Welcome to Incels.is - Involuntary Celibate Forum

Welcome! This is a forum for involuntary celibates: people who lack a significant other. Are you lonely and wish you had someone in your life? You're not alone! Join our forum and talk to people just like you.

Are Russians a savage barbaric race?

Because they are more successful branch of Germanic family. They won two world wars and English still remains the only international language.
so you are Turkic uzbek/siberian
 
By the way are you Russian or Siberian uzbeck mongol?
I'm an Eastern Slav ( Russian ).
Btw, Uzbecks live in Central Asia, not Siberia. Central Asian cities were once highly developed.
Zyj-i Sultani (1438-1439) was the most accurate astronomical table and star catalogue of it's time.
Also Tamerlane was one of the few greatest conquerors in history, literally undefeated commander.
I don't think German history has such examples.
 
They never won anything , USA won 2 wars not UK.
In the WW1 it was mostly France and Britain who defeated Germany ( at least in the Western front ).
In WW2 Britain won an air battle (1940) between Luftwaffe and RAF, making invasion on the British isles impossible.
They also won in 1941 and 1942 in North Africa ( 'Operation Crusader' and Alamein battle ).
 
In the WW1 it was mostly France and Britain who defeated Germany ( at least in the Western front ).
In WW2 Britain won an air battle (1940) between Luftwaffe and RAF, making invasion on the British isles impossible.
They also won in 1941 and 1942 in North Africa ( 'Operation Crusader' and Alamein battle ).
Germany was winning WW1 , only USA could Germany.

In WW2 the UK alone could not win the war. In Asia they were completely defeated by the Japanese . In Europe they couldnt do anything.

If you mean UK and France slowed Germany down and made them untill UK and France were exhausted then yes you are correct. USA comes in afterwards to finish off the Germans. But alone UK could not win anything infact at the end they would have lost both times. It was always USA that won. Even the USSR got supplies from USA
 
Germany was winning WW1 , only USA could Germany.

In WW2 the UK alone could not win the war. In Asia they were completely defeated by the Japanese . In Europe they couldnt do anything.

If you mean UK and France slowed Germany down and made them untill UK and France were exhausted then yes you are correct. USA comes in afterwards to finish off the Germans. But alone UK could not win anything infact at the end they would have lost both times. It was always USA that won. Even the USSR got supplies from USA
No one says that they won alone. They won together with allies. Germany also had allies in WW1 and WW2.
But in the WW1 French and British would have won even without Americans.
The main German ally, Austo-Hungary was literally crumbling.
 
What a nonsense. Russia already was at war with Germany in WW1. The main White Russian armies were allies of Entente.
Russian higher classes had mostly pro-French bias.
The Baltic German nobility considered themselves Russian despite their ethnic origin and were patriotic towards Russia as it served their interests. When the Bolsheviks came to power and targeted them, their loyalties shifted, and they adopted german ethnonationalism most notably in the form of nazism.
 
russians have an inferiority complex. to what degree i dont know but they definitely seem to have it.

they already had an inferiority complex before the german invasion of the soviet union in WW2 but after being terribly victimized by them that probably reinforced their feelings of being inferior.

they like to help and ally themselves with other non-whites geopolitically. brazilians, cubans, indians, chinese, vietnamese, etc...

and from my experience white anglos do indeed look down and make fun of russians. and thats true for eastern europe and the balkans. they view them as poor trashy alcoholics. white ethnic backwater "others".
russia is ran by jews so its just jews allying with non whites
 
No one says that they won alone. They won together with allies. Germany also had allies in WW1 and WW2.
But in the WW1 French and British would have won even without Americans.
The main German ally, Austo-Hungary was literally crumbling.
anyway whatever they are still jew lovers and their wonderful jews that they simp for are replacing them
 
The Baltic German nobility considered themselves Russian despite their ethnic origin and were patriotic towards Russia as it served their interests. When the Bolsheviks came to power and targeted them, their loyalties shifted, and they adopted german ethnonationalism most notably in the form of nazism.
It's not only Bolsheviks. The new ethnic states of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania also were against Baltic German influence, if I'm not mistaken.
 
anyway whatever they are still jew lovers and their wonderful jews that they simp for are replacing them
I googled percentage of migrants in UK and Germany and it was 18% in Germany and 14.8% in the UK.
So Germany is in the worse position.
 
I googled percentage of migrants in UK and Germany and it was 18% in Germany and 14.8% in the UK.
So Germany is in the worse position.
and so what?
 
Just wondering why communism succeeded in Russia but no where else in Europe not even in India, Middle East no where but Russia.

Is it true that Russians are a savage race? Or is it true that they are lazy drunks who want state handouts like free housing because they too lazy to work?

Thomas Orwell says Russians compared to Germans were unproductive meaning they produced nothing or very little whilst none Russians obviously worked alot because those days it was farming which was those days not high iq but rather just alot of work and hours if you wanted to be successful.

So is the average Russian lazy and less productive than other whites?



View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5nHH3bBqEU

The Russians didn't play by the rules of the West. Thanks to their Asian genes, they have won many wars in the steppe. When Napoleon wanted to conquer Russia with his largest army in Europe, he was shocked and described the war as a war of annihilation. Napoleon was used to defeating the enemy's army and then having it handed over to Moscow. The Russians set fire to their own city, the scorched earth principle. The Russians repeatedly fled for tactical reasons and waited until their enemy was exhausted enough to give them the coup de grace. Goebbels also called the Russians vindictive (lol) after they repulsed the Germans and marched on Berlin. The war was fun until the Russians arrived. The Asian influences have made the Russians a strong opponent like the Japanese.
 
The Russians didn't play by the rules of the West. Thanks to their Asian genes, they have won many wars in the steppe. When Napoleon wanted to conquer Russia with his largest army in Europe, he was shocked and described the war as a war of annihilation. Napoleon was used to defeating the enemy's army and then having it handed over to Moscow. The Russians set fire to their own city, the scorched earth principle. The Russians repeatedly fled for tactical reasons and waited until their enemy was exhausted enough to give them the coup de grace. Goebbels also called the Russians vindictive (lol) after they repulsed the Germans and marched on Berlin. The war was fun until the Russians arrived. The Asian influences have made the Russians a strong opponent like the Japanese.
Nice explanation, in simple language to understand. Thanks brocel
 
The Russians didn't play by the rules of the West. Thanks to their Asian genes, they have won many wars in the steppe. When Napoleon wanted to conquer Russia with his largest army in Europe, he was shocked and described the war as a war of annihilation. Napoleon was used to defeating the enemy's army and then having it handed over to Moscow. The Russians set fire to their own city, the scorched earth principle. The Russians repeatedly fled for tactical reasons and waited until their enemy was exhausted enough to give them the coup de grace. Goebbels also called the Russians vindictive (lol) after they repulsed the Germans and marched on Berlin. The war was fun until the Russians arrived. The Asian influences have made the Russians a strong opponent like the Japanese.
It's not about Asian genes, it's about demographics. Even by 1905, Russian women continued to give birth to 7-8 children in their entire lives. Russia had what was of the utmost importance, namely quantity, while the West was fighting with quality. The Germans had better equipment, better generals, better supplies, and they lost anyway, because the USSR could safely play a game where, for the death of one German soldier, it had to sacrifice 4 of its soldiers. Exchanging one enemy soldier for 4 of his own soldiers allowed him to win. Even Marshal Zhukov once said: Do not spare the soldiers, the women will give birth to new ones.
 
Exchanging one enemy soldier for 4 of his own soldiers allowed him to win. Even Marshal Zhukov once said: Do not spare the soldiers, the women will give birth to new ones.
cant do that today
 
Russians have quite a high amount of Steppe/Yamnaya DNA, which is one of the main dominant ancestral groups of all Whites/Europeans: However, they do have some Asiatic admixture, though it is not that high.

View attachment 1167995

Similar to how most Meds/South Euros have single-digit DNA from the Levant, but it's higher compared to Slavs.


Agreed- no Russian ever called me White trash, Incel, etc.

Russia has quite a rich history, it's just downplayed a lot in America for various(obvious) reasons.
so what do you think, are they barbaric in your opinion?
 
so what do you think, are they barbaric in your opinion?
They are more “aggressive” on average i’d say & have a higher time preference, but they’re not barbaric

They settled Siberia, so they have a “Europeaness” to them for sure
 
They are more “aggressive” on average i’d say & have a higher time preference, but they’re not barbaric

They settled Siberia, so they have a “Europeaness” to them for sure
:feelshehe: :feelsokman:
 
It's not about Asian genes, it's about demographics. Even by 1905, Russian women continued to give birth to 7-8 children in their entire lives. Russia had what was of the utmost importance, namely quantity, while the West was fighting with quality. The Germans had better equipment, better generals, better supplies, and they lost anyway
that is only partially true. The Russians were initially poorly equipped. But their weapons were sometimes better than those of the Germans. Take a look at the Josef Stalin tank or the T44. The Russians were about to introduce the AK47 into the war. but then it came to an end. The Russian used ingenious inventions to fight the Germans. but the staff was extremely poorly equipped. They put untrained personnel in a modern tank.
 
It's not about Asian genes, it's about demographics. Even by 1905, Russian women continued to give birth to 7-8 children in their entire lives. Russia had what was of the utmost importance, namely quantity, while the West was fighting with quality. The Germans had better equipment, better generals, better supplies, and they lost anyway, because the USSR could safely play a game where, for the death of one German soldier, it had to sacrifice 4 of its soldiers. Exchanging one enemy soldier for 4 of his own soldiers allowed him to win. Even Marshal Zhukov once said: Do not spare the soldiers, the women will give birth to new ones.
Do you know Hitler's last speech? He says that if he had known that the USSR had rearmed itself to such an extreme extent, he would have thought about attacking again. He couldn't believe what large tank factories Russia had.
 
It's not about Asian genes, it's about demographics. Even by 1905, Russian women continued to give birth to 7-8 children in their entire lives. Russia had what was of the utmost importance, namely quantity, while the West was fighting with quality. The Germans had better equipment, better generals, better supplies, and they lost anyway, because the USSR could safely play a game where, for the death of one German soldier, it had to sacrifice 4 of its soldiers. Exchanging one enemy soldier for 4 of his own soldiers allowed him to win. Even Marshal Zhukov once said: Do not spare the soldiers, the women will give birth to new ones.
If you look at Russian military history, Russians didn't always won with quantity.
What about Suvorov?
 
Do you know Hitler's last speech? He says that if he had known that the USSR had rearmed itself to such an extreme extent, he would have thought about attacking again. He couldn't believe what large tank factories Russia had.
Hitler was a German nationalist, not a pragmatist. Perhaps if Goebbels or Rosenberg had been the Fuhrer, they would have defeated the USSR simply by convincing the population that Stalin was worse than Hitler. Goebbels was the one who lobbied for the creation of Andrei Vlasov's Russian Liberation Army, he was well aware that the millions of Soviet prisoners of war that the Reich received in 1941 could have been armed and sent to fight against the USSR, but it was too late. Millions of Soviet prisoners of war who would have been drafted into the German army could have been armed and plugged any hole on the western or eastern front.
 
If you look at Russian military history, Russians didn't always won with quantity.
What about Suvorov?
Suvorov made his name in the war against the backward and outdated Ottomans. I am Russian, I know my history perfectly well and that we have always fought with the number of soldiers, and not with the skill of generals or equipment.
 
Suvorov made his name in the war against the backward and outdated Ottomans. I am Russian, I know my history perfectly well and that we have always fought with the number of soldiers, and not with the skill of generals or equipment.
So you forgot that he also fought against French?
Also Ottomans were a serious enemy. In 1915 Western Europeans themselves learned how 'weak' Ottomans were.
 
Suvorov made his name in the war against the backward and outdated Ottomans. I am Russian, I know my history perfectly well and that we have always fought with the number of soldiers, and not with the skill of generals or equipment.
I forgot to add that he also fought against Polish insurgents.
 
Hitler was a German nationalist, not a pragmatist. Perhaps if Goebbels or Rosenberg had been the Fuhrer, they would have defeated the USSR simply by convincing the population that Stalin was worse than Hitler. Goebbels was the one who lobbied for the creation of Andrei Vlasov's Russian Liberation Army, he was well aware that the millions of Soviet prisoners of war that the Reich received in 1941 could have been armed and sent to fight against the USSR, but it was too late. Millions of Soviet prisoners of war who would have been drafted into the German army could have been armed and plugged any hole on the western or eastern front.
nah man. Imagine they had given weapons to the Russian prisoners:feelswhere::feelskek:
 
nah man. Imagine they had given weapons to the Russian prisoners:feelswhere::feelskek:
In the Red army, NKVD detachments stood behind the soldiers, who shot all fleeing cowards on the spot, they were called zagrad detachments. Why couldn't the Germans use the same method?
 
In the Red army, NKVD detachments stood behind the soldiers, who shot all fleeing cowards on the spot, they were called zagrad detachments. Why couldn't the Germans use the same method?
The Russians only used this method at the beginning when most of the soldiers were sent to war without weapons. As soon as a soldier has a weapon he would immediately shot back. he have nothing too lose...
 
The Russians only used this method at the beginning when most of the soldiers were sent to war without weapons. As soon as a soldier has a weapon he would immediately shot back. he have nothing too lose...
They were created in July 1942, when Stalin's order number 227 "Not a step back" was issued
 
They were created in July 1942, when Stalin's order number 227 "Not a step back" was issued
Nope. This method already existed in the First World War, so it was not invented in the Second World War. The method was used in the battle for Stalingrad so that the Soviet unarmed soldiers would plunge to their deaths instead of running away. but they had no weapons! That's why it was certain that they would die. When the soldiers were equipped with tanks and other weapons, the method was rarely used anymore. Imagine shooting at armed soldiers. that's most likely they'll shoot back.
 
In the Red army, NKVD detachments stood behind the soldiers, who shot all fleeing cowards on the spot, they were called zagrad detachments. Why couldn't the Germans use the same method?
Maybe the Ukranians would have been happy to fight for Germany?
 
Maybe the Ukranians would have been happy to fight for Germany?
Many Western Ukrainians joined the Waffen SS. I think for them the Germans were a lesser evil than the USSR.
 
Many Western Ukrainians joined the Waffen SS. I think for them the Germans were a lesser evil than the USSR.
Russians I know say Germans are cruel. Is it because of WW2 ?
 
Russians I know say Germans are cruel. Is it because of WW2 ?
I do not know, this is their opinion, I am a Russian and I believe that there is no difference between a gulag and a concentration camp.
 
They are more “aggressive” on average i’d say & have a higher time preference, but they’re not barbaric

They settled Siberia, so they have a “Europeaness” to them for sure
This is what I said. They're more aggresive on average
 

Similar threads

Therapywasawaste
Replies
49
Views
1K
Bača
Bača
Incline
Replies
8
Views
383
Julaybib
Julaybib
Jason Voorhees
Replies
71
Views
2K
TrueGlassesCel
TrueGlassesCel
Regenerator
Replies
21
Views
579
Based NaziCel
Based NaziCel

Users who are viewing this thread

shape1
shape2
shape3
shape4
shape5
shape6
Back
Top