ahh, Stalin's 130th birthday

I never justified the crimes. Zealot explained them, I showed comparison to German crimes. Also, the major difference was it was policy, as ordered by the fuhrer, to commit these crimes. For the Soviets, it were spontaneous acts of disobedience - the biggest difference.

All the allies were crucial to the war ending- i already said that. I never said that they were the singular reason, and if I did, I take it back. All the allies were important, and should be immortalized or ever.
What I'm discussing is whether or not the USSR could've defeated Germany on its own. I think any of the allies could have done it, maybe some more than others - well except for France.

France is NEVER goin to live that down. They fought back AFTER, htough! I mean, they had just finished WWI, and in no way wanted to fight ANOTHER.

As for Ruissia, one of the only reasons Germany lost there was because of Hitler's own stupidity. He had begun to beleive his own propoganda, and began taking a more active role in strategy. Stalingrad, the point where Germany started getting their asses kicked, was tactically a useless city. They COULD have skipped it, but Hitler thought it important. They could have just surrounded the place and let it starve, like his generals were suggesting, but they didn't. Hell, t wasn;t even an important PATHWAY to defeating Ruissia. Ruissia, wanting to KEEP Stalingrad for the same reasons Hitler wanted it, pride, fought like madmen, using gurilla tactics and such, as well as rare but occasional mass attacks that resulted in extreme casualties. All this combined created a wall Germany couldn't breach.In addition, about this time the allies had invaded, and so the German forces were split between three fronts, east, west, and Africa. Since they wanted Stalingrad so badly, I conceed that Germany could NEVER have taken Ruissia, not with Hitler at the helm like that, since pretty much all of RUSSIA'S forces were focoused there, too. Germany kicked Russia's ASS up to that point.

Hitler attacked Stalingrad for the same reason the USSR went all the way to Berlin. Stalingrad was a very important city 1. because it was morally very important 2. it was home to many factories that produced many things for the army! If it was taken, Hitler would've converted these factories, and teh USSR would lose lots of production. Sooner or later, no matter which pathway Hitler took, he would've to defeat Stalingrad. Better to defeat it sooner, while he had so many forces. AS I repeat, the stats I have seen show 80% german forces on the eastern front. These were defeated not by Hitler- these were still a huge amount of forces on teh eastern front, that were defeated. Hitler ordered the troops into Stalingrad, and it would've been easy, had the soviets not be that crazily stubborn. Fighting was literally so crazy, it was a two week battle over a house.
The ass kicking up to that point can easily be explained. It was a surprise attack, a blitzkrieg attack! The Germans simply drove to Stalingrad meeting relatively little resistance until Stalingrad, which is when the forces got organized. The fighting was crazy, and Germany had the advantage - they were on top (its a valley, remember) they had more machinery and troops, and were more organized - after all, they organized the attack. Germany lost, and these losses continued until Berlin.

And as CKX said:
Well between 1941-1944 there was nearly fighting on the west front.

according to the guardian 40 million people soviets died and 3,7 million germands died according to Compton.

Quote :

1. because it was morally very important

But not tactically. In fact, it was a POOR tactical descision to try and take the city.

Quote :

2. it was home to many factories that produced many things for the army!

Kinda hard to produce when you're surrounded and are getting no suplpies.

Quote :

If it was taken, Hitler would've converted these factories, and teh USSR would lose lots of production.

But the factories were not vital, and once the city surrendered out of starvation, or the people died off because of that, then taking them would have been easy.

Quote :

Sooner or later, no matter which pathway Hitler took, he would've to defeat Stalingrad. Better to defeat it sooner, while he had so many forces

Due to many things, such as geography, as well as the Russian people's, or at least Stalin's love for the city, it would NOT have eben better. Hitlers generals suggested letting it wither on the vine after going around. They saw how difficult it would have been.

Quote :

AS I repeat, the stats I have seen show 80% german forces on the eastern front

And as I have said, once the other allies invaded this was not the case.

Quote :

Hitler ordered the troops into Stalingrad, and it would've been easy, had the soviets not be that crazily stubborn

Which was why his generals told him not to attack.

Quote :

relatively little resistance until Stalingrad, which is when the forces got organized.

And because of the emotional importance of the city, and NOT the imeadiate strategic value, could have EASILLY led to the Russians being defeated. Germany attacked the city despite having to actually go out of their way to invade it, as it was not on their original path. Then the Russians threw everything they had at them at that one city. From day one Hitler's generals wanted to avoid the city, because they KNEW that would hapen/.

Quote :

And as CKX said:
Well between 1941-1944 there was nearly fighting on the west front.

I actually don't even know WHAT he was saying here.

alexCCCP-RUS-54321 wrote:

This monument was built by the Soviets, however, recognizing all the counties who defeeated Hitler. No where else were all of them recognized with a monument, or even a plaque, to my knowledge.

ffs who gives a shit about some monument to the four nations??
there is a russian memorial in w-Berlin if that means something to you.

Quote :

What defines a turning point in a war? It is when the enemy begins losing. Before then, the German army was winning everywhere. Stalingrad was where the winning stopped. Cost for Victory means nothing. Victory is victory, and no matter the cost, there is nothing better than victory. AS large as the casualties were, it was the first time that a battle turned to be victory for the Allies. Also, 80% of German forces were focused on the eastern front.

shit man never heard of Pyrrhic victory?
Stalingrad was by no means where the Germans were first defeated, the Moscow offensive was the first victory. Cost for victory means EVERYTHING
the Germans would have won the battle of Britain if not for they're losses.

Quote :

Hitler realized the usefulness of the U-Boats, that is why he had so many in production and used them since the beginning of the war. He sunk many ships, and especially cargo ships to Britain. When the enigma code was broken, however, it was much easier to track these subs and destroyed them. The sea is never a priority,and he simply needed troops and tanks more than U-Boats.

lol wut? why are you even debating this?
http://www.uboat.net/technical/shipyards/
here during 1935-1940 the germans produced 108 subs during 1941 alone they produced 199 sub's. is that obvious enuf for you?.

Quote :

Hitler armed the Nation more than enough. The German army was the most prepared and the most armed, with millions of troops mobilized instantly and rolling fast against unprepared, shocked troops. Almost all the men able to fight did, and they fought well.

ehh you missed the point, I mean war production sucked ass compared to what they could have done.

Quote :

How do you know that army would've collapsed as a result? Disorganzied, as deemed by you, and you only. The German's attacked where they could, and they attacked fiercely and were defeated. The German's defeat was a collage of all teh allies, but what you are saying is the german defeat was a combanation of a few key factors, almost none of wich can be attributed to the Russians." which is entirely untrue.
[ /quote]

how do I know? Zukov fucking knew , the russians knew it, fuck they even moved a lot of government offices east. you also miss the point wich is that the germans DIDN'T attack where they should have and lost becuse of this.

Quote :

The ME-262 was mostly experimental- teh first jet plane. It was seriously unreliable, cost too much, and wasted too many resources. If more were produced, it would just have been worse. However, me-109 were produced in great numbers, and Hitler's Luftwaffe was a feared air force.

wut? the kill ratio of the me-262 was 4-1 and they produced 1,700 planes by comparison only 170 F-22's have ever been produced.

Enigma was the submarine plan code! As far as I know, they only deciphered sub plans, which were of little use to the Soviets.

No.6, I dont get what you mean.[/quote]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enigma_machine

ffs why?
just accept it the russians sucked ass, specifically german.
the tank was a fucking miracle it was a lot better than the germans, unfortunately only the Germans realized that immediately, so they made better tanks but too late.

Tyrong Kojy wrote:

Germany's production of heavy water would also not have been sabotaged, at least not to the same level, and they would have had the bomb.

ehh no they were on the wrong track they thought they would need sevral tons of uranium for their way.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technology_during_World_War_II#The_atomic_bomb

I can't be botherd to find a good source but I heard it on the history channel and in my books on WW2

They would have likely figured it out, had production not been sabotaged as it was.

Stalingrad was tactically the most important city. It was the center hub of the USSR, home to most of the factories that produced Soviet equipment, and was also morally very important. Taking it would almost ensure victory. The capture of Stalingrad was important to Hitler for two primary reasons. First, it was a major industrial city on the Volga River – a vital transport route between the Caspian Sea and northern Russia. As a result, the German capture of the city would effectively sever the transportation of resources and goods to the north. Second, its capture would secure the East flank of the German armies as they advanced into the oil-rich Caucasus region – with the strategic goal of cutting off fuel to Stalin's war machine. The fact that the city bore the name of the leader of the Soviet Union, Joseph Stalin, would make its capture an ideological and propaganda coup.
The Soviets realized this and, though they were under tremendous constraints of time and resources, ordered that anyone strong enough to hold a rifle be sent to defend the city. At this stage of the war, the Red Army was less capable of highly mobile operations than the German Army; however, the prospect of combat inside a large urban area, which would be dominated by hand-held small arms rather than armored and mechanized tactics, minimized the Red Army's disadvantages. (this is from wiki)

The attacking Soviet units under the command of Gen. Nikolay Vatutin consisted of three complete armies, the 1st Guards Army, 5th Tank Army, and 21st Army, including a total of 18 infantry divisions, eight tank brigades, two motorized brigades, six cavalry divisions and one anti-tank brigade. The preparations for the attack could be heard by the Romanians, who continued to push for reinforcements, only to be refused again. Thinly spread, outnumbered and poorly equipped, the Romanian Third Army, which held the northern flank of the German Sixth Army, was shattered. On 20 November a second Soviet offensive (two armies) was launched to the south of Stalingrad, against points held by the Romanian IV Corps. The Romanian forces, made up primarily of infantry, collapsed almost immediately. Soviet forces raced west in a pincer movement, and met two days later near the town of Kalach, sealing the ring around Stalingrad. unil then, teh Germans WERE not surrounded, and were getting furiously supllied. Only after thew were surrounded in the "kessel" did the winter set in, so dont say its hard to when you're surrounded, because they weren't until after the Stalingrad Offensive.

Following your logic, starting WW2 was not vital at all. Once it was started, capturing Stalingrad was the most important thing Hitler could've done.

The allies invaded after Stalingrad, after germany was already retreating. D-day commenced on Tuesday, 6 June 1944. While the battle of Stalingrad (from wiki) The battle took place between 17 July 1942 and 2 February 1943, and is often cited as one of the turning points of the war.[1] The battle was the bloodiest in the history of warfare, with combined casualties estimated at nearly two million. The battle involved more participants than any other, and was marked by brutality and disregard for military and civilian casualties by both sides. The German offensive to take Stalingrad, the battle inside the city and the Soviet counter-offensive—which eventually trapped and destroyed the German Sixth Army and other Axis forces around the city—was the first substantial German land defeat of World War II. The battle was arguably the most important turning point in not only the Eastern Front, but the War itself, as it marked the beginning of the Soviet counter-offensive that led to the surrender of Nazi Germany around two-and-a-half years later.

Can you show me evidence of his generals telling him not to attack Stalingrad specifically?

Simply enough, they didn't throw everything they had at the city - that would be seriously stupid. The people around the area who could fight did fight. However, much of teh Soviet army was still spread around teh Eastern Front. And Germany threw 80% of their forces their, plus Germany had the advantage.

From Day one Hitler's Generals were reluctant to invade at all, and general Paulaus, general responsible for Stalingrad, was certain Germans were going to win at Stalingrad, and so were German soldiers, as letters they sent home prove.

Wasn't CKX saying there was nearly no fighting that time?

it shows that the Soviets acknowledged the importance of all the nations.

i already said why Stalingrad was important victory.

War production was excellent, prove otherwise.

Enigma was mainly used by Submarines, which is why it was a British priority to decipher it because Britain, and Island, kept on having its supply roots cut off. The army didn't depend nearly as much, and even then it wasn't useful to the Soviets.

Devloping a nuclear bomb isn't like solving a puzzle. You don't just figure it out, its much more complicated. They weren't even close to the verge of
developing one.

War isn't just about numbers and weapons. Its about the kind of soldiers you have. Operation Barbarossa caught the soviets off guard, which explains how far the German's got. but then when they reached Stalingrad on the river Volga, by then the Soviets had managed to get organized and were ready to fight at all costs. (from wiki)The German offensive to capture Stalingrad proceeded rapidly in the late summer of 1942, supported by Luftwaffe bombing which reduced much of the city to rubble. However, the German offensive bogged down in house-to-house fighting ( the Soviets had less number and equipment, but using strategy and serious courage, they managed to win not because of Hitler's mistake); despite controlling over 90% of the city at times (showing just how smart Hitler's decision was, as they almost won), the Wehrmacht was unable to dislodge the last Soviet defenders, who clung tenaciously to the west bank of the Volga River as the weather turned rainy and cold. (The Germans were winning but from the very start, its the Fact that they decided to mess with the soviet TROOPS that they were defeated. Notice not tanks, as it was street fighting so the T-34, which metta claims was a miracle, had very little impact on the victory) In November 1942, the Red Army launched Operation Uranus, a two-pronged attack on the exposed flanks of the German Sixth Army in Stalingrad. (It was this strategy, as well as the troops courage and will to win, even when tehy were seriously losing, that led to Germany's defeat.)

You might know italian and then you'll get the answer.

Quote :

Stalingrad was tactically the most important city. It was the center hub of the USSR, home to most of the factories that produced Soviet equipment,

All useless if surrounded and cut off from suplies, something Hitler's general suggested.

Quote :

Taking it would almost ensure victory.

Indeed. Unofortunately Hitler was NOT a tactical genious, only his generals, whom he did not listen to at that point. They knew a direct attack was futile, or at least would devastate their armies, which at that point the allies had invaded.

Quote :

"kessel"

Russia makes gliterstim spice?

Quote :

Following your logic, starting WW2 was not vital at all.

What?

Quote :

Once it was started, capturing Stalingrad was the most important thing Hitler could've done.

Capturing Britain, as I said, would have been more important beforehand, and THEN Stalingrad would have made the Russians fall. Hitler's generals suggested against attacking Russia at all, and he didn't listen. They suggested bypassing Stalingrad, surrpounding it and letting it starve, which he did not listen to. They suggested bypassing it ENTIRELY, leaving it for later, which he ignored. I'm not saying the Russians did not fight hard, I'm saying Hitler was an idiot who could have taken the city much easier had he cut it off.

Quote :

The allies invaded after Stalingrad, after germany was already retreating. D-day commenced on Tuesday, 6 June 1944. While the battle of Stalingrad (from wiki) The battle took place between 17 July 1942 and 2 February 1943, and is often cited as one of the turning points of the war.[

June is before July, dude. Thus the Americans, British and Canadians had already invaded.

Quote :

The battle was the bloodiest in the history of warfare, with combined casualties estimated at nearly two million. The battle involved more participants than any other, and was marked by brutality and disregard for military and civilian casualties by both sides. The German offensive to take Stalingrad, the battle inside the city and the Soviet counter-offensive—which eventually trapped and destroyed the German Sixth Army and other Axis forces around the city—was the first substantial German land defeat of World War II. The battle was arguably the most important turning point in not only the Eastern Front, but the War itself, as it marked the beginning of the Soviet counter-offensive that led to the surrender of Nazi Germany around two-and-a-half years later.

All true, but all I've said is despite what you've been claiming up to recently, Russia was not fighting the entirety of the war against 80% of the forces. By YOUR logic, the other allies werent nesesarry. Though most would consider Normany to have been a substantial loss. Since despite the failure of the overall operation, after that Germany just got their asses HANDED to them. Do you really think Russia would hae suceeded ahd the allies not forced the split of German forces like they did? THat was the plan. Russia take one side, the other three the other. Split the forces so no one side has to face the brunt. 80% is just an assinine number, and you know it.

Quote :

Can you show me evidence of his generals telling him not to attack Stalingrad specifically?

The minutes of his meetings with them. What "I" would like is your source for the 80% numbers.

Quote :

From Day one Hitler's Generals were reluctant to invade at all,

So why did you ask me for evidence if you agree?

Quote :

Wasn't CKX saying there was nearly no fighting that time?

it shows that the Soviets acknowledged the importance of all the nations.

i already said why Stalingrad was important victory.

War production was excellent, prove otherwise.

Use the quote button, dude.

Quote :

Devloping a nuclear bomb isn't like solving a puzzle. You don't just figure it out, its much more complicated. They weren't even close to the verge of
developing one.

In fact they were. All reports state that despite te sabotage the allies inflicted thanks to their spies and raids, the Germans were months away from developing their first atomic weapon when the alies invaded. Russia found them, I believe. With that timeline, if Germany had focoused on Britain first, taking that entirely, thy would have easilly had the bomb once they invaded Russia. There would have been no battle of Stalingrad. There wouldn't have been a STALINGRAD.

Quote :

, but using strategy and serious courage

Difference between courage, which they DID gain after some time, and fear of being shot by your own side, which was at the beginning.

Quote :

showing just how smart Hitler's decision was, as they almost won

The initial progress of their forces DID in fact surprise the German generals, but they turned out to be right in that Stalin would fight harder for that ONE city than anything. And thus no, hitler's decision WASN'T right.

@Earlier argument about France

France was technically taken over by the Nazis during the 1940s, and didn't have an army to fight them with, just resistance.

I have to go Tyrong, but I'll try to answer some of the things quickly.

I told you, they weren't surrounded until AFTER the Stalingrad offensive. Before then, there was a year of fighting with the Germans constantly being supplied and supported. They were winning, controlling 90% of Stalingrad at times. They did excellently, and against almost any other army they would've won. The factories were on the edge, and fighting was literally just outside teh factory while inside people were still working. Oen great example is of the the converted Red October tractor factory. Ferrying supplies to teh soviets ovber the volga was already extremely difficult, so the troops were unsupplied. And as teh river froze, the troops were almost completely cutoff. It was a mircale the Germans were defeated, and what caused this miracle? tanks, equipment? no, it was courage and bravery.

Stalingrad was almost won, don't you get it!
It wasn't hitler's mistake, it was the best decision Hitler could've made for his own people, to win the war. Lots of germans would've died if germany decided to attack Britain's forces, and it could've easily just been liek Stalingrad. However, tehn germany would've had even less troops against USSR, or tehy would've just been dead by then (defeeated by GB). And Germany's forces weren't split bewteen West and EAST as I sad, it was 80% East, 20% West. Even if Germany did defeat GB, they would've had less than 80% of their forces to attack USSR.

Attacking Stalingrad wasn't vital. Starting WW2 wasnt vital either.

Bypassing to where? The Germans would've had to cross teh Volga, which crossing for teh SOviets was just terrible, as many were killed crossing.

D-day commenced on Tuesday, 6 June 1944. Stalingrad The battle took place between 17 July 1942 and 2 February 1943

Germany could have been defeated by USSR alone, however with MUCH greater losses which is why I must thank the other allies. It could've been one with 100% for sure, just greater losses. However. there was 80% aginst USSR, and those 80% were defeated.

While searching for links to prove to you 80% instead of just claiming it liek youre saying with his general's I cam upon this on Wikipedia: Unlike in the west, the Nazi racial policy encouraged excessive brutality against what it considered to be the "inferior people" of Slavic descent; most German advances were thus followed by mass executions. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ac/Bundesarchiv_Bild_101I-031-2436-03A%2C_Russland%2C_Hinrichtung_von_Partisanen.jpg

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II)
Anyways, initially 4.5 million troops invaded at the very start of Operation Barbarossa, followed by millions more over the years. ANd after Barborossa, millions were still fighting on the front line in teh East.

They were reluctanct to invade teh USSR, but not reluctant to invade Stalingrad specifically.

Umm, they were never on a breakthrough. German scientists were, but not the Nazis. German scientists invented the Atomic bomb, but in the US. Britain may have destroyed Germany. Also, Britain sabotaged teh Nazis according to you, so you cannot ensure tehyw oudl've had it by then.


Stalin's order was only activated later in the war, and my relatives in the war never feared Stalin or being shot if retreating. Where did you get the idea they feared this? CoD? Enemy at the Gates? My relatives fought that war, and so you speak for yourself when you talk about teh fear to be shot by your own. For them to might have performed their heroic exploits and
have smashed the formidable German Wehrmacht
simply out of fear of the Stalin's NKVD. Ridiculous!

Don't be mistaken: The Red Army soldiers esteemed and trusted their Supreme Commander-in-Chief, Marshal Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin, who resolutely led them forward to the Great Victory.

Alexander Werth, a Sunday Times war correspondent and BBC commentator wrote: "Stalin is modest and talks low, with few gestures. In public speeches he uses notes for data material only. He is not an exciting speaker, but makes each word count ... His greatest qualities are perseverance and cool judgement of men and things."

Said Fleet Admiral William D. Leahy, who met Stalin at the Teheran conference in 1943: "Most of us, before we met him, thought he was a bandit leader who had pushed himself to the top of his government. That impression was wrong. We knew at once that we were dealing with a highly intelligent man. . ."

Said President Franklin D. Roosevelt of the United States: "Altogether, Marshal Stalin is quite impressive, I'd say."

Said Prime Minister Winston S. Churchill of Great Britain: "Stalin left upon me an impression of deep, cool wisdom and absence of illusions," added that he had "a very captivating manner when he chooses . . . "

President of the United States Harry S. Truman noted in his diary: "I can deal with Stalin," who is "honest – but smart as hell." Others agreed, among them Eisenhower, Leahy, Harriman, and Byrnes.

To say the truth, the overwhelming majority of the Soviet people were not afraid of Stalin. Many loved and esteemed him, while some were in awe of him, true. All those false scary tales about the 'bloody maniac' and those mythical 'tens of millions of his innocent victims' – the fables deliberately concocted to demonize Stalin – were generated by the Cold War western propaganda, as well as by Nikita Khruschev's smear campaign against Stalin. We are going to discuss this topic in full detail later elsewhere on this website.

Meanwhile, I would like only to quote now one American (sic!) woman in this regard:

"Stalin was not just Russia's leader (or dictator), Stalin was Russia's Father. ... He was a leader when Russia needed him most; he was not the greatest battle strategist, but Stalin was what unified the country in order to survive the Great Patriotic War. Without Stalin, Russia today might only be those lands located in Siberia.
Stalin was a harsh Father to his people, but no matter how cold the History Channel paints this one man, they can never capture the pride the Russian people had in Stalin at the time. He held before the Russian people the Grail of the times and I think there are very few wars in the history of modern times when the citizens of a country were so unified and sacrificing in battle and war times.
"Russia came too close to losing herself in that war. Dissidence could not be afforded at that time"

Was it Stalin who fought, or teh soldiers? Do you think teh soldiers merely fouht so hard because they were told to? No! They fought because they saw as their hoem more important than anything else. Attacking anywhere welse wouldve been worse

Lots of germans would've died if germany decided to attack Britain's forces, and it could've easily just been liek Stalingrad.

Quote :

Considering it would have been his focous, I doubt it.

However, tehn germany would've had even less troops against USSR, or tehy would've just been dead by then (defeeated by GB).

Quote :

Consdering the constant bombardment of Britain at the time, and the fact that they would not have had to split their forces on all three fronts, I doubt that. And even if so, Russia was only part of Hitler's army.

Starting WW2 wasnt vital either.

Quote :

It was useful.

Attacking Stalingrad wasn't vital.

Quote :

All I've said is they could have done it beter. You know, by killing Hitler and letting his generals take charge instead.

Bypassing to where? The Germans would've had to cross teh Volga, which crossing for teh SOviets was just terrible, as many were killed crossing.

Quote :

They COULD have gone around.

D-day commenced on Tuesday, 6 June 1944. Stalingrad The battle took place between 17 July 1942 and 2 February 1943

Quote :

My bad, I misread the years.

Germany could have been defeated by USSR alone, however with MUCH greater losses which is why I must thank the other allies. It could've been one with 100% for sure, just greater losses. However. there was 80% aginst USSR, and those 80% were defeated.

Quote :

Yep, you're absolutely rright. We were useless. Russia is God, all hail the greatness that is Russia. They had the ultimate warriors, far braver and stronger and faster than any battle hardened American Marine or British pilot. Yes siree. Why, even now all the world is as ants compared to their greatness. The Germans weren't the master race. RUSSIA is! I mean, resistance in France, Africa, Britain, no, these were nothing. Why, it's not like Russia desperately needed the allies to invade Normandy so the ehat could be taken off them at last, lest they be permanently stopped. Nope.

While searching for links to prove to you 80%

Quote :

I don't know how much math you know, but three quarters is not 80%. And do you REALLY think the Russians could have continued on had Germany not been forced to split their forces, fighting on all three fronts?

Unlike in the west, the Nazi racial policy encouraged excessive brutality against what it considered to be the "inferior people" of Slavic descent; most German advances were thus followed by mass executions. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ac/Bundesarchiv_Bild_101I-031-2436-03A%2C_Russland%2C_Hinrichtung_von_Partisanen.jpg

Quote :

Hey, dickhead. How in the fuck did this adress ANYTHING, and how in the fuck did you think this appropriate at all? Hm? And what, praytell, does this have to do with the conversation?

Anyways, initially 4.5 million troops invaded at the very start of Operation Barbarossa, followed by millions more over the years. ANd after Barborossa, millions were still fighting on the front line in teh East.

Quote :

Yeah, and the west only brought in 100 people total. Because after all, Russia is God.

They were reluctanct to invade teh USSR, but not reluctant to invade Stalingrad specifically.

Quote :

I would find you the fucking minutes, but google doesn;t want to show me ANY minutes....

Umm, they were never on a breakthrough. German scientists were, but not the Nazis.

Quote :

Who. In. The. Fuck. Do. You. Think. I Was. Referring. To?

German scientists invented the Atomic bomb, but in the US.

Quote :

What?

Also, Britain sabotaged teh Nazis according to you, so you cannot ensure tehyw oudl've had it by then.

Quote :

You don;t understand what eliminating Britain entails, do you?

Stalin's order was only activated later in the war, and my relatives in the war never feared Stalin or being shot if retreating. Where did you get the idea they feared this? CoD? Enemy at the Gates? My relatives fought that war, and so you speak for yourself when you talk about teh fear to be shot by your own. For them to might have performed their heroic exploits and
have smashed the formidable German Wehrmacht
simply out of fear of the Stalin's NKVD. Ridiculous!

Quote :

You're right. I mean, your family were those super soldiers Russia had, weren;t they, the entirety of the Russian army. And, it;s not like Russia didn;t have a ton of propoganda that would have made the CIA blush, no siree. Yep. One small group of supersoldiers fought, and noone else. So you're right, there was no fear at all. I mean, there's not a chance they're embellishing for the grandkid, nope. I mean, grandad was a REAL hero. AND a supersoldier!

Don't be mistaken: The Red Army soldiers esteemed and trusted their Supreme Commander-in-Chief, Marshal Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin, who resolutely led them forward to the Great Victory.

Quote :

Wow.... Is propgandic brainwahsing genetic?

Alexander Werth, a Sunday Times war correspondent and BBC commentator wrote: "Stalin is modest and talks low, with few gestures. In public speeches he uses notes for data material only. He is not an exciting speaker, but makes each word count ... His greatest qualities are perseverance and cool judgement of men and things."

Quote :

Why do I care, and what does this have to do with anything? People said great things about Hitler's way of talking, too.

Said Fleet Admiral William D. Leahy, who met Stalin at the Teheran conference in 1943: "Most of us, before we met him, thought he was a bandit leader who had pushed himself to the top of his government. That impression was wrong. We knew at once that we were dealing with a highly intelligent man. . ."

Quote :

Are you, like, trying to convince me of Stalin's goodness, or something? Because you don't have to. I already know the Russians are the master race, with Stalin being The Immortal Lord Of All, one who truly cared for his people and would NEVER hurt them. (Wipes a tear from my eye.) He's not dead, you know. He's just waiting for the right time when he will rise and lead the worker to overthrow the evil capitalist once and for all!

To say the truth, the overwhelming majority of the Soviet people were not afraid of Stalin. Many loved and esteemed him, while some were in awe of him, true. All those false scary tales about the 'bloody maniac' and those mythical 'tens of millions of his innocent victims' – the fables deliberately concocted to demonize Stalin – were generated by the Cold War western propaganda, as well as by Nikita Khruschev's smear campaign against Stalin.

Quote :

Yep, you're absolutely right. The poor man. He never deserved any of it. He only wanted what was right. But fear not, for he shall rise again!

We are going to discuss this topic in full detail later elsewhere on this website.

Quote :

Again, don't need to. Master race and all that.

"Stalin was not just Russia's leader (or dictator), Stalin was Russia's Father. ... He was a leader when Russia needed him most; he was not the greatest battle strategist, but Stalin was what unified the country in order to survive the Great Patriotic War. Without Stalin, Russia today might only be those lands located in Siberia.
Stalin was a harsh Father to his people, but no matter how cold the History Channel paints this one man, they can never capture the pride the Russian people had in Stalin at the time. He held before the Russian people the Grail of the times and I think there are very few wars in the history of modern times when the citizens of a country were so unified and sacrificing in battle and war times.
"Russia came too close to losing herself in that war. Dissidence could not be afforded at that time"
[quote]Wow, amasing! This so isn't a clear sign of propoganda at all! I eman, he's a bloody saint! A harsh man, yes, stern, but good!



What the hell? Oh fuck it....

"Hunger and ruin under the mortars
like steel Stalingrad resists
streets paved with blood
a woman of granite laughs
above a thousand barricades

On its icy road swastika knows
that from now on will find
Stalingrad in every city

The band makes dance officers in cafès
winter sets frost in the bones
but inside the prisons the air burns
as the singing chorus of the Red Army

The radio in the dark and seven workers
seven glasses that toast to Lenin
and Stalingrad comes in the farm and barn
hat flies and man smiles loading his gun

On its icy road swastika knows
that from now on will find
Stalingrad in every city"
I found the text for you.

Edit also found the italian:
Fame e macerie sotto i mortai
Come l'acciaio resiste la citta'
Strade di Stalingrado, di sangue siete lastricate;
ride una donna di granito su mille barricate.
Sulla sua strada gelata la croce uncinata lo sa
D'ora in poi trovera' Stalingrado in ogni citta'.

L'orchestra fa ballare gli ufficiali nei caffe',
l'inverno mette il gelo nelle ossa,
ma dentro le prigioni l'aria brucia come se
cantasse il coro dell'Armata Rossa.

La radio al buio e sette operai,
sette bicchieri che brindano a Lenin
e Stalingrado arriva nella cascina e nel fienile,
vola un berretto, un uomo ride e prepara il suo fucile.
Sulla sua strada gelata la croce uncinata lo sa
D'ora in poi trovera' Stalingrado in ogni citta'

The fuck, i cant even take you seriously Tyrong.

You can doubt anything, doesn't make it false. You're reallu unerestimating teh GB.


How was it useful?

There were a few attempts to kill Hitler. Obviously, none succeeded.

gone around the volga? Do you know how difficult taht would've been? There were on the path to Stalingrad (volgagrad), and to turn around, go North and stuff - a seriosuly bad tactical decision. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/76/Volgarivermap.png

Still a majority of Hitler's forces were on the EAst Front, more than any other Front. Look, am I saying the other Allies couldn't of defeated Hitler? No, i'm saying they could've. But the thing is, WW2, teh USSR was the biggest contribution, and they didn't fight out of fear because of being shot by their own troops, but to defeat the fascists. the Soviets weren't better because they were Soviet, but because of their situation and mentality. And seriously, you know whats really pissing me off? Why teh fuck do you keep on saying Russians when it was the Soviets? Many mongolians, Khaszakistanis, and otehr Soviet Republics all fought for teh USSr. Wtf is wrong you? You sound like one of those losers who learnt all tehy know about WW2 from CoD and some hollywood movies.

I told you, while I was looking, I cam upon that. Just interesting just to share with you. I really liked you're reaction. It gave me utmost respect towards you.

You didn't live in teh USSr, you didn'tfight as a soviet troop or kow anybody who did. Out of all teh otehr Allies, I respectt Britain teh most because they were really important in teh war, especilally for teh Soviets, supplying soem tanks and ammunition.

heres pretty much what you said: the USSr couldn;t of won teh war without the other allies, I do not acknowledge teh increased brutality towards teh slavics, and I knew that it was hitler's decision to attack Stalingrad (which is teh best decision Hitler could've made for teh Nazis) that lost the war. Not any of teh 23 million killed soldiers. The generals told him to not attack Stalingrad specifically, not the USSR, just Stalingrad. Anywhere else would've been much easier, considering other places wasn't on teh path and nowhere as important, although more troops were stationed at these other places. Teh Soviets feared their own leader more than teh German's; I know, I was there.

Well infact, The USSR could;ve won the war witrhout the other allies, just many more casualties. I'm also sure Britain could've. Its just that the USSR made teh biggest contribution in men and important battles. Stalingrad was Hitler's best choice. They were already heading for it, going around teh Volga would've been worse, or anywhere else for that matter. Hitler's increased brutality is a myth, and in knew can explain the increased courage and wanting to defeat teh Nazis.

German scientists living In America made the bomb. Not Nazi German scientists.

Sorry for jumping around and bad spelling, no time.

Just remember, it was not because teh Soviets were Soviet that was so important, it was because of tehir situation and how they reacted. I'm sure Britain could've done teh same, and then I'd prolly be defending Britain right now, But then again no one dislikes Britain, only teh USSR.

Quote :

GB.

What does this even mean? At first I thought it was Great Britain, but the word usage here makes me think otherwise....

Quote :

How was it useful?

Quote box man, quote box.

Quote :

There were a few attempts to kill Hitler. Obviously, none succeeded.

And obviously you don't see that it was a half sarcastic discription os something that they might have done to suceed possibly in and alternate universe.

Quote :

a seriosuly bad tactical decision.

Not if they did it correctly. Cross the river in the heavilly defended city, or cross it elsewhere. Yeah. Bad decision.

Quote :

But the thing is, WW2, teh USSR was the biggest contribution,

That's not only insulting, but bullshit and you know it. The Russians would have run out of steam and started getting their asses handed t them, AGAIN, had America, Britain, and Canada not taken the heat off them. Africa, too. That was the main goal of the European invasion, for both sides of the pincer to take equal ammounts of heat,a nd the Russians were already starting to loose steam when they reached Germany proper, WITH the west's help.

Quote :

Why teh fuck do you keep on saying Russians when it was the Soviets? Many mongolians, Khaszakistanis, and otehr Soviet Republics all fought for teh USSr. Wtf is wrong you? You sound like one of those losers who learnt all tehy know about WW2 from CoD and some hollywood movies.

And you're a nitpicking cunt. No SHIT it was others, but generally one simply says Rssian when referring to he entire side who fought.

Quote :

I really liked you're reaction. It gave me utmost respect towards you.

If you're referring to the picture, it made ME want to block your sick ass. In fact I think it would have, had either Kenzu or Zeal been here.

Quote :

You didn't live in teh USSr, you didn'tfight as a soviet troop

Unless you're a vampire in the body of a 12 year old, neither did you.

Quote :

the USSr couldn;t of won teh war without the other allies

Indeed.

Quote :

(which is teh best decision Hitler could've made for teh Nazis)

Oh yes. it was a good descion for the Nazis. Very. You know what would have constituted a good decsion? WINNING.

Quote :

Not any of teh 23 million killed soldiers.

What?

Quote :

Hitler's increased brutality is a myth,

Wern't you the one who tried to justify Russian brutality to the Germans BECAUSE of this?

Quote :

German scientists living In America made the bomb. Not Nazi German scientists.

Yes, because the Germans had no scientis working on their own version. none at all.

Quote :

Sorry for jumping around and bad spelling, no time.

You've been jumping? I can;t tell. QUOTE.

Quote :

and then I'd prolly be defending Britain right now

I bet.

alexCCCP-RUS-54321 wrote:

Why teh fuck do you keep on saying Russians when it was the Soviets? Many mongolians, Khaszakistanis, and otehr Soviet Republics all fought for teh USSr. Wtf is wrong you? You sound like one of those losers who learnt all tehy know about WW2 from CoD and some hollywood movies.

Dude, what the fuck is wrong with you Alex?
Are you upset or something, I mean shit you got mad over THAT?
WHEN talking about the russians IN a WW2 discussion it usually means the Soviets, DURRR.
And then you say things like "Your one of those losers who learned all their history from holywood films and CoD", that's just a insult man, and if Tyrong had learned from that(which he obviously did not) then he wouldnt reply on your ass every single time, wtf is wrong with you? Chill the F down, kthxbai.

CKX, I said he was acting liek oen of those- that's hat I meant. And calling Soviets Russian's is seriously incorrect. Why don't I just call Canadians British?

Replies mostly consist of what, tahts not right, and teh exact oppiste of what I say.

Yea Gb is great Britain.
How was Starting WW2 useful.

Cross elsewhere. You know, maybe just turn around, ruin the whole Blitzkreig, let teh Soviets reorganize, and then get slaughtered. Crossing it elsewhere would've slowed down teh Blitzkreig, and would've just been liek lining up to be slaughtered while crossing.

What don't you understand? The otehr allies werent neccessary for victory, neitehr were teh Soviets!!! Its not liek WW2 couldnt;ve been won without them, but because theyw ere in it and sacrificed 23 million, they were teh greatest contribution! And Britain too, cuz Britain actually did help rather than just joining in 1944, liek somebody else. Teh French partisans were also very brave, as partisans were to be executed.

Sorry my dad who is living in montreal is calling me on skype, so i cant finish.
but rememeber, I'm a jewish Christian Mongolian German Cnadian Ukranian Russian. I'm more Israeli and Ukranian then Russian. In fact, Ive been to Rusia for one day. ANd in fact, no one taught me to liek Stalin, no one taught me Russia is so awesome, etc- its all my choice. My parents arent even Russian, tehy're ukranian, so If you think I'm some kind of patriot, technicly im not even that Russian.

Quote :

Why don't I just call Canadians British?

Before Vimmy Ridge, it's actually not far from the truth, and in fact our army WAS a member of britain's. But what you were doing is be a nitpicking cunt, since it;s obvious I meant everyone in the USSR. It's reflex to type russia. Why? Because EVERYONE says russia when referring to the eastern front.

Quote :

How was Starting WW2 useful.

Resources, kill the Kikes, kill the homos, kill the niggers, kill the (insert racist term for gypsy here), land gain. Starting the war was VERY useful for Germany.

Quote :

Crossing it elsewhere would've slowed down teh Blitzkreig, and would've just been liek lining up to be slaughtered while crossing.

Yes, ebcause crossing the river in the easilly defended CITY is a better idea, especialy with the blitz momentum you have going. Yep.

Quote :

cuz Britain actually did help rather than just joining in 1944, liek somebody else.

I'll just bet that Russia could have beaten both Germany AND Japan, had America not gotten involved They stayed out. Why? They weren;t in immeatite danger. A douche move, sure.

Quote :

but rememeber, I'm a jewish Christian Mongolian German Cnadian Ukranian Russian. I'm more Israeli and Ukranian then Russian. In fact, Ive been to Rusia for one day. ANd in fact, no one taught me to liek Stalin, no one taught me Russia is so awesome, etc- its all my choice. My parents arent even Russian, tehy're ukranian, so If you think I'm some kind of patriot, technicly im not even that Russian.

Whoopie.

Quote :

they were teh greatest contribution!

So they got 23 million killed. Yeah, not something to be proud of. "We sucked so hard we got more o our soldiers killed than anyone!" I'm not saying they didn;t do much, nor fought well, 'm saying that there is no chance they would have won without the others. Again, they were already runnign oput of steam by d-day. It's not likely they ewould have been wiped out. Sheer numbers. FOrget HOW they fought, by sheer numbers the Russians could not have lost as a nation. However they would not have beaten Germany. When the allies met to plan the european invasion, on of Stalin's main concerns was taking the heat, desperately, off his own forces.

Alex here's a hint, use quote's.

Tyrong wrote:

We sucked so hard we got more o our soldiers killed than anyone!

Lol.

It's a well known statistic that over 87% of all German soldiers were killed by me. The Inglorious bastards were based on me. I wanted to go and invade the Soviet Union but my jeep did a barrel roll and landed in a ditch, and I was stranded in Germany until 1969 where I hosted a little music festival called "Woodstock". After this I started working on a time traveling steam boat on the Mississippi. Then in the early 1990's I flew the steam boat in to my mom's Uterus and was born.

TK wrote:

Even though teh Candians have gained independance from britain, it is still proper to call them British, as at one point they were. Just liek the Soviet republics. They have gained indpendance. But they're still Russia. and its okay taht they never russian countires, or even under teh russian flag. USSR= Union of Soviet Socialist Republics is misleading. They arent republics. They're Russia.

[quote= "im original my signature is from a book but i put my name on it"] killing homos cuz hitler was pissed useful very much for nazis was. it got 5 million nazis killed. but they had to do it. killing people is useful for people.[/quote]

avatar is very nice game wrote:

actually trying to win teh war was a bad decision. tehy should've truned around and got slaughtered and accomplish nothing.

teh japense didng fight teh soviets during ww2 wrote:

im not going to acknowledge the battle of Khalkin-Gol.

i hate russians wrote:

im so cool

i dont understand one front was harder than teh other wrote:

why didnt any otehr ally have so many casualties? well its not like had the advantage of a surprise attakc, a disorganized army, or more troops than on any other front. and yea, i dont care that millions died so im not dead today.

Quote :

"Woodstock".

I thought that was in New York? Seriously, WHERE did this damn concert take place?

As for Alex... I have no idea what the hell you're doing.

Alex just reply to Tyrong's reply to you, dont be a arse.

And battle of Khalkin-Gol was before Japan even joined WW2.
But the USSR did declare war on Japan in 1945. And actually had a battle, wiki link here.