Of course. Though I feel Stalin goes beyond the simple 1% since the 1% in America can live comfortably no matter what, under Stalin, even they weren't safe from him, even, or especially, if they were valuable leaders in the country.
True no one was safe from Stalin.
Also, if you come across anybody that has an image of his leadership in some shape or form was a contributor to pushing out Hitler, one of his victims in the army had a plan for revising/modernizing the Red Army's combat doctrine after seeing its terrible performance in recent years, and Stalin didn't initially want to use to use it against the Germans because out of an argument of using the plans of somebody labeled a "guilty party."
"guilty party."? I don't think I've heard that term in a Stalin discussion.
It was the terminology the book I found that in used, and the book in question was actually about the history of tanks, not Soviet politics, so the writers probably weren't as concerned about how accurate the terminology was as much as detailing what the combat doctrine entailed, and that Stalin executed the guy who came up with it.
I can see Stalin doing that.
Of course. Even after the war he went around ruining the reputation of one his airforce generals who had a lot of success, and only stopped short of what he was originally planned because he figured he might need him with the relations with America going sour, seeing as during the war he managed to get it through his thick skull that he wasn't any good as a military leader.
I heard he feared losing power to some of his generals, of course Stalin not being Russian may have added to his paranoia.
.
.