Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
Obviously Putin agrees.
They don't- I've never heard anyone say anything like that. But while it's not true, it's not that far from the truth- the USSR (certainly not just Russia) supplied a huge chunk of the manpower that beat back the Nazis. Tanks aren't any good without crews to operate them, after all.
Other way around, man. Knives and sticks and punches are still an option if you've got men; weapons without soldiers just make you a better target for invasion.
They got slaughtered when they didn't have enough soldiers to use the equipment they DID have. The entire point of blitzkrieg was to win the fight without fighting; to overwhelm the enemy so fast they couldn't put up resistance. The Nazi advance ground to a halt when they picked on targets that could fight back. They did this because they didn't have enough manpower, not because they lacked bullets.
You're making my point FOR me. WW2 wouldn't've been won without the Soviets.
Oh, grow up.
honestly i agree, the USSR fought the deadliest, longest, and most inhumane battles of the war. Lenningrad lasted for years and each day was just about as bad as D-day. Us Americans love giving ourselves all the credit, but we weren't the most important side in niether WW2 nor WW1.
By killing off loads of German soldiers, the Soviets made the rest of the Allies' jobs easier, diverting the majority of the German army. Furthermore, the USSR was in the war WAY longer than us.
Fyi im not a liberal, just a gutsy history nerd
Obviously they don't do it alone, but it was their soldiers out there dying. we did send them plenty of stuff to play with tho. And America, Britain, and the French resistance played a major role in the war
in summary, we give ourselves too much credit, when infact, the other countries did the dirty work while sat on our lazy bums getting money from the war
@SPIRIT208 I would say this is Irrelevant considering Stalin also committed systematic starvation genocide of 12 million people many of them jews.
@Rob575757575 lol true, im no stalin supporter just a fact teller
Soviet Marshal Georgy Zhukov is quoted as saying:
Today [1963] some say the Allies didn't really help us... But listen, one cannot deny that the Americans shipped over to us material without which we could not have equipped our armies held in reserve or been able to continue the war.
USA preferred to help Russia with lend lease program and creating a new communist enemy instead allowing nazis to take control over entire Europe. Probably strong Nazi Germany was more dangerous from reference point of US than economically incompetent Soviets.
By the way, Stalin paid with gold for US supplies as operation Barbarrosa started 1941 and Nazis conquered Russian land without much resistance
That was 1941 before the US got involved. Germany was more economically incompetent than the USSR. Communism was already a rival threat. They choose to take them down one at a time. Britain was already at war with Germany.
Actually the USSR was given loans of $3.2 billion of which they only had to paid back $722 million in 1971, with the remainder of the debt written. $722 million not counting 26 years inflation and interest they didn't pay.
what? the nazis failed in their evasion and were pushed back. please learn something.
Invasion* lol
So the cold war was out fault in that we saved Russia so they could threaten us with nuclear annihilation. Boy, did we blow that one.
and worse than result, even at the time ussr had invaded poland, so once they blocked nazy advance, allies can't help a bad guy.
If we were under the Nazi rule we would already have been to Mars.
Opinion
27Opinion
I don't know man. i mean germany made the classical mistake of every nation who tried that unsuccessfully in the past. he attacked in winter. the one time of the year, where russians just function better on their home turf. no idea if they could have done it if they weren't attacked on all 3 other fronts.
But they didn't. The Russians suffered as much as the Germans. The Germans were fighting the British and fast running out of resources to do that and the British and Russians were getting stronger with time, Russia had everything they needed but because they were fighting the British they fell short running out of steam.
All the world's most valuable resources at the time were in the hands of the British, Americans and Russians and those they didn't control they controlled access to. Japan went to war with the US for similar reasons and also ran out of steam.
Dude my grandpa was in Stalingrad as a German soldier. The winter beat them. Not the Russians.
More freezing soldiers and frozen machinery wouldn't have won the fight.
Ok I see you know more than me who has family who actually came back to tell the story. Never mind.
How do you know I don't have Russian relatives who fought in Stalingrad. Stalingrad didn't matter, the red army used it to tie the wermarcht down while the built up to launch a counter offensive, not to push the Germans out of stalingrad but to cut them off and surround then so they couldn't escape or be relieved. The grandpa in the Wermarct was no match for Uranus.
upload.wikimedia.org/.../Operation_Uranus.svg
actualy nazy started that battle in summer July.
@strateguy632 the battle in Stalingrad was in February. So in winter.
Germanies blitzkrieg strategy was notoriously weak in the supply chain. I don't see how anything would have been different if Germany was not attacked on the other fronts.
German logistics were notoriously weak. Blitzkrieg was sound. The troops were pumped up on amphetamines. The difference would be they would have the supplies & men they needed to win. Germany wasn't fighting a war on two fronts but on multiple fronts like the North Atlantic, the air, war over germany north Africa, the Mediterranean, later Italy and France. Huge troop numbers occupying Greece, Norway and France to guard against allied invasion. Blitzkrieg doesn't work without gasoline
well and my argument is that their tactic would still have failed even if they managed to throw more people and machines at it. cause the flaw was not a lack of people.
sure blitzkrieg doesn't work without gasoline. but you can't make a vehicle that's doesn't move due to the cold magically move with gasoline.
The flaw was a lack of supplies and an enemy that was getting supplied by the British and Americans more than the Germans were producing. More often than not its production that wins war.
The US sent 427,284 trucks to the USSR, Germany itself only had 347,490 military trucks and lorries.
I was unaware this is a thing. Do you have a link? Historically speaking the Russians were on the brink of defeat for most of the war. The Nazis came within 1 block of taking Stalingrad. Without having a 2nd European front they would have been crushed.
They did contribute to overall allied victory in WWII. However they didn’t do it close to alone.
If they would have taken Stalingrad they could have swept south and captured the Russian oil fields. It was a critical battle.
So, effectively a siege? Like starve them out?
Much like they did with the maginot line. They didn't let themselves get bogged down there. The Russians to when they launched Uranus didn't attack German positions in stalingrad. They drove as far west as they could because that cut German supply lines, German troops were forced to retreat to stalingrad and in the end they all ended up 200 miles behind enemy lines.
Interesting. I did not know that.
We should not of helped the God Damn Russians, we should of let the Germans wipe the motherfuckers out. It would have been better for us in the long run. Just like the fuckin Chinese, we should have let the Japanese have at it. We help these rotten fuckers then they turn on you and become your enemies. Our world would be much better for the USA now without China and Russia.
to drew actualy nazy and soviet were balanced. as a "Monday quarterback " after the game ended we see an option was to let the two wear out each other as moscow was saved while u. s. STILL nutral.
Your assertion is false, no one claims the USSR beat the Nazi's. They held the Nazi's back - especially the Japanese at the time - but they did not line up.
In fact Hitler himself made the mistake of not getting the USA or USSR onboard. He considered the USA too "impure" to be Aryan, which is rather ironic as there are more Nazi's in the USA than the USSR.
It's hard to say in regards to the USSR vs Japan. Sure they had a fight before & during the general accept start of ww2 (1939 invasion of Poland) but the USSR didn't really come into the war against Japan until the very end and were still at peace after Pearl Harbour.
Hitler considered the US very Aryan, remember at the time it was dominated by WASPs (White Anglo Saxon Protestants), German and Scandinavians plus the kkk had huge membership. The Nazis views on race didn't exactly line up with us views on race in regards to Hispanics. American views being influenced by wars against Mexico and Spain, that's why so many nazis fled to South and Central America after ww2.
The USSR was always the end goal of Hitler, it was in Mein Kampf. The Nazis viewed Slavs in Poland as inferior but the real reason the nazis invaded Eastern Europe was routed in WW1 and later the great depression where in WW1 Germany was basically choked out by British control of the seas unable to import strategic materials or food (Germany was starving by the end of ww1) and the great depression where the German economy was laid low by a crisis outside of Germany when the US called in its German loans. Results of hyper inflation, unemployment and food and resource shortage broke the German economy of course all blamed on weimar politicians who happened to be Jewish who were already blamed for "stabbing" Germany in the back by surrendering in 1918 with the German army still in France. The overall German strategic economic goal was to be completely self sufficient and by 1939 they had achieved this but were running out of money and resources.
What Hitler really needed was for France and Britain to be on board with his invasion of Poland and later the USSR. They both had huge empires that made them wealthy and between them controlled a large part of the world's land mass and resources. Germany could have traded with them if they did not declare war and he would have been able to trade with the US the way Britain did paying gold.
what the fuck are you blabbering about? almost everything you said was nonsensical but nazi germany tried to get mexico onboard but they refused. and there's nothing aryan about mexico.
and they never fought the japanese
you're literally a bot.
I was thinking about world war 1. Hitler did not reach out to Mexico.
Usually its the opposite, people claiming USA beat Nazi germany without the help of anyone, maybe with a little help from Britain and sometimes France...
I never heard someone claim The soviet union beat Nazi germany on their own.
see kostas here
They don’t know anything. They’re very sadly misinformed
Oh boy the courthouse chef. Maybe he’s been down in GA
I’ve had some run ins with him. He’s definitely more liberal but he’s not the worst I’ve encountered here so
He’s probably busy frying up the grill in Fulton County. Cooking for everyone. He’s the courthouse chef
Lmao. I know.
because it IS part true. by December 1, 1941 the USSR had blocked, beat the Nazis attack moscow, and pushed nazi back, on their own with out the help of the US or Britain". to claim defeat berlin is the trick, with help as you quoted. why claim? because they don't want u. s. to have the accomplishments. so basically b, c, and d.
Where is the option for "liberals don't actually claim anything of the sort"?
Liberals tend to ignore history. Between shipments from US to the USSR and the lend-lease program, the USSR could have never withstood the German invasion, let alone defeat Germany and be the first to take Berlin. (Okay, that was agreed by the Allies that the Russians would be first, and US and British armies waited several miles away until Russian troops entered Berlin.)
Because they are either
- a victim of russian propaganda
- useful idiots
- russian undercover assets
- don't have anything else to oppose to their polotical opponents
This ideology is pushed by russian propaganda worldwide. So, make your conclusions.
They're lying about everything nowadays... even small things, like the weather. they'll claim that the temperatures are going to be 95 degrees and they end being only 88, etc.
The other reason why our elected officials want to showcase the U. S. S. R. as an impressive world power is because their way of conducting business is probably the closest example of what they're going to do here. Based on what our DOJ gestapo police force have done thus far bears some remarkable similarities to GRU/KGB.
Because they have been fighting the nazis without the help of the us until the us was forced into the war with the bombing of pearl harbor, learn history.
The Germans kicked the ever living shit out of Russia with a 4:1 K/D ratio. The USSR “beat” the Germans Zap Brannigan style
https://www.youtube.com/embed/EF3g4Ua5e7kKilling POWs and civilians.
@ChefPapiChulo Clarify your statement. Be exact.
they have that K/D killing POW and civilians. The USSR surrounded them, as if you even know what that means.
www.britannica.com/event/Battle-of-Stalingrad
please do learn your history before you spout nonsense.
@ChefPapiChulo Back at ya, "chulo"
upload.wikimedia.org/.../..._War_II_Casualties.svg
The German K/D ratio (INLCUDING CIVILIANS AND POWS) was around 10:1. It leveled off at 1:1 around the end of the war as the Russian army mobilized, the German army was stretched thin, and the Russian winter climate took a major toll on the German army. That last reason is why so many Russian civilians died as well. It's harsh when you lose sons, husbands, and fathers that others depended on for survival.
The Germans did to Russia what they did to Europe, struck hard, struck fast. Russia wouldn't support Germany and they didn't think the Germans wouldn't risk the trek. Boy, did they fucking get that one wrong. So the Russians were literally throwing bodies at bullets because their military complex couldn't field an army that was adequately trained, equipped, or commanded.
You tried to start some shit. I've rubbed elbows with your kind before. That's that passive aggressive pussy shit. I've seen you tongue the ass of bosses and then say some passive aggressive racist shit behind their backs or in another language. That wasn't YOU explicitly, but your response was that same thing. I don't expect a pussy to own up to it.
Not to mention most of those civilians died because communist nations are notorious for being frail and prone to societal collapse at the slightest bit of shock.
"You tried to start some shit. I've rubbed elbows with your kind before. That's that passive aggressive pussy shit. I've seen you tongue the ass of bosses and then say some passive aggressive racist shit behind their backs or in another language. That wasn't YOU explicitly, but your response was that same thing. I don't expect a pussy to own up to it. "
nonsensical insane rant.
"The Germans did to Russia what they did to Europe, struck hard, struck fast."
its called blitzkrieg.
"Russia wouldn't support Germany and they didn't think the Germans wouldn't risk the trek."
not sure what this means.
"So the Russians were literally throwing bodies at bullets because their military complex couldn't field an army that was adequately trained, equipped, or commanded."
you're only half right. the russians were outclassed by the germans who bred and raised their children for a total war. but the russians didn't throw bodies at bullets. the russians held their lines firmly and out maneuvered the germans who had poor strategic positioning and weak supply lines. they also used horses to move supplies and their tanks would get stuck in the mud because of weather and poor infrastructure (roads).
you have a serious lack of understanding.
also the war trained the russians quick. by the end of the war they had the largest army, and well trained and well equipped because they turned into an economic powerhouse by the end of the war. while other countries struggled, the soviets came out stronger than before, even with less population and became one of the 3 world power, which are the US, Soviets, UK.
i also dont care about your perception of communism or socialism or any kind of lism. this is cold hard facts and history. and you are wrong.
@ChefPapiChulo You have everything you need to understand. I addressed everything you complained about. You're not giving me any inductive reasoning or a posteriori information that I haven't already summarized. I'm not arguing the semantics of 'holding the line'. Germans struck first, and Russians weren't ready. Plain and simple.
Hitler wanted to ally with Russia before they attacked them. They had a non-aggression pact going into the war. But Germany needed supplies and men. They were stretched incredibly thin fighting all of Europe. They lost that war because they invaded Russia. If they don't invade Russia, or Russia allies with the Germans, Europe is lost, and you're looking at a German occupied Europe for god knows how many decades. Probably throughout the Cold War. Who the hell knows what would have happened then.
@ChefPapiChulo They had the largest army because they did the same thing the US did, didn't joint in. You never interrupt your enemies when they are fighting each other. That's the check and balance that supposed to prevent nations from going to war in the first place. But sometimes, as history shows, that's not enough.
Communist nations have never been at the bleeding edge of anything. That's why the system doesn't work. They were never an economic powerhouse per capita. They had quantity, not quality. That's why they collapsed. That huge economic powerhouse was dwarfed by the US when they had a fraction of the population.
Communism, is weaker than the US Capitalism/Socialist blend. It's too bad you don't care, because it happens to be the key reason why they can't keep up.
hitler wanted to ally with russia? what are you talking about? he had a strategical non aggression pact with russia so he could take over western Europe to then use those resources to invade russia.
you're all over the place with what you're saying and hardly coherent.
lol what the fuck are you even saying?
"They had the largest army because they did the same thing the US did, didn't joint in. You never interrupt your enemies when they are fighting each other. That's the check and balance that supposed to prevent nations from going to war in the first place. But sometimes, as history shows, that's not enough."
like WHAT lmao
@ChefPapiChulo No, it's not dumbass. He couldn't finish off Europe because of US intervention. That's why he wanted help from Russia. Russia said no. That pissed off Hitler. So, he broke the pact and invaded them.
lmao. you're a bot.
@ChefPapiChulo You don't understand basic war strategy. Pacificism can actually be a form of aggression. You ever heard that before ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^?
@ChefPapiChulo Well, I suggest you never go to war with one. Because my money is on the bot.
@ChefPapiChulo I had a typo by the way
"Russia wouldn't support Germany and they didn't think the Germans (would) risk the trek." -That might have been the misunderstanding there.
The Russians got US support at the close of the war, like the OP said. But they couldn't do it on their own. Communism, is weaker than capitalism/socialism blend. That's just the way it is. It definitely did help the US tremendously that they didn't fight their battles in their own back yard so their production lines, being staffed more and more by women by the way, could keep up output. Like I said, pacificism can actually be an aggressive war strategy.
there's just a lot that you're wrong about and it wouldn't hurt to revise reading up on your history knowledge.
@ChefPapiChulo Not really. I think you are using the wrong implication of the word "wrong" to mean incorrect. I think the definition of "wrong" you mean is "I don't like it" or "it's unethical in your opinion". I gave you a bunch of vague deductive conclusions based on statistics I've read because I don't feel like citing every damn number that's out there because they all don't agree. But for the most part, they are within a reasonable range of one another.
What we're doing right now, is a simulation of war. You make decisions based on conflicting and incomplete information. This is what commanders on all sides have to deal with. It's hell. That's why Russian officers in Ukraine are stupid for fighting on the front lines getting themselves killed. Then those soldiers are left leaderless, they're going to be confused, disarrayed, and fight amongst one another based on THEIR limited and conflicting information on what to do. It takes discipline to follow orders and obey. That's what the Russians did in WW2. They shot their own soldiers for retreating. And the sick thing was, they buddied up soldiers where one man carried a weapon and the other carried an extra clip. They were ordered to pick up the rifles of fallen soldiers if one was available. If not, give the clip to those who ran out. Either way, it was a fucked situation. I say again, Communism, is weaker because they couldn't arm EVERY man without US aid, only some of them could be armed by Russia alone.
@ChefPapiChulo You need to understand my philosophy on war in general. Humanity, has NEVER, won a war. We have lost every... single... war. One NATION might win a war, but the other side loses. And when you total up all those casualties, there is always a net loss of life. Mass starvation follows, and it's usually women and children back home who suffer without their husbands, uncles, brothers, and fathers turned soldier because men can't fucking sit down and agree that going to war is stupid. It's a damn good thing modern times allow women and children to be able to survive on their own without us. We keep fucking up.
There is saying, "war does not make heros, only widows."
Right.
@ChefPapiChulo Right, what?
It's not just Liberals. Pretty much everyone in the world knows this, except American Nationalists.
They did with the fighting, we just gave them weapons but technically it was more the Nazis losing then the USSR winning. It was Hitlers arrogance and the cold winter that did it.
It was actually the British empire & french being at war with Germany. Up until 1941 the British ruled the waves thus cutting off global trade, which was the big problem the Germans had in ww1 which was why the USSR was such a major strategic goal for Hitler as it had everything Germany needed to be self sufficient. Without the royal navy and French navy blockading Germany, Hitler would have had all the resources needed to invade Russia. Invading Russia in 1941 made sense, the war with Britain was dragging on and Germany was getting weaker while Britain and the USSR getting stronger.
to dark, content hitler, your idea was in film indiana jones 2023, hitler caused the loss, not allies alone.
Am in Canada. So couldn't care Squat about US relations.
I've never heard that but it think it's a ridiculous claim.
Why do conservatives attack liberals by making up things that no one ever said ever.
Because they don’t know the factual history of WW II
Russia was the first to get to berlin, and took most of the brunt of the remainder of the war
Why do republicans LOVE russia so much?
They got to beriln first, they didn't care what we were doing. They got their first
They wouldn't have cared dude. They didn't. They got to berlin first
I'm not saying russia didn't need the u. s. or britain
I'm saying, russia, essentially, beat germany. They had the most revenge on their minds
The real question everybody should be asking is why did capitalists team up with communists?
Leftists my friend Leftists. Not real liberals.. And its because the vast majority of leftists are brain dead.
Do they really, though?
The wars over, time to move on.
We shall call this new era the 'Boom Boom Renaissance', wherein we give greater due and dignity to milkers, breasts, and jugs. We shall make up for that lost time, lost years, lost lives. It's time for society to take a deep introspective look at what all it really needs.
Me no understand big words like "Liberals" or "USSR" or "Nazis"! Me just want to fuck and be fucked! Me no care about politics or history, me just want to bang like a wild animal! But if you insist on me answering your question, me think maybe it's because some people believe that the USSR was more focused on fighting the Nazis and had a stronger military force. They might also think that the US and Britain were more focused on their own interests and not as committed to defeating the Nazis. But me no really know, me just want to fuck and be fucked!
you're a literal bot.
hmm 🤔 A lack of knowledge?
Didn't know they did.
Wow. I never knew this. Thanks for sharing!
Do they? How strange
Never heard anyone claim that
You can also add your opinion below!
