The Americans taking Berlin and attacking the Soviets? - Page 3 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

The Second World War (1939-1945).
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#14657971
This is a brilliant thread. Invading Russia = piece of cake. After all, the Red Army and Resistance fighters and partisans were pushovers. The Soviets had no conventional strength on ground or air at all, as we all know. Furthermore, invading our ally who bore the brunt of Nazi aggression for years would have gone over smoothly with everyone. The sheer level of strategic genius in this thread is truly phenomenal.
#14658098
Agreed . . . this is all spooky conspiracy nonsense stuff.

A hot flash for all . . . a US general, and it matters not a whit who he is/was or how many stars he has or had, has not not the authority to take such actions regardless of how much he may have wanted to do so. He would be sacked immediately for even attempting to put such a plan in motion and probably arrested. Not to mention that those under his command, even his own staff, would probably outright refuse participation, being painfully aware of the illegality of any orders to even start movement. It is apparent that those pushing this stuff have not a clue as to how complicated such a scheme would be . . . the ever so casual kiss your hand and snap your fingers to make it so ignores stark realities of military operations. You cannot just order everyone up to the line, head east, and kill anyone not dressed like us . . . no, sorry, kids, not the way it works.

Regardless of what those who obviously have no real knowledge of how high command works might want to believe, no one has that kind of juice and it cannot be done on the fly. It is all voodoo conspiracy and Hollywood gee-whiz nonsense to believe that there was even a smidgen of the possibility of the western allies turning on their erstwhile Soviet allies, with or without the remains of the German army as comrades in arms.
#14658110
R Leonard wrote:Agreed . . . this is all spooky conspiracy nonsense stuff. a US general, and it matters not a whit who he is/was or how many stars he has or had, has not not the authority to take such actions regardless of how much he may have wanted to do so. He would be sacked immediately for even attempting to put such a plan in motion and probably arrested. Not to mention that those under his command, even his own staff, would probably outright refuse participation, being painfully aware of the illegality of any orders to even start movement. It is apparent that those pushing this stuff have not a clue as to how complicated such a scheme would be . . . the ever so casual kiss your hand and snap your fingers to make it so ignores stark realities of military operations. You cannot just order everyone up to the line, head east, and kill anyone not dressed like us . . . .

Boy Bulaba is sure lucky to have YOU backing him up !

Zam
#14658187
Yeah, I'm really lucky, that's for sure. Everyone knows invading Russia would've been really easy. After we accomplished that super simple task we should've invaded China too because that would've been a piece of cake also, considering that a foreign invasion would've not gone over well with even the Nationalists who would recognize that we would want to dominate China, and would keep the Communists and Nationalists fighting together even if we claimed we wanted to wipe out the Communists.
#14658224
fuser wrote::lol:

So you are reduced to, "fuck off", "nuh-uh I am right", great to hear that.


No, I'm reduced to 5 primary sources, 4 which happen to be Soviet archival sources and you have nothing. Thanks for playing little man.

And yes you do need to at least try to read carefully, where did I said LL trucks were not numbered over 400,000? Nowhere but you in all these posts have been a complete failure in understanding the concepts of pre war stocks, the 400,000 numbers is right so is the 30% numbers, deal with it and stop repeating yourself. And no all these pre-war stocks were not destroyed during Barbarossa. Railcars, Locomotives, Trucks etc from pre-war were being used after the war too.


Bro, you just claimed earlier that the USSR production of trucks was greater than that of American production of Soviet-use vehicles when it was proven to factually incorrect.

Now back up your assertions with some sources or stop posting.

Also stop lying, who said Mikoyan was an allied spy? No one but the another point that you are completely unable to understand that such quotes from famous personality exists for all sides, see my example of British General staff that you ignored and come back and this time try not to put something in my mouth that I didn't said.


I'm satirizing the fact that you are cognitively unable to see the retardation when a member of the Soviet regime you defend OUTRIGHT CLAIMS that Lend-Lease shortened the war by 1-1.5 years. NOT ME, NOT A HISTORIAN, BUT AN ACTUAL PERSON YOU KNOW, involved with the running of the USSR.



And to take words from your dictionary, literally every anti-soviet hack has tried to overestimate and exaggerate LL contribution, I didn't said that it was not important but your exaggeration is indeed ludicrous, as I said overall LL formed a meager 7% of Soviet GNP, deal with this fact too.


Yeah, every anti-Soviet hack and apparently members of the Soviet General Staff, who didn't consider the allied contribution "meager" at all considering the time and cost of lives it saved.

Your position is a complete joke when factual evidence from Soviet archives and direct verbatim quotes from Soviet General Staff members contradict you.

Oh and stop pretending that 44-45 Germany and Japan are anywhere close to 45 USSR, this has already been proven not to be the case, no amount of repetition will magically make it so.



You've proven nothing, all that you've shown is your knowledge of aerial warfare is seriously lacking, you have no idea that "1000 bomber raids" even existed before I brought it up, and apparently to you altitude is not at all important in aerial warfare. Seriously dude, I suggest reading some basic aviation history before trying to engage in this subject.

And when you brought up Sturmoviks you were literally talking about air superiority and not CAS, its not my fault that you post stupid shit and now have to deal with it. Plus yup, you may not be aware but VVS did had fighters and not only CAS.


Not my fault you lack English comprehension fam.

As per allies not playing fair, who said anything about being fair, is this post a strawman post to compensate for your utter lack of any new arguments. As per offense and defense, literally the op, Patton and Unthinkable are asking them to go on offensive, its not my fault that even a fanboy like you can't think of a favorable scenario in this case.


And British General staff are not going to be moving American troops, use your brain for a second, this is like saying the DDR plans for the invasion of Western Europe will take precedence over Soviet ones.

This clearly demonstrate how you are utterly incapable of reading and understanding simple posts. Did I said ww2 played no part? No, I didn't, now tell me were you aiming for a strawman or you really can't read simple posts?


Keep continuing to try uphold your failed narrative, I happen to enjoy being an Asian very much and am honestly supportive of movements whos actions have resulted in Asian independence from European supremacism. Unfortunately, turns out most leftists are blinded into outright Russophilia and are happy to ignore the wholesale genocide the USSR conducted on Asian peoples.

This is a brilliant thread. Invading Russia = piece of cake. After all, the Red Army and Resistance fighters and partisans were pushovers. The Soviets had no conventional strength on ground or air at all, as we all know. Furthermore, invading our ally who bore the brunt of Nazi aggression for years would have gone over smoothly with everyone. The sheer level of strategic genius in this thread is truly phenomenal.


Please, continue to highlight how the VVS was anything but a comparative pile of shit that sent its own pilots to death with antiquated training, antiquated planes, antiquated tactics and a record so abysmal that it speaks for itself.

If you paid any degree of attention to this debate you'd realize not once has anyone questioned the Red Army but that the discussion has been over the VVS. Unfortunately, your snarky little comment has about all the historical content of a popular history youtube video.

In fact, I actually lauded the Red Army, not once, but multiple times

Bridgeburner wrote:I'll never contest the fact that the Red Army destroyed the Wermacht almost single-handedly, but I will also never agree that the VVS was anything approaching successful in its attempts against the Luftwaffe. It's antiquated training, doctrine, attitude towards fighter pilots, focus on the mission and not downing aircraft were all symptomatic of a thoroughly backward organization.


And linked a US Army War College historian with special access to ex-Soviet archives who is notable for his praise of the Red Army and it's deep battle operational art.



But you didn't actually read anything did you, just popped in with a shitty one liner?

That "ally" of yours brutally repressed Eastern Europeans, Ukrainians, Finns and Baltic peoples for decades, and continues and continued to wreck havoc amongst Asian peoples in Central Asia and the far East. Good to know that liberals still persist with a completely racist agenda, the only crime of course of WW2 was that the Germans had the audacity to do it to fellow Europeans, if it's Asians that bear the force of repression why, then that's something to be cheered on.

As for Resistance fighters and partisans, quite a significant portion of them actually fought the Red Army into the 50s'. It's telling what a shithole the USSR was given their treatment of partisans.
#14658226
@ Lexington

Not really, not in 40s or even in 50s. There are numerous detailed plans for later periods available. Its not a stretch to say that Soviets were far less keen on war than Western allies.

@ Brigeburner

I stopped reading your post when you once again claimed that I said Soviet Production of Trucks was higher than LL trucks, I have explicitly said otherwise. My point was now for nth time that Soviets had pre war stocks too and thus share of Soviet truck in R Army was much higher than western Trucks.

Now, its quite clear that you are utterly incapable of reading simple posts and all you have is stupid repetitions and strawmans. Come back when you have developed the capability to read and understand counter arguments and when you have anything at all new to say that hasn't been addressed before.

Till then keep crying about me being russophile, anti-asian or whatever shit that will make you feel better about yourself.
#14658232
Lexington wrote:One thing I'm wondering, though: So the British had investigated invading the Soviets with Operation Unthinkable...

Not exactly ... that's been way exaggerated by some of the posters here ... The British were (officially) concerned about the defensive posture in Europe after the Americans redeployed to the pacific ... Unthinkable was a "best defense is a good offense" concept ... eliminate the immediate threat. That's all Patton's plan envisioned ... Had it been implemented and succeeded ... I would suspect it would be followed in short order by a diplomatic agreement for forfeiture of arms and Russian withdrawal to their prewar border. Also a much more equitable prisoner exchange. While I'm sure there would be political pressure to overthrow communism completely ... No one was prepared for such a campaign.

Lexington wrote:Did the Soviets have any comparable thing at the time? They really must have, just as a contingency even, I would think?

Of course, and of course they NEVER admitted it. Initially, Zhukov was desperate for a breather during which he could re-organize soviet forces, re-establish discipline, and resupply ... So the Russians were VERY friendly at first. But that faded after a couple of months and there WERE some incidents over the recovery of German assets. BUT - Stalin had his hands full with the New Eastern European territory, and by the time that was sorted out, The US had dropped the Nukes and ALL the rules changed.

All in all ... the fact that the Allies (soon to be NATO) did NOT knife the Russians in the Back like Hitler did is PROBABLY the reason the world survived the Cold War ...

Zam
#14658235
Bridgeburner wrote:Please, continue to highlight how the VVS was anything but a comparative pile of shit that sent its own pilots to death with antiquated training, antiquated planes, antiquated tactics and a record so abysmal that it speaks for itself.

If you paid any degree of attention to this debate you'd realize not once has anyone questioned the Red Army but that the discussion has been over the VVS. Unfortunately, your snarky little comment has about all the historical content of a popular history youtube video.


I do not care what facet of WWII in particular (the VVS) you have been focusing on. My post was pretty clearly in response to the ideas in this thread by people who think it was even feasible for the Western Allies to attack the Soviets, and was not in response to you in any manner.

But you didn't actually read anything did you, just popped in with a shitty one liner?


Typically I scroll past your posts without reading them at all but in this case I saw you quote me. It's too bad that you're upset that I mocked the idea of invading Russia being a piece of cake, but it is a really laughable idea and hard not to laugh at. However yes, I haven't read any of your posts and don't plan to.

And lol @ "one liner"

That "ally" of yours brutally repressed Eastern Europeans, Ukrainians, Finns and Baltic peoples for decades, and continues and continued to wreck havoc amongst Asian peoples in Central Asia and the far East. Good to know that liberals still persist with a completely racist agenda, the only crime of course of WW2 was that the Germans had the audacity to do it to fellow Europeans, if it's Asians that bear the force of repression why, then that's something to be cheered on.


Pretty much every Western Ally or major/colonial power at that time had been or was engaging in the oppression of multiple ethnic groups in different regions of the world, so I fail to see how the Soviets were unique in this regard, as although they didn't balk at liquidating bourgeois elements, they never tried to exterminate whole ethnic groups, reduce ethnic populations to second-class citizenship like occurred throughout the colonial world, and so on. Since you acknowledge that the major European powers were already engaged in ethnic oppression and ethnic superiority (implied in their colonies at the very least), I don't know why you're giving me this pity party about the Soviets, considering everything they possibly did had already been done before or was institutionalized by some European power before or during the war.

If you think communists are liberals then it sheds a lot of light on why you're taking the notion of attacking the Soviets so seriously, because both are pretty dumb.
#14658248
I am also laughing hard that somehow me supporting US and British Empire (of all places) in a hypothetical scenario will make me a "good" Asian.

But then it could had been worse, I was also accused of being a Britshophile for opposing the idea that Britain would had fallen if she stood alone against Nazi Germany.
#14658263
Clearly you're an Asian-hating Russophile, fuser. Hopefully you have learned your lesson and played enough video games to understand how the world works and realize that the Western Allies with their 2.5 million men and outnumbered tanks would easily defeat the Soviets and occupy Russia, because invading Russia is pretty easy and would have been a cakewalk.
#14658266
fuser wrote:@ Brigeburner

I stopped reading your post when you once again claimed that I said Soviet Production of Trucks was higher than LL trucks, I have explicitly said otherwise. My point was now for nth time that Soviets had pre war stocks too and thus share of Soviet truck in R Army was much higher than western Trucks.

Now, its quite clear that you are utterly incapable of reading simple posts and all you have is stupid repetitions and strawmans. Come back when you have developed the capability to read and understand counter arguments and when you have anything at all new to say that hasn't been addressed before.


You are so full of shit, I've addressed this multiple times, the majority of the red army was DESTROYED at barbarossa

Are you going to dispute this indisputable fact, the majority of the Red Armys airforce, armor and logistics were concentrated on the Western border with Germany and were encircled and destroyed ?

Please, go and find ONE, just ONE historian that disagrees with this fact.

Go read Glantz

Glantz, David M (1998), Stumbling Colossus: The Red Army on the Eve of World War

Here's a nice place to start for historically illiterate people.

Till then keep crying about me being russophile, anti-asian or whatever shit that will make you feel better about yourself.


Come back when you've read a history book with a single primary source mate. Until then I've seen posturing that has you rejecting a member of the USSR general staff because they "disagree" with your position. Nice work. How do you manage the cognitive dissonance? Don't respond to me unless you are going to start citing facts.

Bulaba Jones wrote:I do not care what facet of WWII in particular (the VVS) you have been focusing on. My post was pretty clearly in response to the ideas in this thread by people who think it was even feasible for the Western Allies to attack the Soviets, and was not in response to you in any manner.


Good, then don't respond to me. It's not unfeasible and it's actually the Allies holding onto their responsibility for an independent and free Poland and Czechslovakia. Not that you'd give a shit about that though.

Typically I scroll past your posts without reading them at all but in this case I saw you quote me. It's too bad that you're upset that I mocked the idea of invading Russia being a piece of cake, but it is a really laughable idea and hard not to laugh at. However yes, I haven't read any of your posts and don't plan to.


Oh you couldn't resist could you.

Dude, I post on this forum maybe 3,4 times every 3 months or so, I don't give a shit if a boring run of the mill leftist "doesn't read my posts" on a backward corner of the internet, kindly stop waving your e-peen about your position as an "esteemed forum member", a little bit of information, people like visiting these forums for the interesting people like FRS, Potemkin, Rei, Donald (RIP), Dave (RIP), Ombrageux (RIP) and not the boring run of the mill liberals (or whatever flavor of leftist you are) that can be found on every part of the internet and a post record consists of regurgitated tumblr-tier garbage that is tiresome.

You are just not very entertaining man, I appreciate it that you don't read my posts, you really aren't the intended audience at all, there's no saving people like you.

Anyway, since you clearly think "invading Russia is a laughable idea", go back and read about these peoples who've managed it

Varyag Vikings
Mongol Conquest of Russia #1
Tamerlane #2
Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth
Japan at Mukden and Port Arthur.

Nothing particularly laughable about it.

Nothing particularly laughable about Barbarossa either, I can assure none of the Soviets found it amusing in the slightest, and what you think was a foregone conclusion was a matter that hung in the very balance, with every bit of Allied Assistance via Lend-Lease making a Soviet victory possible (and not pyhrric or fatal).

And lol @ "one liner"


I've seen more substance in skinsters singular smiley face posts than that one.

Pretty much every Western Ally or major/colonial power at that time had been or was engaging in the oppression of multiple ethnic groups in different regions of the world,


Ah the old Cold war era fallacy incredible, are people still using this day?

Unless you are going to excuse Nazi liquidation of Jews by that same standard though.

so I fail to see how the Soviets were unique in this regard, as although they didn't balk at liquidating bourgeois elements, they never tried to exterminate whole ethnic groups, reduce ethnic populations to second-class citizenship like occurred throughout the colonial world,


What a load of shit. The USSR continued a policy of ethnic Russian supremacy, the entire Far-East and Central Asia (and Manchuria) was land acquired by force from Asians and subject to large scale demographic colonialism by ethnic Russians, hell, I bet you don't even know about the fact that over 175,000 Koreas were deported from the Russian Far East, the persecution and repression of nationalist central asian leaders and the forced de-culturization and Russification of places like Mongolia as a result of the Bolsheviks is not a crime you get to gloss over easily. The fact that the Soviets managed to destroy the diversity of languages and traditions in Central and Far East Asia is a tantamount to the same actions carried out by the einsatzgruppen in Eastern Europe.

Forced Russification and primacy of Russians amongst the USSR was defacto state policy from the 30s to the 90s. The korenizatsya policy was all but rejected.

I would like to raise a toast to the health of our Soviet people and, before all, the Russian people.

I drink, before all, to the health of the Russian people, because in this war they earned general recognition as the leading force of the Soviet Union among all the nationalities of our country.


Volga Germans, Crimean Tatars, Chechens, Ingush, Balkars, Kalmyks were all deported en-masse to Siberia. Demographic ethnocide was favored by importing in thousands of Muscovites throughout the territories of the USSR, continuing Imperial Russian policy, and marginalizing self-determination and self-rule for ethnicities.

and so on. Since you acknowledge that the major European powers were already engaged in ethnic oppression and ethnic superiority (implied in their colonies at the very least), I don't know why you're giving me this pity party about the Soviets, considering everything they possibly did had already been done before or was institutionalized by some European power before or during the war.


Please, America is the only nation that gets a pass from me with regards to colonialism, the efforts FDR , Truman and the American people did for victims of colonialism have to be respected and affirmed.

The Germans and Japanese destroyed continental European colonial powers ability to function. The only pity was that the final and last colonial empire on this planet - the Soviet Union/Russian Federation,wasn't turned into a Muscovite rump state.

If you think communists are liberals then it sheds a lot of light on why you're taking the notion of attacking the Soviets so seriously, because both are pretty dumb.


Try reading a book for once, instead of Tumblr, might help with the whole historical illiteracy.

You, or Fuser, still both haven't explained how the USSR is going to win against the Western Allies when the entirety of bomber command can nuke, firebomb and utterly destroy Soviet industrial centres and stymie any sort of aggressive advance into Western Europe.

I like how both fuser and you are notably silent when actually questioned with the fact that the VVS can't do jack shit to stop the Allies nuking a hole in the Soviet advance and obliterating Moscow. How is the Red Army going to reach Paris? Anyone want to tell me?

I've already outlined how an Allied force will isolate and grind down a USSR to a halt that has lost 1/8th of its manpower , over 30 million total casualties and is surrounded on all fronts by hostile nations, in addition to an America that has only suffered 500,000 casualties and at the height of its industrial power.

You have a USSR that has its entire network of agriculture, industry and logistics vulnerable to allied strike, and the only danger the allies face is fighting a defensive war in Europe against a Soviet army that is completely exhausted, overstretched and under-supplied, suffering 80,000 in casualties and over 300,000 wounded taking BERLIN against teenagers and old men in the Volkssturm. Please point out how on a map exactly the USSR will manage to take care of a full strength, fully supplied Allied Army that would have the additional support of ex-Wermacht personnel. Tell me how the Soviets will mount any successive offensive or troop concentration when the Allies can turn those divisions into isotopes.

fuser wrote:I am also laughing hard that somehow me supporting US and British Empire (of all places) in a hypothetical scenario will make me a "good" Asian.


What about realpolitik is it hard for you to grasp fam? How is Europeans dying in an even greater war not beneficial for Asia, how is the dissolution of the Russian supremacist state squatting on Asian land not beneficial for Asia? Communists are full of shit, the one state they've got a raging hardon for is an instrument of European colonialism and literally the last colonial empire on the planet.

But then it could had been worse, I was also accused of being a Britshophile for opposing the idea that Britain would had fallen if she stood alone against Nazi Germany.


Uh, dude, what are you even talking about. I'm waiting for your answers on Allied 4 engined bombers and altitude by the way, since you seem incapable of understanding basic physics and why a plane with higher altitude has a massive energy advantage over a plane with lower altitude.
Last edited by Bridgeburner on 07 Mar 2016 09:46, edited 1 time in total.
#14658274
Of course, I am full of, a typical sixth grader response (not that better is expected from you). And no not everything was destroyed during Barbarossa, Glantz or anyone nowhere mentions that all trucks, railcars, locomotives were destroyed during Barnarossa. Or it would had been impossible for red army to field 680,000 Trucks in may 45 given that its almost equal to war time production + LL unless idiotically we are to believe that no trucks were destroyed/lost after Barbarossa which is of course nonsense. You once again made a stupid mistake and has to deal with it now, its totally your problem that you keep making stupid mistakes.

Now obviously I am not going to bother with rest of your shit wall of text post, everything that has to be said has been said by me ("And no you didn't", is seriously not going to prove otherwise), no amount of strawmanning and repetition on your part is going to change that, keep pretending that you still have any counter argument left as you seem to be good at fantasy building.
#14658276
fuser wrote:Of course, I am full of, a typical sixth grader response (not that better is expected from you). And no not everything was destroyed during Barbarossa, Glantz or anyone nowhere mentions that all trucks, railcars, locomotives were destroyed during Barnarossa. Or it would had been impossible for red army to field 680,000 Trucks in may 45 given that its almost equal to war time production + LL unless idiotically we are to believe that no trucks were destroyed/lost after Barbarossa which is of course nonsense. You once again made a stupid mistake and has to deal with it now, its totally your problem that you keep making stupid mistakes.


You didn't even read or watch the Glantz video dude, no one is claiming all the trucks were destroyed, just a massive majority of them, like how the VVS lost over 16,000 planes and the Red Army lost over 21,000 tanks.

You are literally claimingthat the magical Russian trucks evaded capture and destruction at the hand of Germans, quit being so asinine and facetious.

If you look at the goddamn lend lease tables it's possible for teh Red Army to field 680,000 trucks in 45 given that the AMERICANS PRODUCED OVER 400,000 and TRANSPORTED THEM TO RUSSIA.

I've posted sources, I've linked to the archives, I've linked to historians supporting my point of view and you STILL have absolutely nothing. Pathetic.

Now obviously I am not going to bother with rest of your shit wall of text post, everything that has to be said has been said by me ("And no you didn't", is seriously not going to prove otherwise), no amount of strawmanning and repetition on your part is going to change that, keep pretending that you still have any counter argument left as you seem to be good at fantasy building.


You've not cited ONE source and you accuse me of fantasy building and strawmanning? This cognitive dissonance is astounding.

I love how you completely ignore the Russian supremacism and systematic racism of the USSR though, it's incredibly hilarious.
#14658280
You literally said that everything had to be build from ground up after Barbarossa, start taking responsibility for your own shit.

So now what are you claiming that all 400,000 US Trucks were present in may 45 and none were destroyed in preceding years? If you really can't see the utter bankruptcy of your argument then you are beyond hopeless. In may 45 as I already posted LL trucks formed 32% of total red army trucks because you know outside of your fantasy, US trucks are not invincible. If we are to believe your nonsense then as I already said we will have to assume that no Soviet trucks were destroyed after Barbarossa for Red Army to be able to field that many trucks in may 45 (for may 45 total trucks = 680,000, Soviet war time production 200,000+, US LL 400,000+, almost equal to may 45 numbers ergo no Soviet trucks were destroyed after Barbarossa, quite a feat if true. ). So yup you are talking nonsense as usual and just mentioning Glantz here and there in your post is not helping you at all but keep trying, I think you still have some ludicrously funny things to post.

Plus yup you literally are fantasy building and strawmanning (as I actually have proven), so cry me a river but I will be pointing out the obvious (or else put an effort and stop attributing me things I haven't said.) plus in this thread I am not talking about racism carried out by anyone or any nation, so once again keep crying about these completely irrelevant things to this thread as if it can act as a replacement to your utter lack of any counter-argument.
#14658286
fuser wrote:You literally said that everything had to be build from ground up after Barbarossa, start taking responsibility for your own shit.


Because it had to? Are you seriously saying this?

What about "losing 20,000 tanks, over 16,000 aircraft, 2 million men killed, 3 million captured as POWS don't you understand about being "destroyed".

How about you start providing some evidence and stop going off bullshit?

Why can't you provide a SINGLE SOURCE.

I've asked you 6 times now for a source and you have NOTHING.


Do you realize how many army groups and divisions were completely obliterated? Do I have to link you a wikipedia article? What do you think happened to the trucks there? Are you INCAPABLE OF READING and understanding what majority of it means? If an entire DIVISION AND ARMY GROUP WAS ENCIRCLED, (like it was multiple times throughout Barbarossa) WHAT DO YOU THINK HAPPENED TO THE TRUCKS? Did Stalin fly down and evacuate each of the trucks on his golden wings? I can't believe I'm actually having a discussion about this with someone this dumb.

So now what are you claiming that all 400,000 US Trucks were present in may 45 and none were destroyed in preceding years?


Barbarossa Date 22 June – 5 December 1941

first protocol period from 1 October 1941 to 30 June 1942 (signed 7 October 1941),[30] these supplies were to be manufactured and delivered by the UK with US credit financing.
second protocol period from 1 July 1942 to 30 June 1943 (signed 6 October 1942)
third protocol period from 1 July 1943 to 30 June 1944 (signed 19 October 1943)
fourth protocol period from 1 July 1944, (signed 17 April 1945), formally ended 12 May 1945 but deliveries continued for the duration of the war with Japan (which the Soviet Union entered on the 8 August 1945) under the "Milepost" agreement until 2 September 1945 when Japan capitulated. On 20 September 1945 all Lend-Lease to the Soviet Union was terminated.



If you really can't see the utter bankruptcy of your argument then you are beyond hopeless. In may 45 as I already posted LL trucks formed 32% of total red army trucks because you know outside of your fantasy, US trucks are not invincible.


I want your source NOW. You are pulling figures out of your ass. SOURCE FOR US LL TRUCKS, SOURCE FOR TOTAL TRUCKS, SOURCE FOR RED ARMY PRODUCED TRUCKS. Now.

I have posted concrete figures of American trucks DELIVERED to the USSR.

If we are to believe your nonsense then as I already said we will have to assume that no Soviet trucks were destroyed after Barbarossa for Red Army to be able to field that many trucks in may 45.


The majority of Lend-Lease arrived after the ending of Barbarossa in the failure of Op.Typhoon, so yes, the majority of US trucks manage to arrive into a USSR where the rear echelon and rear area operations were secure because the Front stabilized. In english, this means the German advance halted and Russian formations army groups were not being encircled and cauldroned en-masse. Do you know enough about history to understand what I am saying now?

I'm going to drop ANOTHER source on your ignorant little head again

John Ellis, "World War II: Encyclopedia of Facts and Figures"

Total wartime production numbers for select weapons systems (Ellis)
Item US USSR
Tank/SPG 88,410 105,251
Artillery 257,390 516,648
MGs 2,679,840 1,477,400
Trucks 2,382,311 197,100
Planes (all types) 324,750 157,261
Fighters 99,950 63,087
Bombers 97,810 21,116



So yup you are talking nonsense as usual and just mentioning Glantz here and there in your post is not helping you at all but keep trying, I think you still have some ludicrously funny things to post.


Yeah, I mention academically respectable historians in my post and reference Soviet war archives, and you reference absolute shit. You are really pathetic in your attempt to hold onto a position you can't defend. Keep continuing, your illiteracy with regards to history is extremely amusing, here's a guy that doesn't know the Allies launched raids of over a 1000 bombers, here's a guy who thinks the Soviet trucks managed to magically escape the German cauldrons when the Red Army couldn't. Holy shit man, you should write a book on the magical powers of Russian trucks, it'd be a best seller!

Oh and since you can't do Mathematics

In may 45 as I already posted LL trucks formed 32% of total red army trucks


US production: 450,000~
Soviet production 198,000~

Apparently 450,000 is 32% of 650,000~

Your fucking maths is terrible, go back to primary school.
(US STATE DEPT. REPORT 41-45) on total amount of soft skinned vehicles delivered to the USSR(435,000* http://www.o5m6.de/Numbers_Foreign.html_)
#14658306


This is the last time I am responding to your stupid posts which once again is just filled with repetition while being completely and utterly unable to respond to simple questions. I have provided sources where necessary neither I have disputed 400,000 figure, so what are you babbling about again? Oh, right nothing its you repeating yourself once again and failing to post any counter-arguments at all. Btw the 400,000+ figure is for both Trucks and Jeeps, so is 200,000+ figure for USSR is for both Trucks and Jeep. Are you saying that you are pulling these figures out of your ass? And another info, just for you, out of all these LL trucks/jeeps 1/3 were assembled in USSR. Now, seriously stop panting and calm down for a second and try to read first. I am not disputing your numbers, read it aloud at least 10 times and then pay attention to my counter-arguments but I guess I am asking too much from you.

As per sources start with Soviet Economy during WW II by Voznesenskiy

Btw my maths is awesome, but your common sense is non existent, why don't you answer a simple question as I asked last time, do you really think that all LL trucks were present in may 45 and no truck were destroyed after Barbarossa because in your fantasy la la land US trucks are invincible or something? These 400,000 trucks just went marching from 1942-45 without even being scratched once?:lol:

This is exactly the kind of stupid shit people like you post in order to exaggerate the importance of LL (It was important, I agree but let's not ridiculously exaggerate it), another one of my favorite is rail-cars and locomotives where to anti-soviet hacks will cite only war time production and completely ignore the soviet pre war stocks which completely overshadows the LL deliveries.

Anyway good bye from me, keep enjoying living in your fantasy land and repeating yourself in order to pretend that you actually have any argument left at all, dasvidaniya.
#14659469
Okay wow, I must have read dates wrong on the History forum as I didn't think this would get as many replies.

Alright, to quickly touch on some points:

1. Soviet Man Power: By 1945, the soviet military wasn't exactly riding high. Their technology was not as advanced as the Americans and the USA had a lot less casualties and fatigue. Although nuclear weapons weren't plentiful, a dozen carefully planned strikes in late 45 or early 46 would have seriously screwed those numbers. You're talking initial casualties and then radiation fallout. I just don't see this as a big deal considering even if you give them 10 million soldiers, most of those are of the lesser quality and poorly armed. You're looking at machine guns and better aircraft mowing those guys down and then the bombs just finish the job. Frankly the way they looked in 45 you'd need a 10-1 advantage and even then you're downplaying the nuclear aspect.

2. USA unwilling to fight on: The Americans get their boots on the ground in Europe, summer of 44. You're telling me less than a year of fighting is going to drain public support? You forget the power of propaganda?

3. Yalta Conference: Who gives a shit if the U.K./USA reneged on Stalin? Remember how the Soviets split Poland effectively giving Hitler a free pass to start the whole goddamn thing? Again, the propaganda spin above would not have to be too far reaching to resonate with the populace.

4. Hatred for the Fascists: Sure, but you had a lot of unhappy civilians in those annexed Soviet properties. You wouldn't have too hard a time getting them to fight the commies if you explained to them their countries would be taken over by Soviet puppet governments.
#14727165
Patton was a interesting general, but relatively dumb/insane concerning politics. Churchill was similar and made similar comments ("We killed the wrong bear").
There was no way the USA would attack it's ally, the USSR. It was all about conquering Germany first and foremost, not ideology. Roosevelt & his administration were much more anti-German than they were anti-Soviet.
Of course the Germans knew this alliance to be "against nature" and not lasting, as did many American anti-communists since before the war, but this is another story.

PS: I think the human record is irrelevant here, since the Soviets committed just as many massacres & war crimes as the Germans did, if not more.

You're more like the white liberal MLK described,[…]

What is Fascism

Fascism is the sword and shield of Capitalism when[…]

Which assistance programs are you talking about e[…]

I have a good job. :lol: I guess all the for[…]