Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Rachel is pointing out that the Soviets did defeat the Nazis [View all]malaise
(295,748 posts)7. Actually there were several ceremonies in Europe abd Britain today
including one were all the part leaders in England attended (despite the overnight licks).
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
87 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Karelians (NW RF) were tremendously sentimental re their Great Patriotic War
HereSince1628
May 2015
#3
They took the brunt of it but we helped a lot through lend lease. One thing that I've noticed
brewens
May 2015
#11
I have no reason to believe you are lying. I'm sure it is true that you have been told that. :)
brewens
May 2015
#13
From what I have read, I doubt it. I'm surprised it's not written up somewhere that he claimed it
brewens
May 2015
#15
He pretty much had to. What he wrote and spoke about in the 20s and 30s pretty
MillennialDem
May 2015
#31
I disagree - if Hitler didn't invade the Soviet Union, Germany probably would
MillennialDem
May 2015
#34
That might have helped, but maybe not. The rasputitsa (mud) is a huge problem in
MillennialDem
May 2015
#52
Well, technically speaking, Hitler's biggest blunder was bailing Mussolini's ass out
KingCharlemagne
May 2015
#46
As a kid, I learned a lot about the part the USA [layed before I even had a clue what
brewens
May 2015
#18
I agree, I think there was more coordination between Italy and Germany than between either of
davidpdx
May 2015
#21
I think it was potential industrial capacity at that time. The big automakers went into overdrive
freshwest
May 2015
#41
the russians practically had unlimited manpower, even if they had shortage of arms at times. they
dionysus
May 2015
#40
What battles are you referencing? At the decisive Battle of Stalingrad, Zhukov encircled an
KingCharlemagne
May 2015
#48
Ah, I got you. But it was no one-sided meat grinder, as the Wehrmacht fed almost
KingCharlemagne
May 2015
#54
Ah well, I'm no Clausewitz myself, so am relying on others' assessments. But I believe
KingCharlemagne
May 2015
#70
I find the opposite is often true. I bet if you polled people on the street at random most people
MillennialDem
May 2015
#29
It's not as though the US did nothing (also, please don't ignore the UK's efforts, which were
MillennialDem
May 2015
#39
The U.S., UK and western allies were dinking around down in North AFrica while the
KingCharlemagne
May 2015
#49
I apologize for my verbal sloppiness, as the figure of 26 million Soviet casualties refers to
KingCharlemagne
May 2015
#59
The importance of lend-lease lay less in tanks and guns than less glamorous equipment.
malthaussen
May 2015
#63
During Napoleon's time, Moscow was not the capital of Russia, St Petersburg was which he failed to
MillennialDem
May 2015
#69
Apologies on the Napoleon thing - like I said I see it written enough that I do
MillennialDem
May 2015
#74
They came in from one side while we came in from the other. They made it to Berlin before we did.
jwirr
May 2015
#17
Sides? Who cares about what side one came through..... they faced 2/3 or more of the German army at
MillennialDem
May 2015
#27
Uh no. December 5th, 1941 is the day Operation Typhoon stopped. I was not referencing Pearl Harbor.
MillennialDem
May 2015
#82
And for the poor people of Eastern Europe, one brutal occupation was replaced by another.
tritsofme
May 2015
#33
the trouble with history is that it is defined by the objectives of those who write it
dembotoz
May 2015
#64