Nazis were worse. Had the Nazis won the war, Poland, for example, would have been colonized and its Polish population either exterminated or enslaved (and then exterminated), and its cities razed to the ground. As Bloodlands makes clear, when it comes to the systematic murder of innocent men, women and children, Nazis easily outperformed the Soviet Union. As far as the Nazis were concerned, murder was the objective. In the Soviet Union murder was a means to an end. Soviets killed Soviets; Germans killed non-Germans. Soviets killed before the war, Germans during the war. Stalin may have gotten a head start with the mass killings, but once the Nazis crossed the Molotov-Ribbentrop line in 1941, they more than made up for it, first by having the Einsatzgruppen shoot any Jews they could find, and then, as the war went on, by building gas chambers with which they could murder on an industrial scale. During the war, the Nazis perfected a psychopath-run (hence the "banality of evil") genocide machine, which enabled them to murder so many Jews in such a short time in such a difficult environment.

Below are several bits from Bloodlands:

"The men of the Dirlewanger Brigade burned down three hospitals with patients inside. At one hospital, wounded Germans who were being treated by Polish doctors and nurses asked that no harm come to the Poles. This was not to be. The men of the Dirlewanger Brigade killed the Polish wounded. They brought the nurses back to camp that evening, as was the custom: each night selected women would be whipped by officers and then gang-raped before being murdered. This evening was unusual even by those standards. To the accompaniment of flute music, the men raised a gallows, and then hanged the doctors and the naked nurses."

"...in roundups that took several days, the Germans and the Jewish police would blockade particular blocks or particular houses, and force their inhabitants to go to a collection point. Germans shot small children, pregnant women, and the handicapped or elderly on the spot. In larger towns and cities where more than one roundup was necessary, these measures were repated with increasing violence. The Germans were aiming for daily quotas to fill trains, and would sometimes pass on quotas to the Jewish police who were responsible (at the risk of their own position and thus lives) for filling them."

"In October 1941, Mahileu became the first substantial city in occupied Soviet Belarus where almost all Jews were killed. A German (Austrian) policeman wrote to his wife of his feelings and experiences shooting the city's Jews in the first days of the month. 'During the first try, my hand trembled a bit as I shot, but one gets used to it. By the tenth try I aimed calmly and shot surely at the many women, children, and infants. I kept in mind that I have two infants at home, whom these hordes would treat just the same, if not ten times worse. The death that we gave them was a beautiful quick death, compared to the hellish torments of thousands and thousands in the jails of the GPU. Infants flew in great arcs through the air, and we shot them to pieces in flight, before their bodies fell into the pit and into the water.'"

"Having surrendered their valuables and documents, people were forced to strip naked. Then they were driven by threats or by shots fired overhead, in groups of about ten, to the edge of a ravine known as Babi Yar. Many of them were beaten: Pronicheva remembered that people 'were already bloody as they went to be shot.' They had to lie down on their stomachs on the corpses already beneath them, and wait for the shots to come from above and behind. Then would come the next group. Jews came and died for thirty-six hours. (...) One naked mother spent what she must have known were her last few seconds of life breastfeeding her baby. When the baby was thrown alive into the ravine, she jumped after it, and in that way found her death. Only there in the ditch were these people reduced to nothing, or to their number, which was 33,761."

"Jewish women suffered in particular ways. Despite regulations against "racial defilement," some Germans quickly developed a taste for rape as prelude to murder. At least once Germans carried out a "beauty contest" of Jewish women, taking them to the cemetery, forcing them to strip naked, and then killing them. In the ghetto, German soldiers would force Jewish girls to dance naked at night; in the morning only the girls' corpses remained. Perla Aginskaia recalled what she saw in a dark apartment in the Minsk ghetto one evening in autumn 1941: 'a little room, a table, a bed. Blood was streaming down the girl's body from deep, blackish wounds in her chest. It was quite clear that the girl had been raped and killed. There were gunshot wounds around her genitals.'" 

The Nazis also wiped out entire villages in counter-productive anti-partisan reprisals: for every German killed, hundreds of innocent civilians were murdered. Such operations took place not only in the East but in Western Europe as well. In the French village of Oradour-sur-Glane, a Waffen-SS company massacred 600 civilians by a mistake (in the sense that they intended to massacre the inhabitants of another village). The men were separated from the rest, shot and then burned (while still alive). The women and children were taken to a church which was then set on fire. Those trying to escape were shot with machineguns. A baby was crucified.

So, if anything good came out of World War II, it was the physical extermination of what Hitler called the "good ones" of the Germanic race; the barbaric, racist, warmongering Germans with psychopathic and sadistic tendencies.

But in the very long run, Communism outperformed Nazism: the big difference between Nazism and Communism was their longevity. Nazis fell far short of their extermination targets due to the quick self-implosion of the Herrenvolk. Communism was much more long-lived and thus managed to amass a higher body count.

Syria, finally

It seems that the good guys have finally decided to act against Syria despite protests from the likes of Russia. As I argued earlier, non-action in the face of the likes of Bashar Assad would only make it easier for dictators to crush internal revolts in the future. The chemical attack on a residential neighborhood near Damascus was a direct result of earlier do-nothing behavior. The regime had already tried out chemical weapons several months ago on a smaller scale (and fired SCUD missiles into residential areas) just to see what the West would do. The West did nothing but slightly increased its rhetoric, so the regime decided to move it up a notch. (This should also remind us of the importance of American hegemony: without it Assad would have gone completely cavemen on his own people a long time ago with Russia nodding in approval.) The regime's timing could not have been more arrogant and bold: the attacks were carried out while UN inspectors were not many miles away. To anyone living in the West Assad's behavior may seem irrational, considering the international environment and Obama's threats about crossing the "red line", but it's a fact that Middle Eastern dictators have had problems in the past understanding the civil, diplomatic threats that Western leaders issue. Even Saddam Hussein believed, to the very last second, both in 1991 and 2003, that the United States would not invade.

For the West, there should be no turning back now. If the regime is left unpunished, Assad will become even more ruthless. The reverberations of Western inaction would be felt elsewhere too: America's enemies are surely paying attention. Obama may be extremely reluctant to act but even he should understand that it never had to come to this: had he been more decisive before, all this could have been avoided. But Obama, with his doctrine of realpolitik, was caught completely off guard by the Arab revolts that beautifully demonstrated the power of ideas, ideas that Obama's predecessor believed were not as alien to the ordinary Arab as was commonly and fashionably thought. America can now demonstrate that it stands behind those ideas by putting its money where its mouth is instead of being obsessed with maintaining the status quo, i.e., the one where ruthless dictators are kept in power for the sake of stability, breeding resentment toward America among the common folks.

To be sure, there are no easy solutions to the situation in Syria or the Greater Middle East in general. Arming moderate forces (probably easier said than done) within the opposition should alleviate the problem America faces with respect to Islamic rebels. Keeping boots off the ground seems like a no-brainer. As in Libya, air strikes and cruise missiles may be an effective and cheap solution (it should be noted that the West may wish for a regime change but doesn't seem eager to set that as an objective), contributing virtually nothing to America's long-term budget problems (which result from entitlement spending) while providing the kind of assets against the regime the rebels never could have dreamed of. In the long run, it can only be hoped that the ongoing revolutions mark the beginning of the end of autocracy in the Middle East, just as the 1848 revolutions did in Europe.

Why the North might want war

Many are asking what could North Korea possibly gain from an all-out war, a war that'd certainly lead to its own destruction. If North Korea really wants to provoke a war, it will be because of this:

(The Washington Post)

Their military equipment is at least fifty years old, nearing or way past its "best before" date. Soon it will be of little use and North Korea has absolutely no money (or anything for that matter) to obtain new equipment. And, with the Soviet Union long gone, they've got no real friends either. Combine this with the fact that the North Korean regime probably truly believes that the United States and South Korea are out to get them, just waiting for the right moment to invade, and you end up with a regime that believes it's running out of time. Either they set off what they believe to be inevitable now that they still have the initiative, or they wait and watch their (largely imaginary) military prowess decay and fade away, leaving behind a carcass of a country, to be consumed by the vulturous America and South Korea.

So yes, in the crazy, self-induced world the North Korean regime lives in, a war would make sense.

Syria - what's taking so long?

The neocons are pushing for a regime change in Syria:

For the people and the fighters of Idleb, the fight goes on. They know that once Assad is finished with Homs and Hama, and once he thinks he can get away with it, he will turn his attention back to the north. Then it will be their turn, and the dictator will exact a bloody and terrible revenge for their effrontery.

What could prevent this is an effective coalition to counter the anti-Western one (Iran, Hezbollah, Russia) that currently underwrites the dictator. This Western coalition can only happen outside the auspices of the U.N., where Russia and China have already vetoed Security Council resolutions demanding Assad step down. (The Weekly Standard)

That was at the end of February. Now it's too late for the rebels in Idlib. Bolstered by Western inactivity, Assad resorted to tactics such as shellings residential neighborhoods.

The neocons, after years of ridicule, are still confident about their ideas, and why not? What has been happening in the Greater Middle East lately is more or less exactly what the neocons said would happen. Removing a constant, Saddam Hussein, from the Middle East helped alter what many considered a fixed status quo of autocratic regimes.

The intervention in Libya was a tremendous success. The cost of the operation has been estimated at about 3-4 billion dollars with the US being responsible for about a third of that amount. There were no casualties. In short, that's a lot of bang for the buck. In comparison, the United States spends nearly one trillion (a thousand billions) dollars on Medicare & Medicaid annually.

If Asssad is allowed to survive, the Western world has effectively helped set an example that whenever there's a internal revolt, you should resort to brutal measures to suppress the revolt. Any "peaceful solution" that preserves Assad as the head of Syria, as supported by second-rate countries such as Russia and the always-irrelevant UN, would be a travesty, an idealist piece of paper that only serves to bolster Assad's grip on Syria. The West needs to do more than just freeze credit cards.

Perverse incentives

Someone posted this video on HFBoards:

This could be used to demonstrate why the financial crisis happened. The cost of an RPG rocket seems to be at least $50 and can be as high as $500 depending on the model. In any case, a rocket is worth a lot more than a fish. The problem is, of course, that the individual firing the rocket does not bear any of the costs of firing the launcher (courtesy of the U.S. taxpayer) but receives all the benefits.

Banning landmines - naive and dangerous idealism

Now that a bunch of naive idealists in the government have agreed to get rid of landmines, it's fitting to quote Charles Krauthammer (2004):

Realists do not live just in America. I found one in Finland. During the 1997 negotiations in Oslo over the land mine treaty, one of the rare holdouts, interestingly enough, was Finland. The Finnish prime minister stoutly opposed the land mine ban. And for that he was scolded by his Scandinavian neighbors. To which he responded tartly that this was a “very convenient” pose for the “other Nordic countries”--after all, Finland is their land mine.

Finland is the land mine between Russia and Scandinavia. America is the land mine between barbarism and civilization. 

Our president (and commander in chief), Tarja Halonen, has been an advocate of the landmine ban. An officer in the Finnish military was recently fined for calling her incompetent.

Suomen ja Israelin asekaupat

Vasemmistolaiset idealistit (Tuomioja, Hautala, Hassi, Kaurismäki jne.) ovat allekirjoittaneet vetoomuksen, jossa "Suomea vaaditan lopettamaan asekaupat Israelin kanssa". Tällainen sinisilmäinen "vaikuttaminen" perustunee oletukseen, että Lähi-idän ongelmat loppuvat, kunhan Israel laskee aseensa, aivan kuin Lähi-idän konfliktin historia olisi täynnä instansseja, joissa Israelin rauhaneleet oltaisiin palkittu jollakin muulla kuin Israelin siviileihin kohdistuvalla väkivallalla.

Erkki Tuomioja sanoo allekirjoittaneensa asekauppaa vastustavan vetoomuksen siksi, ettei Israelia enää voi eikä pidä kohdella asekaupoissa normaalina kumppanina.

"Ei niin kauan kuin se jatkaa siirtokuntien laajentamista ja laitonta miehitystään palestiinalaisalueilla eikä osoita uskottavia merkkejä aidosta pyrkimyksestä kestävään rauhansopimukseen."

Onpa yksipuolista. Viittaukset palestiinalaisalueiden miehityksen laillisuuteen ovat typeriä, YK:n päätökset kun ovat perinteisesti sotineet Israelin valideja turvallisuusintressejä vastaan. Jos Tuomioja haluaisi edistää miehityksen lakkauttamista, hänen tulisi vedota palestiinalaisiin, Israel kun miehittää palestiinalaisalueita vain siksi, että sen on pakko.

Suomi tietenkin myös hyötyy Israelin kanssa käytävistä asekaupoista, kuten nimimerkki "Moskovan arkistonhoitaja" Helsingin Sanomien uutisartikkelin kommenttiosiossa kertoo:

Suomi on samantyyppisessä asetelmassa kun Israel. Pieni demokraattinen valtio selkä merta vasten totalitaristisen ja äärimmäisen väkivaltaisen historian omaavassa väestöllisesti monikymmenkertaisessa ja maantieteellisesti sitäkin suuremmassa ja historiassa hyvin epävakaaksi osoittautuneessa ympäristössä.
Suomessa on Israelista paitsi sotilaallisesti myös teknis-taloudellisesti opittavaa, onhan Israel korkean teknologian johtavia maita kun siellä on yhdistynyt miljoonan orjuudesta exodukseen paenneen entisen neuvostoinsinöörin osaaminen amerikkalaisen kapitalismin maaperään tuottaen erinomaisia tiedon ja taidon jaffahedelmiä.

Hirveätä simputusta

Ei ole Suomen armeijassa helppoa:

Kaksi varusmiestä on tuomittu sakkoihin alokkaiden simputtamisesta Jääkäriprikaatissa, Yle kertoi tiistaina. Lapin käräjäoikeus määräsi alikersanttien maksettavaksi 30 päiväsakkoa eli yhteensä 180 euroa.

Kiroilevat alikersantit olivat vaatineet alokkaita tekemään tupailmoituksia sängyn alla tai sängyllä selällään maaten. Ilmoituksia oli määrätty tekemään myös seinän takaa.

Pari asiallista kommenttia Hesarin uutisen keskustelupalstalta:

"Kylläpä on tapahtunut kamalia! Ihan on laitettu sängylle makaamaan ja KIROILTU ALOKKAIDEN KUULLEN!!! Kai paikalle on jo lähetetty kriisiapua ja kaikki vapautettu palveluksesta? Missä viipyy Vanhasen anteeksipyyntö?"

"No jos on ihan kiroiltu niin kyllä on varmaan mennyt pojalta sitten fiilis. Toivottavasti ovat edes päässeet heti soittamaan äidilleen!"

"Kyllä siellä on ollu taas porukalla rohkeita äitin pikku mussukoita ku on ollu niin RANKKAA. Rankkaa on sitte ku ollaan 9 yötä metsässä 4h yöunilla, mutta nämä mammarit on saanu sentään kuulla KIROILUA!"

"Voi hellanlettas ku on poikia "kiusattu" tuolla tavalla. Aivan normaalia touhua, piristää kummasti välillä tunnelmaa tuommoinen "pelleily"."

Tässä on itseasiassa kaksi hyvää argumenttia asevelvollisuutta vastaan. Ensinnäkin, vapaaehtoisuus kitkisi armeijasta kaikenlaiset herkkähipiäiset, asepalvelukseen kelpaamattomat yksilöt. Toiseksi, meininki armeijassa on todella lapsellista. Aliupseerit ovat kuin kakaroita ja upseerien älyä joutuu jatkuvasti epäilemään, kun kaikki pitää aina tehdä vaikeimman kautta (missä ei tietenkään sinänsä ole mitään ihmeellistä, onhan armeija valtion monopoli). Armeija ei todellakaan tee pojista miehiä, vaan se tekee miehen aluista poikia. Minun on vaikea nähdä armeijassa mitään mekanismia, jonka avulla normaaliälyinen varusmies miehistyisi sen 6-12 kuukautta kestävän leikkikerhon aikana. Toisaalta jos lähdetään siitä, että asevelvollisuus pitää säilyttää, niin tällöin olisi tietenkin kaikkien kannalta parempi, että tällaisesta "simputuksesta" ei rangaistaisi, sillä se tekisi asepalveluksen entistä tylsemmäksi. (Todellinen simputtaminen on tietenkin asia erikseen.)