I replied to someone saying that the USSR defeated the Nazis saying that it was a group effort. Got into an argument and called a Nazi repeatedly because “I was mad that the USSR defeated the Nazis and hated them for it” which is ridiculous. This isn’t the first time that’s happened on Lemmy. What’s up with that?
the total USSR causalities were around 27 million, western allies casualties were a combined 1.7 million in all theaters.
calling it a ‘group effort’ does imply an equal contribution, which is what gets peoples hackles up.
What kind of a person reads about a huge number of dead humans and thinks “ah, a contribution to the war effort”. That explains so much, really.
honestly an incredible comment to make while the OP is talking about “The Soviet tendency to throw bodies at a problem”, just feels performative.
the point was that the eastern front was 70-80% of the german war effort and OP was replying to someone saying:
It also goes to show how the USSR needed the help and without it being a group effort the citizens of the USSR would have suffered even more.
i’m not going to deny that the USSR would have suffered more without lend-lease, but that’s true of any alliance member receiving material support.
the issue i see is that when people talk about this, 27 million to 1.7 million loss ratio gets passed through the narrative and emerges as an equal partnership. Yes the USSR got like 10 billion in material from the US, but the eastern front was 70-80% of the entire german war effort. The lend lease didn’t even arrive in significant amounts until after the battle for stalingrad.
the OOP comment that OP replied to was this, on the subject of how the US hasn’t won a war:
d-day could not have happened without the soviets turning the tide on their own. you can call it a group effort but that makes it sound like it was equal participation.
Girl, I’m not here to downplay the contributions of the USSR nor did I. I’m also not OOP. I know basic history. You already said that you object to calling it a group effort. What was the point of this comment?
I also never downplayed their contribution.
The Soviet tendency to throw bodies at a problem until it went away is largely to blame for their high casualties though. And without allied support they’d have lost even more.
Hey look, Hexbear is directly attacking you and calling you a Nazi for… checks notes saying Soviets helped with the war? https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/76613775
No, for repeating the “human wave” myth which is ahistorical nonsense.
guy is a specialist in selective comprehension. i can’t even be mad, he’s too pathetic
It’s throwing bodies at a problem when Russia defeats the Nazis, but it’s waves of brave men sacrificing themselves when it’s America defeating Japan.
Strange how that works isn’t it?
that is just dehumanizing. the front was extremely brutal and most of the fighting and dying happened there as a result.
stalingrad was where things turned in 1942-1943, lend lease was arriving but was not exactly significant until after 1943. soviet commanders did acknowledge the value of the lend lease, but the way it’s been spun since then is like someone showing up to a group project late, doing a fraction of the work and trying to claim the spotlight afterwards.
The USSR was good at that
Sure, if you ignore North Africa, Western Europe, and the Pacific Theatre.
This whole “the US showed up late and claimed victory” narrative is just as stupid as acting like the USSR didn’t do anything.
27 million to 1.7 million losses in all theaters. the eastern front was 70-80% of the entire german war effort. The lend lease didn’t even arrive in significant amounts until after the battle for stalingrad.
the original comment you replied to that started this off was this:
you have managed to really move the goalposts in your pity thread
The USSR having no concern for their own fighting men is not a plus towards this argument. Germany lost 3-4 million on that front. 3-4 million in comparison to 27 million shows that the Soviet strategy of throwing wave after wave of bodies was a bad strategy.
It was a good strategy. Because they, ya know, won the fucking war. Jesus christ, lmao.
the 27 million includes approximately 16-19 million civilians who were systematically exterminated or died under occupation.
blaming soviet military strategies for those deaths is historically illiterate. the nazi invasion was explicitly genocidal in intent, those civilians weren’t casualties of soviet tactics.
Okay? That still doesn’t mean that the Soviets won the war singlehandedly, which is the argument that was being made. Around 11 million Soviet soldiers and sailors were lost. The only excuse for that is strategy. Losing 11 million to 4 million is , frankly, awful and the only reason they didn’t lose completely was that they had the numbers.
soviet POWs were systematically murdered rather than held as prisoners. this was a war of extermination and qualitatively different from every other theater. very different from conventional warfare, a significant portion (on the order of 3+ million) of those ‘military’ deaths were just starving or working prisoners to death.
the person you replied to said:
the original claim was not that the soviets won single-handedly. they were responsible for taking on 70-80% of the german war effort.