Russia to West: D-Day wasnt decisive in ending WW2.

Discussion in 'Russia & Eastern Europe' started by zoom_copter66, Jun 10, 2019.

  1. Kathie Harine

    Kathie Harine Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2018
    Messages:
    130
    Likes Received:
    70
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Female
    You're both wrong. Stalin didn't have anything to do with it. The decision was purely military. Eisenhower didn't like Churchill's plan for tactical reasons. FDR was the heavy that had to tell Churchill: "No."
     
  2. Yazverg

    Yazverg Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2012
    Messages:
    3,400
    Likes Received:
    218
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Well. I have got some points to comment on:
    1. Every effort against the will of fascism and Hitler was helpful and must be respected IMHO. Being allies in that war gives the right to every country to ingerit their right for the victory over fascism. So I don't see any trouble in respect of those soldiers and marines who fought nazis in France or Italy or even in the Pacific ocean. My heritage as of USSR is not getting any weaker or smaller. It's actually getting even bigger!
    2. Attempts to divide the victory over fascism does not actually belong to the times when many countries were fighting against it. As I said every contribution was worthy. But these attempts happen from all the sides and they entirely belong to latter political struggle. In the times of cold war these attempts belong to competition between capitalist and communist parts of the world. At the moment these attempts belong to antirussian political gang, which needs an enemy to support their rotten regimes and to extend their doomed rule. So we must keep this and the first remark before we even start to talk history.
    3. Land-lease represents a transaction. The USA and USSR were sending their products to one another in order to economize their limited resources during the tough war. The american part was bigger related to the soviet, which is not about industrial might but about the situation when the soviet and not american army had to oppose and fight nazis. If it was different the soviet part of lend-lease would be bigger. And in its essense it doesn't make the sense of lend lease as just a transaction. So if you believe that lend-lease was the decisive input into the Victory i suggest you stop today at a supermarket, learn the address of every product you have been buying there and send the rights for your results of labour to these companies... Because you would never have survived and completed your project without their products. And forget about the money you paid for that... just the same way you are forgetting about the price paid by the USSR during and after the WW2. Russia finished to pay off this debt in the very end of the last century.
    4. Lend-lease was not about the USSR. The thing was that the UK was running off war machinery too rapidly and their was a huge risk that they would have to surrender without having any serious means of war. Which would increase Hitler's empire to most part of the globe. The USA decided to sell warships and planes to UK to keep it in the war taking the payback by colonial empire and turning former metropolia into somewhat a european dominion of the USA. This way the USA took military presence in Iceland in eschange for some warships... To think of that - it doesn't make that much sense if we speak of the fight with fascism, but it certainly turned the country from a worlds ill person (great depression was still near the USA) into a worlds' superpower.
    5. If we return to the share of industry we will see that the USSR manufactured about 95% of the war materials consumed by the Red Army... 5% was mainly lend-lease (not only, because the USSR traded and got help from other states, like Mongolia for instance and it was mongolian horses and mongolian winter clothing which helped the Red Army to counterattack from positions near Moscow). This sort of reveals the true nature of modern propaganda about Russia, russians and their 'ill-attitude'... Unless you really share the results of your labour (your house, cars, ... wife probably) with the grocery and gas stations you buy from. If so - I would regard it not as propaganda but as a kind of religion.
    6. There was no help from the US in 1941... In the most difficult time, when soviet industry had to rebase from the west to east and Red Army had to suck war materials from the country in huge quantities before the war plants reached its peak production. The way of thinking was quite understandable. The US management had all the rights to think that the USSR would be crushed by Hitler the same year and every delivery to Stalin would be actually received by Hitler. Only after the USSR appeared to be much stronger and russian people showed much more will to fight than all the european nations taken together and multiplied 10 times - only then the US started to trade with USSR under lend-lease program.
    7. Bombing of civilians in the cities... hardly makes any serious reason. It was just a PR. And the outcome was rather negative than positive. Soviet planes attacked Berlin in 1942 but soviet generals calculated that the damage done was not really worth of repeating it. It took western generals years to calculate the same. But even if we look back at western attempts to bomb ISIS in Syria we would recollect that it was useless. I mean we will need to understand the difference between a bomber of the first half of the past age and modern bomber to see the depth of how useless it was to bomb german cities without groundforce operations following right after bombing. Besides, IMHO ISIS was much weaker comparing to nazis and war industry of ISIS can hardly be compared to Nazy war machine. But of course, propaganda effect was huge and still remains so. If modern people understand how useless it is to destroy a truck or a squad with a half-million USD rocket (not even calculating the costs for sattelites service, utilization and salary fund) - the world would become much more safe. Unfortunately people still believe in propaganda that a super-doper bomber can win the war if it has the right colors and Tom Cruz-like guy inside.
    8. I can't respect the right for Victory over the nazism and fascism after those people who demonstrate their fascist-like behaviour and values. So IMHO the russians who tell that americans, europeans or germans are a weak nation - cannot view themselves as continuation of Victory of fascism. They themselves are a living example that some cowards are able to surrender to fascist ideas faster than Netherlands, Belgium or France did. But it also refers to you, because of your attitude towards russians. So you, by your own choice are the enemy of all those soviet (russians, ukrainians, belorussians, kazakhs, tatars etc), american, british, french, polish and many other soldiers who truely defeated fascism in their times. Their Victory gives me hope that you are also doomed as any other person on the path of Hitler. BTW Hitler didn't want anything bad for his nation... in the beginning. He wanted only all the best for his people. But as a result he became a curse and almost a murederer of his own nation. Luckily for germans he lost and they survived. I wish you nation (whatever it is) to see your complete capitulation the sooner the better. They deserve your loss.
     

Share This Page