Were :m: involved?
URSS could have won WWII by itself
- Thread starter Varda
- Start date
Were :m: involved?
I got the munches too.
All you've said above is true. You've also got the experienced airmen from Spain being lost over France and Britain between 1939 and 1940, wasted occupational forces, redirection of supply, all that.
However, Russia won the war in 1938, when WWII was only a glint in Hitler's eye.
Been there before, remember? Russia effectively ended WWII before it officially started.
Last edited:
You should devote more time into researching how that came about.
The USSR had the single-handed biggest role in winning the war. The Western Allies didn't make nearly as many sacrifices.
Until summer 1941 anyway. Stalin was quite happy to let the Great Britain, her Kids, and the Dispossessed fight Germany all alone.
In terms of sheer sacrifice, Russia had the highest casualties and thousands of towns were utterly destroyed; not to mention nearly the whole of Stalingrad.
Russia won the Eastern Front on her own, and damn well was indispensable to the war effort.
Ya, Khalkhin Gol would still be a factor still but sure Japan would have grabbed kamchatka as a gimme in 42',43' having no enemies at sea?
Ya so?
So I'm addressing the OP; Russia could have won on her own. The same can't be said of the Western Allies.
No you said she made the most sacrifice and was (historically) indispensable to the war effort.
And no she could not have won all by herself.
And no she could not have won all by herself.
Yes, she could, especially given that the Japanese were not also attacking from the east.
This is what happens when you have people in brotherhood, aka, communism; the Motherland can achieve anything.
This is what happens when you have people in brotherhood, aka, communism; the Motherland can achieve anything.
mmmk i'm done with you, read the thread and refute the comments (intelligently) if you wish to discuss further.
I have, and I have. Who destroyed the most armored divisions? Russia. Who had the highest casualties? Russia. Who had thousands of towns and cities destroyed? Russia. Who single-handedly fought the Eastern Front? Russia.
Russia was indispensable to the war effort, and you know it.
Russia was indispensable to the war effort, and you know it.
While that is a valid statement Russia would not have been involved with the war at all if they weren't forced into defending themselves when attacked. Russia wasn't ready to start any wars and weren't trying to conquer anyone if you read your history books. They didn't want to go to war, the war came to them.
Of course they didn't want war; war is a capitalist creation.
Actually Hitler was more a dictator or even Facist than a capitalist.
I said he was a dictator as well.
But let us look at what a facist is:
Fascism
( /ˈfæʃɪzəm/) is a radical, authoritarian nationalist political ideology. Fascists advocate the creation of a totalitarian single-party state that seeks the mass mobilization of a nation through indoctrination, physical education and family policy including eugenics.
Fascists seek to purge forces, ideas, people, and systems deemed to be the cause of decadence and degeneration, and to produce their nation's rebirth based on commitment to the national community based on organic unity, in which individuals are bound together by suprapersonal connections of ancestry, culture, and blood. Fascists believe that a nation requires strong leadership, singular collective identity, and the will and ability to commit violence and wage war in order to keep the nation strong. Fascist governments forbid and suppress opposition to the state.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism
Doesn't look Capitalistic at all does it, more Communistic .
Actually it's neither; if you have actually read the Doctrine of Fascism by Giovanni Gentile, it's "corporatist" (not to be confused with corporation as we know it).
But my point still stands, it is an elitist, hierarchical system.
But my point still stands, it is an elitist, hierarchical system.