Was just watching Jack Ryan Season 3 and seeing the display of force and their movements causes some interesting dissonance given what we know now.

    • Astroturfed@lemmy.world
      222·
      1 year ago

      This is such a popular misconception I really don’t understand. Russia was so entirely dependant on the US for their logistics in WW2 it’s shocking how little it’s talked about. They were supplied American food and trucks in mass. Without the help of American supplies Hitler would of beaten Russia. Then once the Western front was more of a threat the Russians were able to surge forward with their mass of bodies and utter disregard for casualties.

      The Russian army has always been a joke. Brutality and lack of regard for human life is their strength. Theyre like the big dumb fat kid who bullies people in school. You get in a real fight with em and it quickly becomes obvious they haven’t ever done cardio (logistics, supplies) and there’s very little muscle mass (technology) hiding behind the fat layer (overblown specs and lies about capabilities).

    • Apollo@sh.itjust.works
      194·
      1 year ago

      The USSR that was massively propped up and kept in the fight thanks to the absurd volume of war materiel being pumped in by Britain and America?

      A general disregard for numbers of casualties, an almost complete lack of maintenance capability for heavy vehicles, and unimaginative tactics relying primarily on overwhelming numbers and firepower might have ground down the resource starved Nazis, but it would have been a very different story against the Allies.

    • Anticorp
      158·
      1 year ago

      The Russians didn’t defeat the Nazis, they stopped their advance. While this was critical for the eventual defeat of the Nazis, it is not the same thing. The Nazis were defending against advances from Allied forces along 3 flanks, while stopped-dead against the 4th in Russia. The Russians also lost 1.5 million people in the battle for Lennongrad and were almost out of supplies. The wouldn’t budge because it was their absolute last stand. By the end of that battle Russian soldiers were reporting to the lines without weapons or boots, and picking up both from the guy in front of them when he was killed. It was a horrific nightmare of a situation. It was a critical victory against the Nazis, but not their ultimate defeat. The Nazis were defeated when the western forces advanced on Berlin and Hitler killed himself rather than be captured.

      • TaTTe@lemmy.world
        161·
        1 year ago

        I would like to make one correction. Berlin didn’t fall because the Western forces captured it, but it was in fact the Red Army that got there first. This of course doesn’t change the fact that the Soviets never would have managed it by themselves, but this is the reason why claiming “the Soviets defeated the Nazis” is technically true.

        • fidodo@lemm.ee
          63·
          1 year ago

          Getting there first means you get credit for winning the whole war?

          • TaTTe@lemmy.world
            82·
            1 year ago

            They were on the winning side, so they did win the whole war. But as I said, they didn’t do it alone nor would they ever have been able to win without all the help they received from everyone else fighting the Nazis at the same time. I don’t think current events should be a reason to see history differently. The Soviets were a powerful war machine during WWII and their contribution played a huge role in the outcome of that war.

        • Anticorp
          21·
          1 year ago

          Thanks for the correction. It’s crazy how many countries were required to defeat the Germans in WWII.