User talk:Anonymiss Madchen/Genocide Denial (Talk:Rape During the occupation of Germany)

On "Genocide Denial"

Corrected from "denocide denial" by Anonymiss Madchen.

This edit [1] demonstrates the author's unfamiliarity with the sources.
For instance Elisabeth Heinemann in her "The Hour of the Woman: Memories of Germany's "Crisis Years" and West German National Identity" clearly states (regarding Soviet occupation zone as whole):

"Estimates of the numbers of rapes at the hands of Soviet soldiers range widely, from the tens of thousands to 2 million." (p. 364)

Atina Grossmann says:

"The numbers cited for Berlin vary wildly; from 20,000 to 100,000, to almost one million, with the actual number of rapes higher because many women were attacked repeatedly. Sander and her collaborator, Barbara Johr, speak, perhaps conservatively, of about 110,000 women raped, many more than once, of whom up to 10,000 died in the aftermath.7 At the same timeand despite their virtual fetishization of statistical clarity-they announce on the basis of Hochrechnungen (projections or estimations) that 1.9 million German women altogether were raped at the end of the war by Red Army soldiers.8 This may be a horrifically accurate estimate, but one wonders whether or not the focus on numbers has something to do with precisely a competitiveness about the status of victim ("ein Verbrechemn it dem anderena ufgerechnet")s,o sensitive in the context of World War II, that Sander claims to resist in her work; it even suggests a lust for generally portraying women as victims that seems central to her particular historical and feminist agenda." (p. 46)

In other words, the figures which have been removed by Anonymiss Madchen are in full agreement with what the sources say, and have nothing in common with any "genocide denial". IMO, editing Wikipedia requires familiarity with what the source say. In addition, inflammatory and baseless edit summaries just make one's point weaker.--Paul Siebert (talk) 23:29, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe only 10,000 soldiers admitted what they did, since Russians are deniers. That does not mean that 10,000 is anywhere near accurate. This isn't a kind of genocide where numbers are written down and kept track of extremely well. Maybe 20,000 is the only number that can be seen in pictures or something like that. This "100,000" source sounds a lot like the Holocaust denial equations that "proved" that the ovens at Auschwitz wern't large enough for the statistics of people killed there. It is also known that they weren't the only methods of disposal tht were used.

I will take your advice into account when making future edits.

Anonymiss Madchen (talk) 23:49, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You should read the sources (Johr), where the procedure of these calculations has been described. That has been done as follows:

ESTIMATES OF THE NUMBERS OF RAPES BASED ON
BERLIN POPULATION STATISTICS5
1. Official statistics for the period between September 1945 and August 1946 show a total of 23,124 births (both live and stillborn). Of these, approximately 5% were "Russian children": 1,156 children.
2. Some 10% of the pregnant women had abortions, of which 90% were successful. Therefore, ten times as many women had actually been impregnated: 11,560.
3. About 20% of the raped women became pregnant. Therefore, among those of childbearing age, five times as many were raped: 57,800.
4. In 1945, 600,000 women of childbearing age (18 to 45 years) lived in Berlin. 57,800 of them were raped. That represents 9.5% of this age group.
5. In 1945, 800,000 girls between the ages of 14 and 18 and women over 45 lived in Berlin. If one assumes that 9.5% of those in this age group were raped, that would mean that 73,300 of those younger and older women were affected. (If a 4.75% figure is used, then the number is 36,650.)
6. Conclusions: Of the 1.4 million women and girls in Berlin, between 94,450 and 131,100-an average of more than 110,000-were raped between early summer and fall of 1945.

Source: Barbara Johr, "Die Ereignisse in Zahlen," in Sander and Johr, BeFreier und Befreite, p . 54.

According to Sander, these results were obtained based on Dr. Reichling's work and his tables. In other words, if Dr. Reichling's data are valid, if the assumption is valid that in 90% cases the pregnancies were terminated, if the assumption is valid that the probability of pregnancy after rape was 0.2, if the assumption is valid that for a woman of fertile age, a girl or older woman the probability to be raped was the same, then the results may be valid. The problem is, however, that noone demonstrated that these "ifs" are reasonable. For instance, it is natural to expect that older women were less attractive for young soldiers, so the probability for older women to be raped was lower. (The witnesses' testimonies meant just that even old woman were raped more or less frequently, however, that does not mean that the real frequency was the same). With regards to girls, according to memoirs, mothers took special efforts to hide them, so it is also natural to expect that the probability for young girl to be raped was lower. In other words, the above table is plagued with absolutely unjustified assumption and based on non-verifiable data. In addition, the way Johr presents the data (the number ofsignificant figures: e.g., "approximately 5%" of 23,124 is 1,000, or, 1,200, but in no way can it be 1,156) demonstrates her poor mathematical background. Fortunately, this is not my conclusion: below is the quote that criticises these assumptions (formally, it tells about Beevor, however, since he used mostly Johr data the same criticism is applicable to Johr):

"Perhaps 2 million German women were raped, Ioo,ooo in greater Berlin. Beevor estimates that I0,000 died, some murdered, most from suicide. The mortality rates for the 1.4 million raped in East Prussia, Pomerania and Silesia were probably much higher. Statistics proliferate, and are unverifiable. Beevor tends to accept estimates from a single doctor - how can we possibly know that 90 per cent of Berlin women were infected by VD, that 90 per cent of rape victims had abortions, that 8.7 per cent of children born in 1946 had Russian fathers? (Nicky Bird International Affairs (Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944-), Vol. 78, No. 4. (Oct., 2002), pp. 914-916).

--Paul Siebert (talk) 00:03, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain how the number of abortions tells anything about the number of rapes. Rape does no automatically mean pregnancy, and there is no magic formula for "1 in 10 rape victims will become pregnant" or anything like that. It seems that you are trying to use numbers and length to confuse us, and hope that we will agree with you rather than understand it. It reads like a cashier-change scam. Maybe if you were sent to Auschwitz, starved, "liberated," and raped by russians repeatedly, you wouldn't be engaging in this denial. BTW, because of the rape of Holocaust victims, denying this is Holocaust denial. My boyfriend's Jewish grandmother was sent to a concentration camp, "liberated," and gang raped. We had a child; that means I had a 1/8th Jewish child.

--Anonymiss Madchen (talk) 04:01, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The number of rapes all sources refer to has been obtained from the abortion rate according to the procedure described above. This procedure has been taken from the Jorh's book, and no other more reliable data on rapes exist so far. With regard to the "magic formula" (one in ten), I also agree it is dubious, however, that formula has been taken from the only source all other books on rapes (Beevor, Grossman et al) rely upon.--Paul Siebert (talk) 04:11, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

PS. I do not deny the fact that the rapes did occur, and they were massive. However, I cannot understand what concrete message you want to add to the article in addition to what is already there?

Re the personal experience of your family members. Can you imagine that each of these rapists also had his own personal experience? Can you admit that other users on this or other talk pages had relatives which were not raped, but killed, or even burned in the death camps' crematoria? And does it change anything?--Paul Siebert (talk) 04:40, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that "formula" is flawed. From the descriptions I have heard, it was every girl and woman, or very close to it.

There is nothing massive about 100,000 people in a nation 60 million. Also, having statistics that are millions low is massive denial. Does anyone but deniers claim that only 5.5 million Jews were killed just because it is the minimum estimate? It's probably actually a lot higher than 6 million. All I want is for something close to a correct number to be included.

The only thing that gets accomplished with this argument is that the one making it says acting like Nazis is ok. Comparison to another genocide is also irrelevant for the purpose of severity; we aren't ranking because the Holocaust would come out on top. This actually is part of the Holocaust* for a small percentage of the victims. There were actually Russians in my family who were killed by the Nazis, and my boyfriend's grandmother's entire family who was mostly killed by the Nazis. The only time anything changes is when a "crime" takes place in a town near a concentration camp; silence is consent, if American soldiers shot the population of a town directly next to a concentration camp, I'd find it "wrong," but not particularly care. Also, there are plenty of things that are worse than death. Why do you think there were so many suicides?

Ask yourself this: how would 200,000 Jews killed by the Nazis feel about the Russian genocide?

*There were at least a few thousand German Jews raped by the Russians, including those in concentration camps, and thousands of non German Jews who had been "liberated".

--Anonymiss Madchen (talk) 06:30, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry if I seem to angry about this

Re "Yes, that "formula" is flawed. From the descriptions I have heard..." This flawed formula is the only attempt to make more or less objective estimate. The description you have is a hearsay, and cannot be discussed seriously.

Re "All I want is for something close to a correct number to be included." What number is correct, what source is the most reliable and why? And why do you think that the bigger the numbers are the more they are trustworthy?

Re "it was every girl and woman, or very close to it". Had that been the case, every grandmother of every German citizen would be raped. That would be very easy to verify just by simple poll. Did anyone do that?

Re "The only thing that gets accomplished with this argument is that the one making it says acting like Nazis is ok " Incorrect. Mass rapes were not even close to what Nazi did with conquered nations.

Re " This actually is part of the Holocaust* for a small percentage of the victims." A small percentage of Jews was killed by American bombing. Does it mean the US participated in the Holocaust?

Re "there are plenty of things that are worse than death." According to the German proverb, which was common during those times, "the Russian on you is better than the Yankee above you" (i.e. bombing is worse than rapes).

Re "Why do you think there were so many suicides?" Several studies exists that provide an explanation for that. Rapes are considered as neither sole nor the major case of mass suicides.

Re "how would 200,000 Jews killed by the Nazis feel about the Russian genocide?" Didn't understand. Please, explain.

Re "and thousands of non German Jews who had been "liberated"" Does "Liberated" in quotation marks imply that they were not liberated in actuality?

Re angry. You don't seem angry, just too emotional.--Paul Siebert (talk) 08:41, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

-----------------

It is not objective because it is far too low. It is biased towards denial. There are times when making up formulas are not acceptable. This 100,000 thousand thing is like trying to claim that only 5.5 million Jews were killed by the Nazis; that would be Holocaust denial.
The number of girls and women in each of the towns and cities would be correct, due to the descriptions of the frequency of acts of genocide. Bigger is not by itself better; that is just a generalizing tactic.
It was every girl and woman in eastern Germany, the part that was occupied. Not the whole country.
Yes, but acts of genocide and racism are. I'm having a hard time believing that the rape of non German Jews by Russians was not motivated by anti antisemitism.
There is a huge difference between indiscriminate (and militarily necessary) bombing at high altitude and the specific and deliberate killing of civilians on the ground.
Who made that up? Goebbels? Or the Russians made it up to support Communism.
Those were probably experiments on normal rape that happens everyday, not acts of genocide.
How would the 200,000 Germans killed in concentration camps by Nazis for being Jewish feel about the Russian genocide?
They were hardly liberated if they went from certain death to severe abuse and possible/likely death.

Part of the problem here is with the title, which is misleading to the conclusion that the war crimes were only directed against Germans. Additionally, it supports Communist and Nazi propaganda by giving the illusion that Jews and slaves were not raped or victimized in other ways by the Russians (or that they even helped), and that the crimes were motivated by revenge, which they were not, as is made clear by the crimes against non German Jews and Poles.

I'm not intending in anyway to say that support for Nazi or Communist propaganda is intentional or negligent. I have had Jewish friends unintentionally express Nazi sympathizers views on Allied actions, and I didn't blame them for it.

--Anonymiss Madchen (talk) 18:35, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No comeback? It seems that you never had an argument, and that you were just reciting Russian closet Nazi propaganda. You must have just run out. I had suspected you for sometime, but I wanted more reason to go on, and agreement from more people. It seems that you've just exposed yourself.

We should be changing this title to "rape by the Russians" or something along that to eliminate the Holocaust Denial present in the current misleading title. The Russian closet Nazis are constantly trying to give the impression that their genocide was only committed against Germans or Poles, and not against Jews who were sent to concentration camps. (Auchwitz: Inside the Nazi State) Your genocide and Holocaust denial by "not Nazi" Russians has come to an end.

--Anonymiss Madchen (talk) 20:30, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, Madchen, ^{Corrected from "Madhen" by Anonymiss Madchen.} I didn't notice your previous post (in future, if you want to get a quick answer from me, just leave me a note on my talk page).

Re 1. If you believe the figures are far too low, you probably have some reliable sources that support your views. Please, reveal them; Re 5.5 million Jews, I do not think to claim that would be a Holocaust denial, because actual amount of killed Jews was not more than 6 million. Therefore, I am not sure if I understood this your argument;

Re 2. Again, I need to see you sources;

Re 3. If every woman was raped, then it can be easily revealed by simple sociological poll. Do you have any reliable source that refer to the results of such a poll. One more thing. Form the sources available for me (Gorssman, Liebman & Michelson, Heineman, non of them are Russian or Communist) I learned that during 1945 on every German woman could got free abortion provided that she would claim that pregnancy was a result of rape by a Russian soldier ("a Mongol", as they used to call them). Of course, noone was able to check the nationality of her actual sexual partner, as well as a degree of coercion during that sexual contact. Taking into account that many woman in both occupation zones (as well as many woman during most wars) practised "sex for food" (I cannot call that "prostitution"), all pregnancies resulted from that also were attributed to rapes. Did you think about that?

Re 4. I am not sure I understood you point. Explain, please.

Re 5. I am not sure you are right. The American crews dropped their bombs from (relatively) comfortable planes, being (relatively) safe, their relatives were overseas, and they themselves saw no blood, dirts and numerous evidences of atrocities committed by their opponents. By contrast, Soviet military fought mostly on land, saw numerous deaths of their comrades, were the witnesses of Nazi atrocities (initially against their own compatriots or even relatives, then against Eastern Europe nations). Of course, in that situation the same criteria cannot be applied to American bomber crew members and Soviet infantry men. In that sense, the American bomb that was dropped by mistake on a school is not less crime than the gang rape of all schoolgirls by Soviet infantry men whose state of mind was deeply damaged as a result of terribly hard four years war. In other words, I don't see why the former is a lesser crime than the latter. Incidentally, bombing of many cities (e.g. Gresden) was deliberately directed against civilian, not military targets.

Re 6. I found that in one of English sources cited in this article. I'll try to provide concrete ref soon. Incidentally, you intention to equate Racism and Communism is laughable: one of the key features of Communism is Proletarian internationalism

Re 7 Sorry, but the sources (English sources) cited in this article emphasise the fact that the attempt of some Germans to present rapes of German woman as acts of genocide are a manifestation of racism. Please, refrain from promoting racist views on WP talk pages.

Re 8 If I understand you correct, by adding that link ("Russian") you insulted a whole nation. It is in your interests to retract that immediately.

Re 9. Please, see a statistics (based on declassified Soviet archives), which describes the fate of repatriants [2].

--Paul Siebert (talk) 21:37, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1)If you believe the figures are far too low, you probably have some reliable sources that support your views. Please, reveal them; Re 5.5 million Jews, I do not think to claim that would be a Holocaust denial, because actual amount of killed Jews was not more than 6 million. Therefore, I am not sure if I understood this your argument;

Claiming that 5.5 million Jews were killed would be genocide denial because the minimum estimate is 5.7 million.^{Nazi Germany and the Jews, Saul Friedländer (abridgment)}

2)Again, I need to see you sources;

The Fall of Berlin 1945
Germany 1945
Auschwitz, Inside the Nazi State
The Color of War (can't remember specific episode at the moment)
Hitler's War: The Eastern front, The End in Berlin
Auschwitz, A New History

Many smaller sources, will be added later.

3)If every woman was raped, then it can be easily revealed by simple sociological poll. Do you have any reliable source that refer to the results of such a poll. One more thing. Form the sources available for me (Gorssman, Liebman & Michelson, Heineman, non of them are Russian or Communist) I learned that during 1945 on every German woman could got free abortion provided that she would claim that pregnancy was a result of rape by a Russian soldier ("a Mongol", as they used to call them). Of course, noone was able to check the nationality of her actual sexual partner, as well as a degree of coercion during that sexual contact. Taking into account that many woman in both occupation zones (as well as many woman during most wars) practised "sex for food" (I cannot call that "prostitution"), all pregnancies resulted from that also were attributed to rapes. Did you think about that?

That would require such a poll to actually be performed. Obviously, the entire area where the vast majority of the victims lived was under the occupation of genocide deniers for approximately 45 years.

Your point would only be a denial tactic against people who consider the abortion statistics to somehow indicate the number of victims.

4)I am not sure I understood you point. Explain, please.

You claimed that the actions of the Russians were not comparable to the actions of the Nazis.

Raping Jews and Russians in concentration camps, and singling out a race of people for genocide is exactly what the Nazis did. Even if the numbers are not comparable, the intent and the actions certainly are.

5)I am not sure you are right. The American crews dropped their bombs from (relatively) comfortable planes, being (relatively) safe, their relatives were overseas, and they themselves saw no blood, dirts and numerous evidences of atrocities committed by their opponents. By contrast, Soviet military fought mostly on land, saw numerous deaths of their comrades, were the witnesses of Nazi atrocities (initially against their own compatriots or even relatives, then against Eastern Europe nations). Of course, in that situation the same criteria cannot be applied to American bomber crew members and Soviet infantry men. In that sense, the American bomb that was dropped by mistake on a school is not less crime than the gang rape of all schoolgirls by Soviet infantry men whose state of mind was deeply damaged as a result of terribly hard four years war. In other words, I don't see why the former is a lesser crime than the latter. Incidentally, bombing of many cities (e.g. Gresden) was deliberately directed against civilian, not military targets.

You are incorrect. Please intensely study the air war over Germany. (Awe, the poor ******* Russians! Able to hide behind a wall, or a foxhole, not 10,000 feet high without any single protection.) Unfortunately, aircrews had the most dangerous assignments and lowest moral of the war, especially bomber crews near the beginning.

As for your mention of atrocities, do you think it is wise to ever trust anything that a Communist ever says? Writing historical articles based on input from Communists is about as effective as asking Nazis to rewrite Holocaust and Bombing of Dresden.

Finally, bombing was inaccurate. There is absolutely no intent to commit a war crime when a bomb intended for a factory falls on civilians. There is full intent to commit genocide by Russian soldiers who are in complete control of their actions. And as for bombings that were war crimes, the bomber crews would not have had any knowledge of where specifically the bombs fell. The responsibility goes to the planners. Are you intending to say that Russian soldiers somehow didn't have control over what they were doing the way that bombs deviate due to aerodynamics?

6)I found that in one of English sources cited in this article. I'll try to provide concrete ref soon. Incidentally, you intention to equate Racism and Communism is laughable: one of the key features of Communism is Proletarian internationalism

Unfortunately, you don't understand the difference between what Communism is supposed to be, and what it turns into. Communism is supposed to be good, however, it turns into evil, and has killed 150 million people. The Communists were just as Anti Semitic as the Nazis, and considered the Holocaust (directed against the Jews) to be a good thing; the reason why the Russians fought the Nazis was because they were invaded.^{Auschwitz, A New History}

7)Sorry, but the sources (English sources) cited in this article emphasise the fact that the attempt of some Germans to present rapes of German woman as acts of genocide are a manifestation of racism. Please, refrain from promoting racist views on WP talk pages.

Unfortunately, that only applies to those people. There are many different causes of things. Under what is commonly considered to be genocide, the Russians were genocidal. Your argument is exactly the same as the extremist claim that the racial disparity in prisons is solely due to racism. While it is true that the disparity is influenced by racism, it is not the only cause. To return to the subject, I am aware of sources that mention the manifestation of racism in the perception of the Russian genocide.^{Germany 1945}

The copy/pasted sentence about racism only serves as a desperate attempt to form a logical fallacy that I am somehow being racist.

Unintentional racism is not racism. If it were, than my Jewish friends who have unknowingly perpetuated Nazi propaganda and opinions would be "racist."

8)If I understand you correct, by adding that link ("Russian") you insulted a whole nation. It is in your interests to retract that immediately.

I did that, and I have moved past such immaturity. Sorry.

9)Please, see a statistics (based on declassified Soviet archives), which describes the fate of repatriants [3].

Regardless, there were still hundreds of thousands of Russians, Jews, and others who were raped and frequently murdered by Russian liberators.^{The Fall of Berlin 1945 - Auschwitz, Inside the Nazi State}

--Anonymiss Madchen (talk) 04:14, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re 1. Genocide denial is a denial of the very fact of genocide. The discussion about the actual numbers is just a scientific discussion. If some scholar finds the data that confirm that the amount of killed Jews was 200,000 lesser than we used to think, I see no problem with that - provided that that was a real serious studies, not an attempt to whitewash Nazi. In addition, how can you be sure that 5,7 million is more precise than 5,5, taking into account that no records were carried out during EF massacres of Jews in 1941-42. The actual amount can be higher or lower, and that has nothing to do with genocide denial. Genocide denial is, e.g. a claim that the Jews were kept in camps to protect them from aggressive crowd, and that the gas chambers were used for sanitary purposed (to fight against lice). Don't mix these two things.

Re 2. Your first source fully relies on the Johr's data (already discussed). With regard to other sources, please, provide the quotes that demonstrate your idea.

Re 3. It is a circular argument: the real number of rapes cannot be established because these data were suppressed by "genocide denires", and these "denires" are the deniers, because they suppressed the data about genocide.

Re 4. No. What the Nazi did was the official policy, whereas what the Soviets (not "Russians") did was the spontaneous acts of individuals, who were badly psychically traumatised as a result of the terrible war that had no precedents in human history. In that situation, any comparisons with the US or other Western Allied troops are simply immoral.

Re 5. You correctly noted that danger of assignment and morale used to correlate reversely. In that sense, you have to concede that even the most dangerous assignment of US bomber crew cannot be compared with that of the ordinary Soviet infantry man. By sending a bomber (whose crew's morale was deteriorated as a result of previous dangerous assignment) the Western command took a responsibility for inaccurate bombing, which was considered as an inevitable side effect of the war. Similarly, by sending infantry men (who was not a kind Santa Claus any more as a result of preceding battles, as well as of the atrocities he was a witness of) to the battle, the Soviet command took a responsibility for possible side effects, and reasonably considered them as inevitable as an inaccuracy of bombing.

In addition, let me remind you that the concept of "Douhet war" (a massive bombing campaign against enemy's civilian as a primary measure to force the enemy to surrender) was widely practiced by both US and British air forced, so it is simply a hypocrisy to claim that civilian victims were not a target of the Allied bombing raids (the most striking, although not the sole example was Dresden).

Re 6. You probably read too many books written by scholars like Rummel. The number of 150 million is a gross exaggeration, and such estimates are considered obsolete now. In addition, whereas most deaths during Stalin's time were a result of wars, famine and diseases, Nazi simply murdered their victims. The difference is obvious, and it is enormous.

Re 7. Unintentional racism is racism. Regarding to the sources I use, if you believe they are unreliable, go to WP:SRN and ask for comments there.

Re 8. I cannot discuss that seriously without seeing your sources.--Paul Siebert (talk) 18:23, 22 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1) Claiming that only 5.5 million Jews were killed would be Holocaust Denial. The book with the very lowest estimate (5.7 million) lists the number of German Jews killed at 165,000. No other source lists a lower number; the US Holocaust Memorial website lists at least 180,000 German Jews killed. Therefore, the number of Jews killed in other countries would also be higher, and the number of Jews killed by the Nazis would be significantly higher than 5.7 million.

2) Unfortunately, I've been traveling and I can't bring all the books. I've been using Google books as best I can, but it doesn't work as well without the book.

3) That may be. However, there was no poll that was taken, so it is a null point. You argument is "the most easy way of verifying the genocide was never done, so therefore it didn't happen." No one did a poll at all, not a poll that confirmed your theory.

4) The fact that the Russians did not have to be ordered to rape and kill Poles, Germans, and Jews while the Germans did have to be ordered to commit murder is even more disturbing; clearly Russians don't need to receive immoral instructions from war criminals, they just do it automatically, according to your argument.

Also according to your argument, anything that is done by "severely traumatized" or disturbed people is ok. Under your logic, stress makes rape acceptable. Please inform your country's judicial system.

In addition, the fact that you claim that there was no comparison between the morale of aircrews and Russian infantry demonstrates complete unfamiliarity with the subject. Also, your claim that a comparison is "immoral" gives an indication of a bias toward Communism or some sort of Russophelia.

5) Please explain more clearly.

6) The 150 million figure comes from Digital Survivors, which also lists the number of German Jews killed by the Nazis as 160,000. Clearly, the website is listing minimal figures. Many of the famines that you mentioned were intentionally caused by Communists, and are widely considered to be genocide.

Also, what non Communists reasons are there for believing that Rummel is inaccurate?

7) Regardless of the terminology that you feel is appropriate for addressing subconscious racial prejudice, you made clear generalizations. Just because racist victims interpreted the war crimes as genocide because of racial differences does not mean that everyone who interpreted the war crimes as genocide is racist. Interpreting the Russian barbarity as genocide is not limited to Germans. Making such extreme generalizations is suspicious.

8) You were already supplied with the sources. Both Auschwitz, Inside the Nazi State and The Fall of Berlin 1945 give information on genocide committed by the Russians against Poles, Jews, Germans, Russians, and French. Rejection of facts presented is a common method of Genocide Denial.

--Anonymiss Madchen (talk) 05:48, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To claim that e.g. the amount of killed Jews was 5.5 million, not 5.7 because some specific category of Jews (e.g. the German Jews) was not killed would be a Holocaust denial. However, in our case we have no well established numbers; in that situation, a discussion about more precise figures has nothing in common with any denial. I would recommend you to avoid this type arguments in future.
I can wait.
I have no theory. And I do not claim that "the most easy way of verifying the genocide was never done, so therefore it didn't happen." By contrast, you claim that "since the scale of the rapes has not been established precisely, the witness testimony must be accepted without any criticism, and any attempt to question the most astronomical estimates is a "genocide denial"". You push the idea that virtually every women in Soviet occupation zone was raped, and this was a rape sensu stricto, not "sex for food", "sex for protection" etc. This claim is outstanding, and every outstanding claim requires outstanding evidences. Please provide these evidences. Please, remember also that "genocide" is a legal term, and, since majority reliable sources do not recognise these rape as an act of genocide, your persistent misuse of this term is hardly acceptable.
Firstly, by writing "Poles, Germans, and Jews" in that context, you equate Germans (both perpetrators and victims) with Jews and Poles (only victims). That is incorrect and immoral. Secondly, yes. Soviet command, by contrast to German command, didn't issue the orders to kill, rape and loot. Soviet military did that not automatically, but spontaneously, without any orders, and the question is why did they do that.
To explain their motives, let me point out that you seem to misunderstand my arguments. I never wrote that " anything that is done by "severely traumatized" or disturbed people is ok". My point was that it is absolutely incorrect to apply the same criteria to the actions of a person having a severe psychological trauma and to the same actions committed by a non-traumatised person.
Yes, I agree, that comparison between the morale of aircrews and Russian infantry can and should be done, however, it would be absolutely incorrect, ahistorical and immoral to do that without taking into account historical context. In connection to that, I have no idea about what "unfamiliarity with the subject" or Russophilia are you talking about. Such claim must be supported with serious arguments, so I expect you either to provide the arguments or to withdraw the claims.
Please, read about the "Douhet war" concept in more details (for the beginning, read this[4]).
As I expected, these figures were taken from Rummel's writing. As I already demonstrated (with reliable sources) elsewhere, Rudolph Rummel's estimates are known to be a gross exaggeration. Thus, he claims that about 40 million died in GULAG, whereas contemporary data show that no more than 18 million passed through GULAG, and the number of those who died there did not exceed 2 million. Rummel worked before the "archival revolution" of 1990s, and, by contrast to many other scholars, he refused to re-consider his early estimates after new de-classified data had been provided. Regarding genocide, as I already wrote, no scholarly consensus exist about the characteristic of the action of Communist regimes as genocide.
You again twisted my words. I never implies that "that everyone who interpreted the war crimes as genocide is racist". My point was more concrete: to claim that the rape of German woman by Soviet (not necessarily Russian) military was an act of genocide means to claim that superior German blood had been spoiled by inferior Asiatic blood. This is a manifestation of racism.

"I found the passages in Helke Sander's film that seemed encumbered by this underlying conception so shocking, even when she reverses its plus and minus signs. Thus she writes the following about the documentation in the book in the prefatory essay:

It is one of the ironies of history that a war waged for racial purity laid the groundwork for interbreeding on a gigantic scale, and that contemporary Europe in fact appears different than it did fifty years ago. This, too, only becomes clear if we know the figures.

Even if "the figures" were accurate, would the "appearance" of Europe actually depend on "interbreeding," on the failure of the planned "racial purity"? Or does this sentence indicate that Helke Sander cannot tear herself away from the semantics of ethnicity and national states, of collective bodies and the transgression of boundaries? Even if this sentence serves only to invoke "the irony of history," the question remains whether her numerical calculations can conjure up more than an ironic gloss on the Second World War's mountain of corpses. The obsession with sexual transgression moves in two directions: toward the "genocide of love" on the one hand, and on the other toward a primal fertility. This split goes so far as to divide the film in two. The conspicuously forced presentation of statistical calculations blinds us to her principal witnesses, who proceed at times using a curious jargon, as if they were still working for the anti-Bolshevik propaganda department or the Institute for Racial and Biological Hygiene. An old woman, for example, makes a comparison with dog breeding in order to prove that the genetic inheritance [Erbgut] of German women impregnated by Russians had not been damaged. In her interview, Dr. Lutz, to be sure, mounts her argument as a defense of women against the masculine notion that, as a consequence of rape, the woman as the "vessel for the child" undergoes irreparable harm and for that reason must be cast out. In fact, however, she does not abandon the argument's orientation toward racial hygiene..." (Blood, Sperm, and Tears. Author(s): Gertrud Koch and Stuart LiebmanSource: October, Vol. 72, Berlin 1945: War and Rape "Liberators Take Liberties" (Spring, 1995),pp. 27-41Published by: The MIT Press)

8. You provided no concrete sources or quotes so far. Please do that. With regards to genocide committed by "Russians against Poles, Jews, Germans, Russians, and French", I still need the evidences that the alleged genocide did take place, that it was committed by the Russians (as opposed to other nationalities fighting in the East), and that the interpretation of the events you are talking about is made in a historical context.--Paul Siebert (talk) 16:04, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]