Did the Soviets help the west in any way in WW2?

[Canell]

He was intentionally lowering the population of Russia.

Got any proof of that?

 

[apdst]

So? How does this cancel what I wrote? :shrug:

You make it sound like Russia came to the rescue.

 

[The German]

Did the Soviets help the west in any way in WW2?

Yes, they had the eastern front, and drew a huge percentage of Axis resources away from the west, and that is in no way insignificant. But what about other areas?

Intelligence? Arms & weapons? Anything?

In the Stalin biography that I read it says that Stalin had a shift of opinion during 1943, he became convinced that the nazis couldnt win and during this mid to end phase of the war he was less interested in helping the allies than he was in gaining as much as possible from this war in support of his empire by throwing everything he had into marching west.

Stalin would have created a communist puppet in France if the allies would have let him get that far, and I the allies were aware of that (as is proven by documents writen during meetings between Churchill and Stalin).

 

[LaughAtTheWorld]

You make it sound like Russia came to the rescue.

Without the Soviets the Allies would have still won (assuming that the US would have gotten involved which was undoubtedly highly likely) but with far greater losses of lives, economic loss, and time. The Soviets made incomparable contributions and even the rabid anti-communist cannot deny that.

 

[LaughAtTheWorld]

You don't seem to understand.

Stalin intentionally and unnecessarily sent millions to their death in pointless human waves. He was intentionally lowering the population of Russia.

Do you get it now? Do you understand why your apologism is disgusting?

Stalin certainly made unnecessary and incomprehensible operational mistakes (the Second Battle of Kharkiv and the 1942 spring counteroffensives) but Stalin certainly didn't intentionally send millions into their deaths. Your theory is so far, new to WWII historiography.
P.S: Stalin at least had the sense and desperation to realize that he has to leave the military to its generals. Thus he mostly kept his hands of military matters. Hitler was the exact opposite-he kept on making mistakes till the very end.

 

[ecofarm]

Stalin certainly made unnecessary and incomprehensible operational mistakes (the Second Battle of Kharkiv and the 1942 spring counteroffensives) but Stalin certainly didn't intentionally send millions into their deaths. Your theory is so far, new to WWII historiography.

Book Review from WashTimes:

Ample evidence exists that Stalin considered Red Army soldiers expendable fodder throughout the war, and especially during the early months when the Germans seemed bound for victory. To enforce the “human wave” tactic, SMERSH officers carried with them printed forms authorizing executions of any soldier or officer who seemed to flinch in combat.

A Red Army survivor described the battlefield reality: “An order comes from above: ‘You must seize a certain height.’ The regiment storms it week after week, each day losing a large number of men. The replacements for casualties keep coming without interruption; there is no shortage of men.”

Someone finally declares, “Stop wasting the men. There is a concrete enforced pillbox on the top! And we have only the 76-mm cannon to destroy it.” Whereupon a SMERSH officer appears, scrawls the objector’s name on the printed form, and orders, “Shoot him in front of formation!”

Human waves were unnecessary and enforced brutally, without the slightest concern for deaths.

P.S: Stalin at least had the sense and desperation to realize that he has to leave the military to its generals. Thus he mostly kept his hands of military matters. Hitler was the exact opposite-he kept on making mistakes till the very end.

Same source:

Some 47 Red Army generals arrested by military counterintelligence during the war were either executed or died in prison. Military tribunals sentenced 417,000 servicemen who were investigated by counterintelligence; 217,000 of them were shot...

Source:
BOOK REVIEW: 'SMERSH: Stalin's Secret Weapon' - Washington Times



Now you wanna tell me how those 20m were necessary, the only option? BS. A large portion of that 20m is NOT a contribution to the war effort but victims of Stalin's insanity and rage.

 

[apdst]

Without the Soviets the Allies would have still won (assuming that the US would have gotten involved which was undoubtedly highly likely) but with far greater losses of lives, economic loss, and time. The Soviets made incomparable contributions and even the rabid anti-communist cannot deny that.

The Allies would have gotten their asses handed to them without Soviet entry into the war; an involuntary entrance.

"Contribution" suggests that the Soviets willingly joined the Allied war effort and added something positive to the war. Except for engaging three German army groups, armies from Romania, Bulgaria and Hungary, the Soviets neither volunteered their help, nor made a positive contribution.

Yeah, I know, "but...the T-34, blah, blah, blah", but the fact is that Stalin would have gladly sat the war out and wasn't making ANY preperations to get involved. The Red Army probably murdered more innocents than Hitler did.

 

[apdst]

Stalin certainly made unnecessary and incomprehensible operational mistakes (the Second Battle of Kharkiv and the 1942 spring counteroffensives) but Stalin certainly didn't intentionally send millions into their deaths. Your theory is so far, new to WWII historiography.
P.S: Stalin at least had the sense and desperation to realize that he has to leave the military to its generals. Thus he mostly kept his hands of military matters. Hitler was the exact opposite-he kept on making mistakes till the very end.

Stalin sent men into battle with no weapons. It was Leningrad, I think, where Cruschev sent men into the battle line with one rifle per two men.

 

[blackjack50]

The Allies would have gotten their asses handed to them without Soviet entry into the war; an involuntary entrance.

"Contribution" suggests that the Soviets willingly joined the Allied war effort and added something positive to the war. Except for engaging three German army groups, armies from Romania, Bulgaria and Hungary, the Soviets neither volunteered their help, nor made a positive contribution.

Yeah, I know, "but...the T-34, blah, blah, blah", but the fact is that Stalin would have gladly sat the war out and wasn't making ANY preperations to get involved. The Red Army probably murdered more innocents than Hitler did.

The west could have won without the USSR. It just wouldn't have been a total victory. It would have been similar to WW1. A war of attrition that would have resulted in a German surrender over lack of basic supplies. The allies would have crippled the Germans with air and naval warfare.

That doesn't take away that the Soviets did in fact expedite the war and provide the cannon fodder necessary to stop German advances.

 

[apdst]

The west could have won without the USSR. It just wouldn't have been a total victory. It would have been similar to WW1. A war of attrition that would have resulted in a German surrender over lack of basic supplies. The allies would have crippled the Germans with air and naval warfare.

That doesn't take away that the Soviets did in fact expedite the war and provide the cannon fodder necessary to stop German advances.

The Germans would have sealed the continent. It would have been over after the Allies failed gain a foothold.

 

[USViking]

Yes, well, the West did not have a homicidal maniac employing unnecessary human waves.

Over half of all USSR fatalities were civilian. Therefore, even if the USSR had zero battle deaths
it would still have lost several times as many people was the West.

Also, human wave tactics were definitely employed, but I am not sure breakthroughs could have
been accomplished any other way against a skilled enemy manning prepared defenses. That was
the problem both sides faced on the WW1 Western Front, and the only solution necessarily involves
frontal assault by massed troops.

 

[USViking]

...Now you wanna tell me how those 20m were necessary, the only option? BS. A large portion of that 20m is NOT a contribution to the war effort but victims of Stalin's insanity and rage.

ANY tactic tying down and killing Germans was a contribution to the war effort.

 

[ecofarm]

ANY tactic tying down and killing Germans was a contribution to the war effort.

Sending perhaps millions to enemy slaughter in hopeless waves is not a war effort, it's population control for the coming winter. He murdered 47 generals and 200k others in the process.

 

[blackjack50]

The Germans would have sealed the continent. It would have been over after the Allies failed gain a foothold.

Occupations don't last. Especially in conquered lands. We would have bombed the bejesus out of them. Eventually Italy...the soft under belly...would have fallen. The effort would be focused on the foothold, and United States economics would have pretty much crippled their resolve. Consider that we essentially had an economy tooled up to defeat Germany and Japan.

Now. Again. To clarify. I am not stating that it would be a total victory. It would have resembled the First World War and Germany would have had to be starved out. It would have taken longer, but if any power was capable it was America.

 

[apdst]

Occupations don't last. Especially in conquered lands. We would have bombed the bejesus out of them. Eventually Italy...the soft under belly...would have fallen. The effort would be focused on the foothold, and United States economics would have pretty much crippled their resolve. Consider that we essentially had an economy tooled up to defeat Germany and Japan.

Now. Again. To clarify. I am not stating that it would be a total victory. It would have resembled the First World War and Germany would have had to be starved out. It would have taken longer, but if any power was capable it was America.

The Germans would have achieved air supremacy. As far as Italy goes, we wouldn't have made it over the Alps, just like we didn't make it over the Alps in real life.

 

[joko104]

While our war movies feature our battles, some of the battles between the Russians and German were massively greater in terms of numbers and firepower. The Russian tactic evolved to astronomical levels of artillery barrages and then mass numbers of troops. I can't remember the battle, but for one battle I had calculated the Russians had laid down 1 artillery round for every 10 square yard - for an area of nearly 10 square miles - prior to charging. German intelligence saw it coming and has pulled back their troop the day before.

Probably the largest basically one-on-one battle in world history was the forces of Mao versus those of Chiang Kai-shek - 1 MILLION troops on each side. Chiang Kai-shek lost and retreated to Taiwan, where he was "president" from 1950 to 1975 - and for which (absurdly in my opinion) we declared that Taiwan was the REAL China.

I have never read of the USSR learning of an real intelligence for themselves, let alone any that would have help the other Allies.

 

[USViking]

Sending perhaps millions to enemy slaughter in hopeless waves is not a war effort, it's population control for the coming winter.

That is a really and truly hopeless remark. If anyone was going to let die soldiers would have been the last people, since the Germans weren't going to just, you know, sashay on back home when the weather got nice.

The truth is that the USSR was expending manpower in an earnest effort to break through the German line during the winter, and it came close to succeeding. The Germans barely held on in the Moscow, at some points being forced to retreat 150 miles, while in the south they were driven out of the major city of Rostov.

And speaking of nice weather, do you know why the Germans did not resume the offensive along the entire front in the spring and summer of 1942? Because so many of them had been shot up the year before that they didn't have enough men any more, that's why. It wasn't only the USSR whose population was getting "controlled"!

He murdered 47 generals and 200k others in the process.

Not during the war he didn't. The armed forces were purged, especially at the highest levels where I think 3/5 Marshalls were shot, but that happened in the late 1930s.

 

[ecofarm]

That is a really and truly hopeless remark.

You don't like facts?

Not during the war he didn't. The armed forces were purged, especially at the highest levels where I think 3/5 Marshalls were shot, but that happened in the late 1930s.

The article specified that those 47 generals were not part of the purge but during the war.

 

[rathi]

Ecofarm, why don't you explain a strategy for defeating the Nazi's that didn't involve sacrificing millions of lives? Your regular forces have been eliminated, your primary centers of industry captured. You have mobilized many soldiers, but don't have the resources to equip them properly. There is no choice to but to trade lives for time in order to rebuild your army back into a cohesive fighting force. The Soviets fought using modern doctrines later in the war when they had regained the ability to do so.

I find it much easier to justify the loss of life given that Hitler was a genocidal maniac who wanted to exterminate the entire populace, as opposed to millions who died in WW1 for nothing at all.

 

[blackjack50]

The Germans would have achieved air supremacy. As far as Italy goes, we wouldn't have made it over the Alps, just like we didn't make it over the Alps in real life.

There is no chance they would have gained air supremacy. The United Kingdom had already fended them off by the time the Soviets joined the war. The RAF would have held on and the United States would have supplied plenty of aircraft and pilots.

As I said. The war would have been longer, but Germany could not have sustained an occupation with the massive pressure that would have ben brought by the United States. We were actually capable of fighting a 2 front war and our distance from the Nazis meant they never would have made it across the ocean in any number to pose a threat.

Logistically speaking the Nazis had no chance. They didn't have a navy of keeping us away. Eventually we would have stopped fighting Japan. And turned efforts back. Keep in mind Germany lost the war in Europe because they were starving in the trenches. It would have been the same result.

 

[apdst]

There is no chance they would have gained air supremacy. The United Kingdom had already fended them off by the time the Soviets joined the war. The RAF would have held on and the United States would have supplied plenty of aircraft and pilots.

As I said. The war would have been longer, but Germany could not have sustained an occupation with the massive pressure that would have ben brought by the United States. We were actually capable of fighting a 2 front war and our distance from the Nazis meant they never would have made it across the ocean in any number to pose a threat.

Logistically speaking the Nazis had no chance. They didn't have a navy of keeping us away. Eventually we would have stopped fighting Japan. And turned efforts back. Keep in mind Germany lost the war in Europe because they were starving in the trenches. It would have been the same result.

The RAF only fended the Luftwaffe off. The Luftwaffe was no where close to being defeated.

 

[blackjack50]

The RAF only fended the Luftwaffe off. The Luftwaffe was no where close to being defeated.

And that is all they had to do. Fend them off. There was a giant economic power house across the Atlantic that would have dominated any future German aerial assaults by providing more planes and pilots. The Germans would never have held Europe for any stretch of time.

You understand this right? That there was no physical or economic way the Germans could have held Europe. Not long enough for a victory. It would have required defeating the United States. That would never have happened. Once we were tooled up...we couldn't have been stopped.

 

[apdst]

And that is all they had to do. Fend them off. There was a giant economic power house across the Atlantic that would have dominated any future German aerial assaults by providing more planes and pilots. The Germans would never have held Europe for any stretch of time.

You understand this right? That there was no physical or economic way the Germans could have held Europe. Not long enough for a victory. It would have required defeating the United States. That would never have happened. Once we were tooled up...we couldn't have been stopped.

There were 3 army groups in Russia that would have prevented The U.S and Britain from establishing a foothold in Europe.

It took two-and-a-half-months for the Allies to break out of Normandy againt one army group, made up of units that were redeployed from the Eastern Front.

Rundstedt only had 60 divisions to secure 3,000 miles of coastline. That was only a 10th of what he needed.

 

[LaughAtTheWorld]

The Germans would have achieved air supremacy. As far as Italy goes, we wouldn't have made it over the Alps, just like we didn't make it over the Alps in real life.

I wonder how they would have achieved air supremacy. US aircraft production and training dwarfed Germany's.

 

[LaughAtTheWorld]

Book Review from WashTimes:



Human waves were unnecessary and enforced brutally, without the slightest concern for deaths.




Same source:




Source:
BOOK REVIEW: 'SMERSH: Stalin's Secret Weapon' - Washington Times



Now you wanna tell me how those 20m were necessary, the only option? BS. A large portion of that 20m is NOT a contribution to the war effort but victims of Stalin's insanity and rage.

Depends on what you mean intentionally. Stalin certainly sent the men to their deaths with the understanding that most would be killed. If his goal was for population control as you said and not for military purposes then you're wrong. As for your figure, it's more likely 10 million dead, of which 3 million were killed in captivity by the Axis.
Sure Stalin was a psychotic mass murderer-one has to only look up the terrifying Yezhovschina. First-hand accounts show how terrifying his rage was. Entire populations would be killed and deported at his whim. I'm not defending Stalin, I'm just saying that even he didn't kill millions for population control. He was just paranoid and psychotic.