It's kinda funny when Ukrainian fascists had promoted idiotic view that USSR=Russia and Ukraine was an occupied country instead of an equal part, and now meet consequences of this view.
Yeah, leave it to a Ukrainian flag username to erase the heroism of the Ukrainians in the Red Army in order to fellate the Americans
Spitting on the graves of antifascist heroes to honor not-Hitler is a liberal tradition
Liberals erased actual Ukrainian history with random fascists who committed massacres for a few years before dying.
And not just random Massacares Russians either, what they did was the Holocaust against poles and Jews. No wonder so many poles hate Ukrainians so much.
The Ukrainian government apologized to Israel, Poland, and Germany after their German ambassador said “Bandera didn’t commit any massacres. And if he did, it was justified because he was stopping Russian aggression.”
They said he didn’t represent the views of the government even though he’s literally the ambassador lol
their grandfathers would shoot them with a smile
Really funny to see all the MAGA patriots going to bat for the Soviet Union in the replies
That’s only because Trump is doing it. If Biden did it they’ll call him a Stalinist
If it ends with some of them seeing through anticommunist propaganda, it would be very funny.
It won't. They'll just use this as a "gotcha lib owned with facts and logick" and forget about it in 5 seconds.
This country is incredibly fucked when such simple, elementary school facts like the Soviet Union defeated the Nazis always gets such push back.
also the fact that Trump knows more about WWII history apparently than tons of libs... who am I supposed to hate again? the pro-Nazi idiots rejecting history simply because it reflects well upon a socialist country that doesn't even exist anymore?????? like fuck man
Those with any knowledge bring up lend lease. I'll give them that. Without the material and financial aid the USSR probably would have lost outright or been forced to sue for an unfavorable peace. I'll allow it. Probably true. Lend lease was extremely important in keeping the USSR afloat after Barbarossa kicked off. So the USSR probably loses without the USA.
But what they never want to admit is that not only would the exact same thing happen without the USSR fighting the nazis, the western powers would not have fought nearly as long OR as hard by comparison. Do they really think the USA would have thrown a few million - let alone tens of millions - of lives into the meat grinder trying to stop the fascists? The hell they would have. Because at the end of the day the nazis did not represent as intense a threat to them as they did to the slavs and communists. The Bismarck wasn't going to end up shelling New York harbor to cover an invasion of nazi stormtroopers of the USA. They'd just go back to isolationism, declare it a European problem, and be grateful that the fascists took out those mean nasty commies for them.
Lend lease was important but I’m not so sure about the USSR losing.
Most historians specializing on the Eastern Front agree that Hitler caught the USSR off-guard by only about a year, as Stalin’s purges from 1937 led to a massive reorganization of its military that was still incomplete by 1941. However, the Germans would have had a much harder chance if they had invaded by 1942, when the reorganization would have completed by then.
Even then, the planners of Operation Barbarossa gave themselves only 4 months to crush the Red Army, after which they’d run into significant logistical issues. The German military wasn’t as invincible as people usually think. Nazi Germany suffer from perpetual manpower (both military personnel and industrial labor), logistics, fuel and supply shortage, as well as aging military equipments.
The German blitzkrieg wasn’t a formal military doctrine, unlike the Red Army’s Deep Operation doctrine. It was performed to cover up these weaknesses of the German military because they were unable to wage protracted and sustained warfare without running into manpower and logistics issue.
As such, the German invasion of the USSR was essentially doomed by winter of 1941, when they failed to defeat the Red Army within 4 months. When the Germans failed to reach the Caucasus oil field by the winter of 1942 (Operation Blau) and were instead stuck at Stalingrad, it was all but over for the Germans.
The Soviet industries were already kicked into high gear, after being relocated into the Urals, and by the end of the war the Soviet industrial output had far surpassed Nazi Germany’s (and second only to the United States which was far off to the other side of the world and sustained minimal damage from the war).
So, lend lease did play a role, especially in terms of reducing Soviet casualties and war damages, there’s no doubt about it, but that doesn’t mean that Hitler’s campaign against the USSR wasn’t just as doomed as it would be without the lend lease.
Certified as an unbiased source according to media bias fact check dot com.
'yeah the other dudes contributed i swear but the soviets got 76% of the germans so you can say they did some things'
'yeah but i gave him a pencil so i basically did the whole project' <- a sentence that would rightly get your ass kicked
Real "group project but one person does 80% of the work, including the most difficult parts" vibes
Materiel, that's the lady from cottage the cowardly dog, right?
(My phone autocorrected courage to cottage but I'm leaving it because I think it's funny as fuck)
TBF the “America single-handedly defeated the Nazis with the English as a goofy sidekick and Russia somewhere off to the side”
predate Trump by decades.
Guys give him a break. He’s Forbes’ Top Economic Thinker. It’s not his fault he’s stupid.
rejection of the Soviets doing most of the winning of WWII is mainstream in the US unfortunately. I honestly didn't even learn that the US played such a small role in the war in Europe until college in a Holocaust class. Of course the info is all out there, but if you grow up in the culture of "fuck yeah, the good guys! we beat the Nazis and Soviets!" That's a nice delusion to have. I remember when my professor said that to the class. he specifically did like a tangent of "oh btw... I bet many of you didn't know this, but..." and gave some information on Eastern European side of WWII. I think I was actually upset by it (still very lib minded) but I read into it further and we went over it more and stuff and yeah. In the end it's just plainly a falsehood of American Exceptionalism bullshit. But if you never study history outside high school and never read and correctly absorb information it's very easy to live in the "America saved the world!" delusion of many modern Americans.
Lots of western Europeans have the same "America saved the world" delusion. It is part of the ideological superstructure of atlanticism.
You use the flag of a country that openly celebrates a Nazi collaborator. Sit this one out and think about that
The United States beat Hitler with the help of Captain America, Namor the Sub-Mariner, the Human Torch and The Whizzer
The guy is doubling down by trying to say Ukraine and Belarus lost more combatants than Russia and also Germany wouldn't have been defeated without the US and UK.
Yeah except the Nazis were already retreating from the eastern front by the time D-Day happened. The US and UK were instrumental in getting the Nazis out of France and Italy, but the troops marching into Berlin were Soviets.
This guy is a PhD and works for Forbes? Quality intellectuals that America has crafted. We have our own self-replicating ghoul class who aren't even cynical even more, they legit believe all the ghoul propaganda.
the allies certainly helped with the defeat for sure but comintern did all the heavy lifting
Jacques Pauwels has a good book detailing both how the Allies' second front was indeed an attempt at capitalizing off of an inevitable Soviet victory (and mitigating Soviet influence in Western Europe in the aftermath), and also how little resistance the Allies faced on the Western Front because German soldiers were terrified of the Soviets and fled west to surrender/be protected by to the allies.
I can’t view this bird brain thread without an account so I’m just gonna assume that his points are nothing of importance
Including the Ukraine, which this man has in his pfp. smh this anti ukraine man is doing putins work for him smh.
It actually gets really ghoulish:
1/ First, the Soviet Union included, not only russia, but another 14 countries. Ukraine alone lost over 8 million people in WW2. As a percentage of population, Belorussia lost 25% and Ukraine 16% of its population, while russia only 12%.
I think he got those numbers by including civilian genocide victims.
2/ Second, just because the Soviet Union had the most causalities, doesn’t mean that they won the war. The reason Soviets had such large casualties is because they used people as cannon folder. Something russia is still doing today.
And doing more apologia for literal Nazi genocide of Slavs to own the ruskies
3/ Third, the Red Army was poorly equipped and heavily relied on the US support. Through the lendlease, the US has provided over 400,000 trucks, 14,000 airplanes, 13,000 tanks, and more.
Now list total tanks, and maybe who drove them.
If dumping military equipment was a magic spell to make the side with the richest sponsors win, then what's going on in Ukraine?
4/ Forth, Nazis were defeated only after the second front was open. Nazis had to fight against the US, UK, and all their allies.
So, it is plain stupid to attribute victory over Hitler to russia.
The front that never would have opened were it not for Molotov-Ribbentrop, which I'm sure this same prick will call Nazi collaboration (unlike Bandera, who was just doing what he had to in order to own the ruskies)
Such a fucking waste of space
Now list total tanks, and maybe who drove them.
"Altogether, as many as 84,070 T-34s are thought to have been built, plus 13,170 self-propelled guns built on T-34 chassis. It was the most-produced tank of the Second World War, and the second most-produced tank of all time, after its successor, the T-54/55 series."
Damn didn't know they were building all those T-34s in Kentucky.
"The Soviet Union churned out over 36,000 Ilyushin Il-2 bombers during WWII, making it the most-produced aircraft of the war."
Oh wow, I guess Georgia was busy cranking out IL-2s as well.
When you’re entire knowledge of the eastern front comes from watching Enemy at the Gates
I saw a number that said lendlease contributed about 5% to the USSR war material. Which is not nothing, but like... 5% of 76% is still above 70%, if that's how you want to measure things.
Whereas if you removed the USSR's contribution to the war effort...
4/ Forth, Nazis were defeated only after the second front was open. Nazis had to fight against the US, UK, and all their allies.
So, it is plain stupid to attribute victory over Hitler to russia.
The front that never would have opened were it not for Molotov-Ribbentrop
Why is that? I thought that agreement had as only function to delay the German attack on the USSR. Why would it lead to a second front?
Let me rephrase: The western front would have opened either way, but the War on Two Fronts situation would have been radically diminished if the Nazis invaded the Soviets earlier, as it was openly the plan of western reactionaries to pit the Nazis against the Soviets and then deal with whoever won after (hence their resistance to an antifascist alliance). The Pact (1939) was useful in stalling for time in an absolute sense, certainly, but it also helped prevent the Soviets from being effectively the sole focus of the Nazis (who, in the meantime and in their need for expansion, invaded other countries, including Britain in 1940), as Operation Barbarossa only started in 1941 (still earlier than the Soviets planned, but a delay nonetheless).
So my point is that the strain of handling these conflicts simultaneously was one of the major factors in the Nazis being defeated, but westerners were actively planning on preventing such a situation from arising, hence a need for the Pact to stall the Nazis (along with the more broad use of industrial development, etc.)
I mean, the USSR did, which included a lot of Ukrainians such as Lyudmila Pavlichenko.
Westerners and now recently modern Ukraine has been pushing hard to separate all Ukrainian history from the USSR aside from being "oppressed." So naturally the average burger will think USSR = Russia = Russia did everything good or bad in WWII.
The same USSR that all the NAFO dipshits and ukronazis were frothing at the mouth in glee as they celebrated Finland's role in ww2 in shooting soldiers of the Red Army, many of whom were Ukrainian as well.
Our Big Wet Comrade gave a speech about the bourgeoisie
I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
Literally overheard 2 guys arguing about this in a parking lot just now lol
