[sergeykish]

They believe USSR won WW2 by itself - there was no war before June 1941, no Lend-Lease, without Allies they would seize entire Europe. And no, not free, no self determination allowed [1]. Then they would certainly beat Japan by themself - it is just an island. Afghanistan was another territory that could be ours.

Putin plays on ideology created by USSR. Lie, lie, nothing but lie. Bolsheviks invented a lot in terrorism. It takes century to unfold. ISIS followed same book [2].

Sorry to bring it here, it is awful they want to start it again.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prague_Spring

[2] https://www.russiamatters.org/analysis/islamic-state-and-bol...

[gdy]

"They believe USSR won WW2 by itself"

Considering that about 80% of German losses happened on the Eastern front, this isn't far from the truth.

Meanwhile, the White House claims that the war was won by the US and the GB [0]. And the US embassy in Denmark 'inadvertently' claims that Auschwitz was liberated by the Americans.[1]

[0] https://mobile.twitter.com/whitehouse/status/125884241152413...

[1] https://mobile.twitter.com/usembdenmark/status/1222249721554...

[brnt]

Reducing winning down to body counts is precisely what was the problem with Vietnam. Materiel, production, logistics, money to fund it all.

It would be more precise to say the Russians were an American mercenary army. They were pretty much funded by them, most materiel was US produced and delivered for free.

[sergeykish]

Closer, but too simplistic - USSR had its own industry [0]. But it was in heavy need of aviation, heavy trucks, locomotives, fuel, ammunition and food for army. A lot of supplies were captured in Operation Barbarossa. Wikipedia has better description [1]:

> In total, the U.S. deliveries to the USSR through Lend-Lease amounted to $11 billion in materials: over 400,000 jeeps and trucks; 12,000 armored vehicles (including 7,000 tanks, about 1,386 of which were M3 Lees and 4,102 M4 Shermans); 11,400 aircraft (4,719 of which were Bell P-39 Airacobras) and 1.75 million tons of food.

Compare with totals [2], check out USSR tanks production (119,583) [3]. And Lend Lease resources were not free - they had to be payed back.

The brilliance of USA move was helping others to fight their enemy. You can always replace goods but no way to replace a man. Without USSR they would loose a lot. Quite possibly there would be no USA today.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_industry_in_World_War_I...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lend-Lease

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_production_during_Wor...

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_combat_vehicle_producti...

[brnt]

Well, there is a reason hiring mercenaries is usually regarded as a shady proposition. But you're right, Russia and America made a good match in WW2. It's just an angle that's not often illuminated (thanks for your far better post btw) and as always in this story, it's so sad that ordinary Russians ultimately paid the price. I wish that part also was shown differently (in Russia). Russia was not a casualty, Russians were. And Russians certainly did not win this war.

[gdy]

"And Russians certainly did not win this war."

We most certainly did, we still exist as a nation.

[brnt]

If there ever was a people divorced from its nationstate, its Russia. I know the propaganda department does not allow for critical thinking on this matter, but Russians did not win, and have never really won.

That I hope will change someday.

[jaakl]

Well, define winning. Here the looser side(s) still exists not only as a nation, but also as flourishing economy, human rights, democracy, welfare etc. Russia has only the yearly parades.

[sergeykish]

I believe he is about wining like German population did. There was no Nuremberg trials on Soviet leaders. Millions killed but nothing.

[gdy]

Is this what they teach in American schools?

The idea that the US bought millions of Soviet lives is as ridiculous as it is insulting.

The Soviet people fought in an existential war, the defeat meant death in concentration camps for some, and life as slaves for others.

All the stuff the USSR got in the lend-lease, while much appreciated, is a small fraction of the resources the USSR commited to the war.

"delivered for free"

You understand that it was called "lend-lease" for a reason?

[brnt]

I wouldnt know what they teach Americans in school. See sibling comment for why youre wrong.

Nothing is less disrespectful than not telling the story of ordinary people, in favor of national or foreign narratives.

[gdy]

I know the story of the ordinary people. They are my grandparents.

I don't know in what kind of warped reality you live if you write things like 'the Russians were an American mercenary army'.

[sergeykish]

It is not the same don't you think? Would it be possible to feed, transport army, cover by aviation etc without support [1]? Would it be possible if there was only one front? And even if it was that is not what happened. Truth should be respected.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lend-Lease

---

That claim on twitter is stupid but so is "USSR only"

[gdy]

"Would it be possible if there was only one front?"

The second front was opened only in 1944 when the outcome of the war was clear.

"Truth should be respected."

The truth clearly isn't respected in the West. You could see it in the American government statements, you can see that in these French polls: https://www.les-crises.fr/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/sondage...

"That claim on twitter is stupid but so is "USSR only""

Nope, you cannot equate these two things. Again, about 80% of German divisions were destroyed by the USSR.

[sergeykish]

You have not answered Lend Lease point.

So you fight lie with your lie.

Your view is so one-sided that it is easy to accept opposite one-sided view. Not allies, not entire world - "it is all USA because USSR claims everything for itself, you can't trust these USSR liers".

[gdy]

The USSR won the Great Patriotic War. It had some help from Allies, people in Russia are aware of it.

And what you see in the White House tweeter is a lie.

[sergeykish]

It is actually worse.

That claim is about Western Europe only [0]. Think about it. Without USA and UK entire Europe would be occupied by USSR. Litva claimed it was liberated in 1993 (48 years after end of war). I never understood them until one day.

My country was attacked without declaration of war in June 22, 1941.

My country was attacked without declaration of war in February 27, 2014.

It opens eyes.

I can't be sure but people from Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Romania, Hungary, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Mongolia, Moldova, Georgia, Ukraine may understand. You may check what do they think about Russia, like Poland [3].

Russian government antagonizes these countries. It does not matter because its real enemies are its own people.

----

Navalny claims "27 millions Russians" - that number is entire USSR [1], Russia loss 13,950,000; Ukraine loss 6,850,000.

[0] Sorry, Russian language source for now https://www.bbc.com/russian/news-52611746

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties

[3] first link I've found - conveniently omits partitioning czechoslovakia and early years but is representative https://www.znak.com/2020-01-17/chto_v_polshe_dumayut_o_ross...

[gdy]

"Then they would certainly beat Japan by themself - it is just an island."

Why not? It took the USSR only 11 days to defeat the Kwantung Army (0.7 million soldiers) in the Manchurian Strategic Offensive Operation. [0]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_invasion_of_Manchuria

[sergeykish]

Would you want to be soviet soldier in 1942 discussing these ideas?

[gdy]

I suppose you would've preferred to be an American pilot dropping nuclear bombs on civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

[sergeykish]

I suppose you would've preferred to be in NKVD interrogating and killing harmless people by thousands

[gdy]

Don't see the connection.

[cjblomqvist]

For anyone reading this. Sorry for no references, but it should be known (contrary the attention given by Hollywood etc) that SSR, if I'm not mistaken, did weaken Hitler before D day significantly, and were the ones turning the tide for the Russians. They also lost and killed a LOT more than the allied troops. Partly because they were more reckless with men (considered less worth compared to the allied mindset), but also because they fought more. Then, could they have won alone? No idea. Nobody knows of course.

Don't buy the Hollywood perspective on WW2 without first considering that it's far from the full picture. For example, China/Japan details are not as well known in western world, but a significant situation and part of the conflict with lots of people killed, which also happened before 1939 partly.

As always, it's more complicated...

[celticninja]

It's not unknown that taking on Russia stretched Nazi Germany's resources. However it is also known that between 1939 and 1941 Russia and Germany had an accord and were allies. That was until Germany invaded russia is 1941. So the German army that invaded russia in 1941 had already been fighting Britain and the allied forces for 2 years, significantly weakening them and stretching their resources.

[gdy]

"between 1939 and 1941 Russia and Germany had an accord and were allies"

That's false. Russia and Germany had a non-aggression pact. Also you should read about the Munich Agreement[0], that preceded the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact and clearly shown that no one was willing to fight Germany and protect Czechoslovakia besides the USSR.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munich_Agreement

[sergeykish]

Can we agree that both Germany and USSR gained territories as result [1], [2]? And they were trade partners [3]? And, yes, France and UK helped that to happen.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_invasion_of_Poland

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupation_of_the_Baltic_state...

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German%E2%80%93Soviet_Credit_A...

[gdy]

The USSR gained so much needed strategic depth, the Germany gained Lebensraum.

Which country wasn't trading with Nazi Germany?

[sergeykish]

"Germany gained so much needed strategic depth" - somehow Germany evil, USSR not - flawed logic

[celticninja]

You say potato...

[gdy]

You are entitled to your own opinion, but not to your own facts.

The fact is that the USSR and Germany signed a non-aggression pact, not a treaty of alliance. You can read the text [0] yourself and see that there is nothing resembling a war alliance.

[0] https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pa...

[eveningcoffee]

I clearly looks like an alliance to take over other countries.

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pa...

They even divided Poland in a coordinated attack on two fronts.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German%E2%80%93Soviet_military...

It is not the name that matters but content and actions.

[sergeykish]

Have you red it? My point by marshal USSR Georgy Zhukov on Moscow Victory Parade of 1945 [1]:

> By the combined efforts of the great powers of the USSR, USA, UK fascist Germany was defeated in the ashes

That victory was rebirth of USSR. Heroes returned home, no way to rule them as before. But wounds were not allowed to heal, 9 May become day of "we were attacked, still plenty of enemies around". Russians, Czechs, Slovaks, Ukrainians, Georgians, Moldovan (and many others) fought together. USSR attacked Czechoslovakia, Russia attacked Moldova, Georgia and Ukraine.

Somehow your counterexample is loss and contribution. I never said there was not.

> "turning the tide for the Russians^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H USSR"

By USSR census Russians 53%, Ukrainians 21%, even Slavs would be incorrect - 78%. Census 1937 [3] was not published because of the man-made famine [4] consequences. Official position - there was no such thing.

Hardly anyone knows about occupation of Poland [5], Baltic states [6] and War with Finland [7].

Could they have won war alone? No. Germans occupied a lot of industrial territories with Blitzkrieg, not enough time to restart factories [8]. Without support there would be no Moscow and Stalingrad. There would be guerilla war but that's not enough.

Back to topic. In Russia it is believed that after taking Berlin soldiers should have fought Allies. That's liberation war for you.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gzZoVm-joc&t=20m23s

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_Census_(1926)

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_Census_(1937)

[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor

[5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupation_of_Poland_(1939%E2%...

[6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupation_of_the_Baltic_state...

[7] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War

[8] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evacuation_in_the_Soviet_Union

[andrea_s]

> Back to topic. In Russia it is believed that after taking Berlin soldiers should have fought Allies. That's liberation war for you.

And they were not the only ones: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Unthinkable

[sergeykish]

Sure there were war plans then and from both sides. But those in command understood what could and could not be done. Soviet soldiers knew about allies - both as force and support (food, trucks etc). It was liberation war, it is not clear would they turn weapons on allies or stupid rulers.

I mean today, when hardly any solder left alive.

[gdy]

"In Russia it is believed that after taking Berlin soldiers should have fought Allies."

[Citation needed]

[sergeykish]

It is hard to cite what is in the air. I am transcribing what was programmed by state media. It was generally believed that we could. And how big our country is a treasure by itself. So we should. Liberated countries owe use and should live just as we are, otherwise they are traitors.

Some facts - signs "On Berlin" (На Берлин) [1]? Anyone else want this war again?

But best mark is the leader support [2]:

> In January 2013, at the time of 2011–2013 Russian protests, Putin's approval rating fell to 62%, the lowest figure since 2000 and a ten-point drop over two years. By May 2014, following the annexation of Crimea, Putin's approval rating had rebounded to 85.9%, a six-year high.

... improved after aggression on "brother Slavs", war in neighboring country, tanked economy [3], [4].

[1] https://www.google.com/search?q=%D0%BD%D0%B0+%D0%B1%D0%B5%D1...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_image_of_Vladimir_Putin...

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_financial_crisis_(2014...

[4] https://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=d5bncppjof8f9_&...

[gdy]

You are not making sense.

Nothing in what you have written has any relation to your statement: "In Russia it is believed that after taking Berlin soldiers should have fought Allies".

[sergeykish]

So you do not understand that country leader makes a crime against his people. Puts relatives on different sides of war. That response to his actions programmed by schools and state owned media.

That Germans resolved this conflict and leave on. And Russians cling for their only perceived superiority as war machine like there is nothing else to be proud of. Like it is zero sum game - their own victory and noones else.

You are not alone - their is entire country.