Real history (not the American version)

[Drachenjäger]

I wouldn't count the US out of WW2 completely in favor of the USSR. They won the Pacific almost single handed, while at the same time providing a substantial number of troops to the European offensive in 1944, as well as keeping many allied countries afloat with their flow of supplies. Although I do agree about the Eastern Front. As far as the European Theater is considered, almost the entire war was fought between Berlin and Moscow. 4 of the world's 5 largest battles by casualties were fought there after all.

 

[whitehall]

The amount of casualties a country endures is not a indication of their military might and rather it is an indication of their military weakness. An estimated 20 million Russians died during WW2. Some of the carnage was good news to the Stalinist monsters and some of it was inevitable when the Russian winter froze the Nazi invaders. Aside from the disaster of the Nazi invasion and the incredible losses on both sides, the Russians never really won a freaking battle as a part of the Allied invasion and they never had an Air Force or a freaking navy. FDR might have referred to Stalin as "Uncle Joe" but Stalin was an inept criminal idiot. For some reason the FDR administration ordered Ike's forces to halt when the tough American and Brit Troops broke through to the Rhine and the Allies had to wait for Russian hoards to sweep Berlin. Today dumb assed modern idiots think Russia won WW2. Go figure.

 

[frigidweirdo]

The Nazis were defeated by the Soviet Union. 90% of the casualties were on the Eastern Front. America helped, to be sure, but in truth it was the Soviet Union which defeated the Nazis.

Later, America did not defeat the Soviet Union, the Soviet Union imploded from within.

When it comes to the Middle East, I have yet to encounter anyone who can tell me exactly what it is America has achieved or won there.

Which is not to say necessarily that America is bad, but merely that America sits back, protected, does a little here and there and then reaps the credit for victory. It is a very lucky country. But, as we are finding out, that luck is beginning to run dry and America is deeply divided and looks to be headed for civil war.

WW2 was an effort for many countries. Without the Western fronts, the Soviets would have had it harder. Had Hitler not had to deal with the British in 1941 would he have failed in Russia?

Most people see that Hitler was the reason for Germany's failure. Yes, the Allies put in a lot of effort, but disaster at Dunkirk, Stalingrad etc, the interference with his general etc, this caused the downfall of Germany.

 

[regent]

The Nazis were defeated by the Soviet Union. 90% of the casualties were on the Eastern Front. America helped, to be sure, but in truth it was the Soviet Union which defeated the Nazis.

Later, America did not defeat the Soviet Union, the Soviet Union imploded from within.

When it comes to the Middle East, I have yet to encounter anyone who can tell me exactly what it is America has achieved or won there.

Which is not to say necessarily that America is bad, but merely that America sits back, protected, does a little here and there and then reaps the credit for victory. It is a very lucky country. But, as we are finding out, that luck is beginning to run dry and America is deeply divided and looks to be headed for civil war.

Without the USA lend lease program with the Soviets they would have been fugged

America spent 50 billion on Lend Lease. 31 bill to Britain, 11 bill to the USSR, 3.2 to France, 11.6 bill to China, 2.6 bill to other nations.

 

[Picaro]

The early British aid to Stalin kept the Soviets in the war; without it Stalin would have lost Moscow and never would have been able to build up Soviet forces in the first place. While the amount looks like a trickle compared to later shipments, it came at the most critical point for Stalin as far as staying in the war, and the later shipments were the only reasons he was able to launch offensives out of Kursk.

So, thank the Brits for Stalin staying in the war at all. As for casualties, they aren't a measure of who won anything, especially if your main tactic was human wave attacks, and having to launch two or three of those to 'win' a battle. The Soviets were losing hundreds of thousands of troops to ad hoc militias made up of old men and children; in Berlin alone they lost around 600,000+ to such under-supplied militias. Without the machine tools, food, alloys, ammunition, engineering advisors, aircraft engines and even aircraft fuel imports, among many other things, like rails and locomotives, radios, etc. there would be no Soviet 'victories' to speak of. The T-34 wouldn't have been much to brag about without British and American engineers studies and recommended improvements. The Soviets wouldn't have been able to have total air superiority over most of their front if it weren't for the Allied bombing campaigns forcing Hitler to pretty much strip the eastern front of even anti-aircraft guns, which allowed the Soviets to use even WW I era biplanes at night; see The Night Witches stories for the women pilots who flew those. Also without the av fuel booster shipments most of the Soviet air force would be grounded or barely able to fly.

It's ridiculous to claim Stalin could have won without western aid; he wouldn't even have been a player without it. Compare the Allied casualties with German causality ratios on the western front after D-Day and Anzio with the German vs Soviet casualties; the Americans and Brits were head and shoulders above Soviets in inflicting casualties, and would have won without the Soviets; it would have taken another year or two longer, and that's about it.

 

[Picaro]

The Nazis were defeated by the Soviet Union. 90% of the casualties were on the Eastern Front. America helped, to be sure, but in truth it was the Soviet Union which defeated the Nazis.

Later, America did not defeat the Soviet Union, the Soviet Union imploded from within.

When it comes to the Middle East, I have yet to encounter anyone who can tell me exactly what it is America has achieved or won there.

Which is not to say necessarily that America is bad, but merely that America sits back, protected, does a little here and there and then reaps the credit for victory. It is a very lucky country. But, as we are finding out, that luck is beginning to run dry and America is deeply divided and looks to be headed for civil war.

Without the USA lend lease program with the Soviets they would have been fugged

America spent 50 billion on Lend Lease. 31 bill to Britain, 11 bill to the USSR, 3.2 to France, 11.6 bill to China, 2.6 bill to other nations.

Some of that given to the Brits was passed on to the Soviets as well; I don't recall how much but likely in the area of another $3 billion.

 

[Skull Pilot]

I have been raised in Soviet Union, my relatives have been fighting against Germans and they were witnessing: it was the Soviet people who defeated Nazis. USA and Britain helped a lot, no question, but they only opened the second front in Europe in 1944, after 4 years since WW2 started and a year before WW2 ended, basically when it already became clear that Soviets would win anyway.

Americans, when was last time you had wars on our own lands, not abroad? In Russia, Belarus and Eastern Ukraine just about everybody has had relatives, who participated WW2 and everybody knows the real truth about WW2 from the real witnesses, not only from the Media and textbooks, like a lot of you do. Feel the difference.

We haven't been attacked by another country on our own soil because no one is stupid enough to try it

 

[Skull Pilot]

Why do you think your Russian version of history is any more "real" than anyone else's