Al, don't you believe that the Stalinist regime was ruthless? I would think everyone else would. Don't you believe that the normal background tone was one of violence, I thought you would have assented to that, but obviously not. Don't you believe he executed 700,000 in the 1930s, apart from the millions starved? That works out a norm of approx 200 per DAY, but in actual fact it would be a lot higher because the executions didn't really get under way until about 1935, so perhaps we could double that figure to get a truer average. Puts your one general and officers in the shade a bit though. What sets a Purge apart from EVERYDAY violence when 100s were killed in the normal run of things, is the magnitude of the event. In the Red Army Purge he removed virtually EVERY general, and FIFTY percent of his officers, a bit different from executing ONE general and many officers for retreating in the face of the enemy. A PURGE was a singular event which removed virtually a whole class of people, for instance army officers in 1937/8, plus ALL the admirals, or as I've said ad nauseam, the railway engineers, they almost vanished completely as a class. I could cite where he removed virtually the whole class of scientists. I gave you examples of where this background brutality could be seen, such as the trial at Krasnodar. That was COMMONPLACE. You are obviously denying that Stalin was prepared to be as ruthless as others suggest, when you gleefully seize on the ONE general and officers eliminated probably for violation of State Order 270, which expressly forbade retreating or being captured and made it a treasonable offence, and argue that was a Purge. No it wasn't it was the normal violence anyone could expect at any time. A violence you apparently don't give credence to. How can this possibly be a Purge when it left 99.9% of officers UNAFFECTED by it, compared to what happened in 1937/8? Leaving that many untouched is hardly a purge.

If you could find any lists of RECOGNISED Purges and show me evidence of those you refer to, I would be astounded. Most historians have the historical awareness to be able to filter out the many instances of brutality and define Purge specifically. You merely seize any act of barbarity and use it for your puposes.

I told you on this thread and on others that I use forums for amusement, well this is failing to amuse anymore, so this will be my last post. If you had been prepared to be honest, we could have proceeded, but I can't possibly win when you bend events to suit your purposes. Using your criteria, you could point to 100s of such purges, but no one else strangely, would include them.

Have a nice day, write what you will, I assure you I will not read it, and I know you have a worryingly pathological need to be seen as 'right.'