of course America mogs Europe
russia doesnt mog shit either, sure they got more balls than europe but they're still like a less powerful version of china or whatever
less powerful in terms of what, bro? Of course China's economy is better (it's first in the world), but man...
cant even invade a 38 million population country with shit military in 2.5 years
mfw 2 years to not even come close to taking over ukraine
bro, Russia uses only 8% of its military and NATO supplies a lot of money and weapons there
the least dumb german
Bro russia is holding back trust me brooooo
and I wonder which army is stronger than the Russian one? The Americans fought in Afghanistan for 20 years and lost. In Vietnam, they generally capitulated in disgrace.
how long was russia in afghanistan in the 80s?
0 bro
i meant 80s
they were there 2 times less time than the United States, and at the same time, some Afghans supported Russia, unlike the United States
and both failed
in any case, the main goals of the USSR in Afghanistan were fulfilled, and the United States failed its main goal. This is despite the fact that the United States has been there 2 times longer. Now they and all of NATO are supplying Ukraine with a bunch of weapons and openly financing these Nazis, and the Ukronazis are losing anyway. At the same time, Russia does not use even 15% of its army
at what price tho? russia lost 14k men and 55k wounded in 10 years while murica lost 2.5k in 20 years
The president doesn’t run shit
The USSR fought more harshly and tenaciously, sometimes not really caring about its soldiers in order to achieve its goals. The United States and NATO, according to some estimates, took care of their soldiers, mostly holed up on bases.
meanwhile russia lost 9 mil and germany lost 1.5 mil soldiers
that’s what the general public sees
Ppl don’t realize Putin is fighting a shadow war on the inside against the Russian establishment. He’s got a lot on his plate rn the pushback he’s been getting internally is insane to read about however it seems like majority of Russian ppl are on hide side still. He has balls of pure steel
i know that he has several plans hes high iq
you underestimate the Russian losses and even more so the German ones. In any case, there were allies with Germany when the USSR fought alone with everyone. Of course, there was lend lease, but it was minimal (about 5% and had almost no effect on anything)
What makes you think that Putin had a 3-day plan? It's fucking American analyst Mark Milli who said such nonsense, not Putin
because they sent parashooters right at kiev etc
Lol at this historical revisionism
ALMOST LOST? JFL
so theyre purposefully not gaining ground and losing thousands of people?
Bro watch this vid I think u would like it. Lmk what u think. Not disagreeing with most of what ur saying btw, but watch this if u have the time and care to watch.
lend-lease supplies accounted for about 4% of the total military production of the USSR during the WW2, and these 4 percent were useless
The tactics of "human waves" have never been the tactics of the Red Army. This is confirmed in their memoirs by Manstein and Halder. They emphasized that the Russians outnumbered them, but never mentioned that the Red Army used this tactic during the attacks
Emperor Hirohito named the entry of the Red Army into the war as the main reason for the surrender
What are you talking about, what makes you think that Russia is losing thousands? Much more Ukrainian soldiers died, 5 times more than Russians
‚From October 1, 1941, to May 31, 1945, the United States delivered to the Soviet Union 427,284 trucks, 13,303 combat vehicles, 35,170 motorcycles, 2,328 ordnance service vehicles, 2,670,371 tons of petroleum products (gasoline and oil) or 57.8 percent of the aviation fuel including nearly 90 percent of high-octane fuel used,[36] 4,478,116 tons of foodstuffs (canned meats, sugar, flour, salt, etc.), 1,911 steam locomotives, 66 diesel locomotives, 9,920 flat cars, 1,000 dump cars, 120 tank cars, and 35 heavy machinery cars. Ordnance goods (ammunition, artillery shells, mines, assorted explosives) provided amounted to 53 percent of total domestic consumption.‘
youre actually correct
JFL at you fucking liar
nope, again nice revisionism
from unbiased institutions:
The amount of aid under the lend-lease for the USSR was quite small — only about 4% of the funds spent by the country on the war, and tanks and aircraft were supplied mainly of outdated models. As a rule, such assistance was untimely and ineffective, and most of the supplies did not reach the country at all. In addition, the bulk of this assistance came at a time when the USSR had already launched a counteroffensive. It is safe to say that lend-lease did not have any significant role in the course of the war. US lend-lease supplies to the USSR amounted to $10 billion, and the reverse lend-lease of the USSR to the USA amounted to $6.8 billion. It is worth saying rather that the USSR, despite all the difficulties, somehow managed to support its allies economically.
How did you know that the losses were 1 to 10?
www.pravmir.ru
you proved with this photo yourself that it was not Lend Lease that was 95% percent, but Soviet production, Lend Lease itself was only 5% in 1942
I didn't understand what you wanted to say with all this? What is the point
Where did you find this?
Why do you want to kill your Slavic brothers over a land dispute?The amount of aid under the lend-lease for the USSR was quite small — only about 4% of the funds spent by the country on the war, and tanks and aircraft were supplied mainly of outdated models. As a rule, such assistance was untimely and ineffective, and most of the supplies did not reach the country at all. In addition, the bulk of this assistance came at a time when the USSR had already launched a counteroffensive. It is safe to say that lend-lease did not have any significant role in the course of the war. US lend-lease supplies to the USSR amounted to $10 billion, and the reverse lend-lease of the USSR to the USA amounted to $6.8 billion. It is worth saying rather that the USSR, despite all the difficulties, somehow managed to support its allies economically.
And Lend Lease is not a help. This is a product sale.
They sold it to Germany in the same way.
How did you know that the losses were 1 to 10?
I don't understand where you got the number 1:10? You do realize that most of the Soviet casualties were civilians, not military?
13:10. For 13 killed, missing, wounded, captured Soviet soldiers, there were 10 German
Оценка соотношения потерь на Советско-германском и на Западном фронте
Не только в современных СМИ, но и в ряде исторических работ поддерживаются старые, или создаются новые мифы.
you proved with this photo yourself that it was not Lend Lease that was 95% percent, but Soviet production, Lend Lease itself was only 5% in 1942
I didn't understand what you wanted to say with all this? What is the point
you proved with your own words that Japan capitulated precisely after the USSR got involved
Where did you find this?
Reliable data is still difficult to access. Neither Russia nor Ukraine reports losses in a detailed and public form.
but according to Israeli intelligence, the loss ratio is 1:10 in favor of Russia, although it was already a year ago. Also, think about it yourself, there is no martial law and mobilization in Russia, and the Armed Forces of Ukraine are constantly mobilizing their people (obviously, the Ukronazis are constantly dying at the front)
We don't want to. They want to kill us, the Nazis In Ukraine have been in power since 2014 and they have been infringing on the rights of Russians at the legislative level in every possible way. And they staged a genocide
i just proved to you that lend lease was significant, but you still deny it due to your ultranationalistic narrative
the soviets started uneffective counteroffensives in 1940 already yes, but until 1942 germans still advanced further into russia and had the strategic advantage
it is not, and again, even stalin admitted to that
11.8 billion USD which is worth 180 billion today
it was payback for the lend lease of the US and they only provided minerals, which is far less strategically important than warmachines
YET THEY DIDNT EVEN PAY THAT MONEY BACK
this is altogether and including the end of the war, were germans fought without any equipment or trainingHow did you know that the losses were 1 to 10?
I don't understand where you got the number 1:10? You do realize that most of the Soviet casualties were civilians, not military?
13:10. For 13 killed, missing, wounded, captured Soviet soldiers, there were 10 German
Оценка соотношения потерь на Советско-германском и на Западном фронте
Не только в современных СМИ, но и в ряде исторических работ поддерживаются старые, или создаются новые мифы.
yet at the end of the war, regarding trucks it accounted for 33% of the whole stockpile
yes, but you claimed the main reason for surrender was the declaration of russia, but thats not true and the surrender speech states exactly that
its an average estimate of different institutions
source? even russian sources state that theyre losing more manpower than the ukranians
yes there is
again you provide russian propagandist media
chill bro.
)
yet u didnt adress any of my points, because you know im rightchill bro.
Your whole comment is just butthurt.
You're just trying to deny everything, saying muh muh russian source
i will deny this because its not truein any case, I do not know why you are so defending the United States in this, because they organized this war, actually sponsored Hitler and set him against the USSR (of course you will deny this, you yourself do not know how to search for information
yes the US benefitted from the war, but so did the USSR, considering they were the second superpower for 50 years
just because the propagandists on TV told you that there is an authoritarian regime in Russia does not mean that this is the truth
