This comparison shows how Russia’s latest nuclear weapons dwarf America’s (and everyone else’s)

Discussion in 'Warfare / Military' started by Destroyer of illusions, Jul 21, 2018.

  1. Destroyer of illusions

    Destroyer of illusions Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2014
    Messages:
    9,555
    Likes Received:
    890
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You write nonsense.
    Combat casualties of the Red Army in the Second World War - 11.932.069 people.
    Fighting German losses - 8.725.600

    But the whole of Europe fought against the USSR except Germany.

    For example.

    Romania:
    The Romanian 3rd Army (Mining and Cavalry Corps) and the 4th Army (3 Infantry Corps), totaling about 220 thousand people, were intended for military operations against the USSR.

    Italy:
    The Italian Expeditionary Corps for the war against the USSR was created on July 10, 1941, consisting of one cavalry and two infantry divisions, with corps artillery and two air groups (reconnaissance and fighter). In total, there were 62 thousand soldiers and officers in the corps. There were - 220 guns, 60 machine-gun tankettes, aviation - 50 fighters and 20 reconnaissance aircraft.

    Finland:
    On June 30, 1941, Finnish troops (11 infantry divisions and 4 brigades, totaling about 150 thousand people) launched an offensive in the direction of Vyborg and Petrozavodsk.

    Hungary:
    On July 1, 1941, Hungary sent the Carpathian Group to the war against the USSR (5 brigades, totaling 40 thousand people), who fought as part of the German 17th army in Ukraine. In April 1942, the Hungarian 2nd was sent to war against the USSR army (about 200 thousand people).

    Slovakia:
    One division (consisting of 2 infantry regiments, artillery regiment, battalion of light tanks, numbering 8 thousand people) fought in Ukraine in 1941, in Kuban in 1942, and served as a guard in Crimea in 1943-1944. Another division (consisting of 2 infantry regiments and artillery regiment, 8 thousand people)

    Croatia, the Netherlands, Belgium, France, Sweden, Denmark, Spain, Norway .... fought against the USSR.

    I can’t say the losses of these countries right now, but they were also big. For example, there were more Frenchmen killed near Moscow than the French who fought against Hitler.

    Therefore, if we count the number of military killed, the losses are approximately equal. The enormous losses of the Russians are due to the fact that the Germans and their allies killed the civilian population of Russia.
    This is about how the Americans in Vietnam killed many civilians. Therefore, the loss of the Vietnamese was higher than the American losses. Same in Iraq or Afghanistan. Americans and their allies kill civilians.
     
  2. Destroyer of illusions

    Destroyer of illusions Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2014
    Messages:
    9,555
    Likes Received:
    890
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Tell me, do you think my comment "Your comment does not make sense," an insult or violation of forum rules? I ask this question because I received a warning for a similar comment. I ask this because I do not speak English and maybe I can not understand the rules of the forum.

    Now my answer. The United States and its allies in the years 1945-49 were powerless against the Red Army. It is a fact. No atomic bomb could change anything. These bombs did not matter even for Japan. (Japan signed a surrender only because the Russians destroyed the Kwantung army. All Japanese historians wrote about it) Therefore, if little Japan ignores atomic bombs, then big Russia spits on them even more. After 1949, Russia itself became a nuclear power.

    Russians can fight in any conditions. The US Army lost the war in Vietnam. At the same time, the Vietnamese army is much weaker than the American one. And the Vietnamese did not have the "Orange" and nuclear bombs.
     
  3. Questerr

    Questerr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Messages:
    59,135
    Likes Received:
    3,866
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Russians cannot fight without fuel and ammunition. The Allied strategy would have targeted Soviet logistic and transportation centers in Eastern Europe and cut the Soviet armies off from resupply. An army without supplies dies.
     
  4. Mushroom

    Mushroom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    8,912
    Likes Received:
    408
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Funny, but notice that every country you mention was run by a Fascist government, predominantly controlled by Germany.

    The French for example, they did not "fight against the USSR". The majority of "soldiers" in France during WWII never left France. When the country was occupied you had the GMR founded, which was used exclusively inside of France.

    However, you did have the 33rd Waffen Grenadier Division of the SS Charlemagne. And as it sounds, it was a German (not French) SS Regiment that was composed of French citizens. It started as the Legion of French Volunteers Against Bolshevism (LVF), and recruited POWs who were pro-Fascist. There were plans to create an entire Division out of it, but it was never even the size of a Regiment in numbers.

    Of the roughly 2,000 members this unit had, another 5,000 were pumped in by either ethnic French Germans or volunteers from other Western European volunteers. It was this 7,000 man strong force that met the Soviets in Eastern Germany.

    As part of their idea of "Brotherhood", the Germans tried to create as many SS units as they could. Netherlands, Croats, Norwegians, Finns, even Estonians and Cossaks had Waffen-SS "Divisions". One of the strangest was the "British Free Corps", made up of POWs from England and the Dominions. But only 54 ever joined this unit, never more than 27 at any one time.

    So yea, if you count a few thousand French and other people as being "The whole of Europe", right. How about stepping off of the propaganda and sticking to facts. Most of those who joined in fact were much more "Anti-Communist" than "Pro-Fascist".

    And wow, Finland had issues with the Soviets. No surprise, considering the Soviets had earlier tried to lop off a chunk of Finland in the Winter War. Then you wonder why so many found it easy to join forces opposing the Soviets.
     
  5. Destroyer of illusions

    Destroyer of illusions Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2014
    Messages:
    9,555
    Likes Received:
    890
    Trophy Points:
    113
    But why do you think that the United States can destroy Russian logistics centers? With the same success, you can assume that the Russians will destroy the logistics centers of the US Army.
    In addition, the Russians can fight without supplies. For example, small Garrison of the Brest Fortress fought with the much superior forces of the Germans in full surroundings and without supplies for more than a month. At the same time, the Germans were able to capture it only completely destroying the Russians. This is a fact, but not fiction. The second example is besieged Leningrad. A city with a population of one million people, not having full supplies, the Germans and their allies could not seize in full surroundings in spite of everything.
    The Russians died of hunger in the literal sense, but the strongest army in the world at that time, the German army, together with their allies, could not defeat the Russians.
    The siege of Leningrad lasted 872 days. Or almost two and a half years. No one is able to withstand this, except the Russians.
     
  6. Destroyer of illusions

    Destroyer of illusions Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2014
    Messages:
    9,555
    Likes Received:
    890
    Trophy Points:
    113
    [/QUOTE]
    What is not clear?

    Combat casualties of the Red Army in World War II -11.932.069 people.
    Combat casualties German - 8.725.600

    If you add representatives of other nationalities who fought against the USSR, then the death toll will be approximately equal. Therefore, your statement that the Russians have won only because of the number of Russians killed is a lie.

    For some reason you write about the French, but keep quiet about the Italians, Hungarians, Romanians. But they were full-fledged allies of Germany. And they fought with their troops under their flags.

    Here is a curious archival document-list of prisoners of war who surrendered to Soviet troops during the war. Recall that a prisoner of war is one who fights in uniform with a weapon in his hand.

    Germans-2 389 560,
    Hungarians-513767,
    Romania-187 370,
    Austrians-156 682,
    Czechs and Slovaks-69 977,
    Poles 60 280,
    Italians-48 957,
    French-23,136,
    Croats-21 822,
    Moldovans-14 129,
    Jews-10 173,
    Dutch-4 729,
    Finns - 2 377
    Belgians-2 010,
    Luxembourgers-1652,
    Danes-457,
    Spaniards-452,
    Roma-383,
    Norwegians-101,
    Swedes-72.

    During the war against the USSR, all of Europe fought. Three hundred and fifty million people, regardless of whether they fought with weapons in their hands or stood at the bench, producing weapons for the Wehrmacht, did one thing. During the Second World War, twenty thousand participants in the French resistance were killed. And two hundred thousand Frenchmen fought against the USSR. The Russians also captured sixty thousand Poles. Two million European volunteers fought for Hitler against the USSR.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2018
  7. Questerr

    Questerr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Messages:
    59,135
    Likes Received:
    3,866
    Trophy Points:
    113
    In 1945-49, the US would destroy Russian logistic centers with atomic bombs. The Russians had nothing comparable and no way to deliver them.
     
  8. tecoyah

    tecoyah Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    Messages:
    23,983
    Likes Received:
    5,870
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Golly....Russia has the bestest weapons that no one can use.
     
  9. Destroyer of illusions

    Destroyer of illusions Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2014
    Messages:
    9,555
    Likes Received:
    890
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The United States also could not deliver atomic bombs. In addition, one should not exaggerate the capabilities of atomic weapons of that time. For example, the United States and Britain bombed Dresden with conventional ammunition — the destruction and death of civilians was several times greater than after the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagosaki. Or see what happened in Stalengrad.
    Once again I am writing. No one in the world can destroy Russia. If there was at least a small opportunity to do this, those in the White House and the Pentagon would do it. In the US, power is in the hands of cynical and aggressive crazy. They lied to the whole world, showing a test tube with chalk to the UN only to start the war in Iraq. Therefore, only due to the fact that Russia has powerful weapons, there is still a peace in the world.
     
  10. Questerr

    Questerr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Messages:
    59,135
    Likes Received:
    3,866
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes we could deliver atomic bombs, as we showed in Japan. In fact, during that time period we had both the B-29 and B-35 to deliver atomic bombs. It’s not the civilian casualties that would have mattered. It would have been the destructions or roads and rail links along with factories and supply depots.

    You cut off the Russian field armies from logistics and they run out of supplies and become unable to fight within days. That was most definitely in the capacity of the United States in 1945-49.
     
  11. Destroyer of illusions

    Destroyer of illusions Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2014
    Messages:
    9,555
    Likes Received:
    890
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Again you write nonsense. Again. You could not deliver atomic bombs to Russia. There is a difference between the mythical possibility and the real possibility.
    Americans killed thousands of civilians in Japan. The United States is the only country in the world in the history of mankind who has used nuclear weapons against civilians. Also, the Americans did a massive genocide in Vietnam. With the use of chemical agents. You are certainly not the only ones who used chemical weapons against the peaceful population of a sovereign country, but you did it in massively. And now you are telling me about what kind of caring you will protect peaceful population . This is ridiculous.
     
  12. Questerr

    Questerr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Messages:
    59,135
    Likes Received:
    3,866
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The Soviet Union had no integrated air defense network in 1945-49. They had huge gaps in their radar network. B-29’s and B-35’s easily could have delivered atomic bombs to Russia.
     
  13. Mushroom

    Mushroom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    8,912
    Likes Received:
    408
    Trophy Points:
    83
    They are included. They were members of the German Army, to be specifically the Waffen-SS.

    So I am not sure what kind of game you are trying to play here. Apparently you seem to think every nation in Europe had millions of soldiers who fought the Soviets, not just the Germans. The Germans had handfuls from many nations, and they were all integrated into their own military.

    And yea, there you go with the numbers again. The Soviets took significantly more casualties than the Germans. Why? Because they largely sucked, and were not invincible. They simply had more bodies to use to swamp the enemy by throwing themselves against machine guns and artillery. The Germans used their men much more smartly, and had significantly lower casualties to show for it.

    Want to see another example? The Korean War. The North Korean and Chinese Army, using largely WWII Soviet tactics. A 1.5 to 1 advantage in personnel over those of their UN counterparts, (1.6 million opposed to 900k), and an over 2 to 1 rate of dead bodies (398k to 178k). That is not victory, that is slaughtering your people because you suck at anything beyond throwing bodies at a problem.

    Remember, in war the idea is not to give your life for your country, it is to get the other poor SOB to give their life for their country. Strutting around bragging about your own side having greater casualties shoes that you do not seem to grasp this very simple fact at all.
     
  14. Destroyer of illusions

    Destroyer of illusions Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2014
    Messages:
    9,555
    Likes Received:
    890
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You write nonsense. The Russians took Berlin. It is a fact. Vietnamese defeated the United States. This is also a fact. Your comment looks like a pathetic attempt to find an excuse. You will always lose in the war with Russia. The United States did not independently win a single war. (I don’t say Panama and Grenada. Because it’s more of a shame than a victory) Even the savages in Somalia, with sticks and spears, drove out the American fur seals. But you talk nonsense about military tactics and strategy. This can only cause laughter.
     
  15. Mushroom

    Mushroom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    8,912
    Likes Received:
    408
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Nobody is saying the Russians did not. I just state the truth that they took far more casualties than they needed to do in order to take it.

    And North Vietnam lost the war. That is why they sued for peace and got the Paris Peace Accords in 1973. Which they then broke in 1975, 2 years after the US left.

    So the lesson from Vietnam is that you can never trust Communists to keep their word.
     
  16. Toggle Almendro

    Toggle Almendro Active Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2016
    Messages:
    829
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Wrong. Both A-bombs were dropped on military targets.

    We did nothing of the sort.
     
  17. Toggle Almendro

    Toggle Almendro Active Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2016
    Messages:
    829
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Our nukes could easily wipe Leningrad and Moscow off the face of the earth.
     
  18. Destroyer of illusions

    Destroyer of illusions Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2014
    Messages:
    9,555
    Likes Received:
    890
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Not trust the Communists? :roflol::roflol::roflol:You tell better about the Tonkin incident. Or about "Saddam Hussein's chemical weapons".

    [​IMG]
     
  19. Destroyer of illusions

    Destroyer of illusions Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2014
    Messages:
    9,555
    Likes Received:
    890
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You can say anything, but it will not change the reality. The United States is the only country in the history of mankind who dropped an atomic bombs on civilians. And the United States massively used chemical weapons in Vietnam, Korea, Cambodia, Laos and other regions. This is an indisputable fact, the same as - the United States deliberately infected the citizens of Peru with syphilis and gonorrhea.
     
  20. Destroyer of illusions

    Destroyer of illusions Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2014
    Messages:
    9,555
    Likes Received:
    890
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Only in your dreams.
     

Share This Page