• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump Claims on Russia' Losses In WWII

rhinefire

DP Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2007
Messages
12,629
Reaction score
4,536
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Dumbo has a video claiming Russia lost 51 million people in WWII. Tell me he is not the most ignorant rodent to ever occupy the Oval Office. He has said he hates to read. Well fine but being ignorant as a result is no reason to open his little square mouth to verify it. Add the fact that England shared in beating Hitler but not according to Fozzy Bear.

 

Attachments

  • Trump Pic.webp
    Trump Pic.webp
    33.8 KB · Views: 0
Dumbo has a video claiming Russia lost 51 million people in WWII. Tell me he is not the most ignorant rodent to ever occupy the Oval Office. He has said he hates to read. Well fine but being ignorant as a result is no reason to open his little square mouth to verify it. Add the fact that England shared in beating Hitler but not according to Fozzy Bear.

The Soviets are the ones who did the bulk of the work in defeating the Nazis, yes.
 
20-22 million or so in military deaths, to the extent they kept records.
 
20-22 million or so in military deaths, to the extent they kept records.
Operation Bagration, that most Americans never heard of, was the Soviet Union pushing Germany back across Eastern Europe and was one of the biggest battles in history.
While the Brits and Yanks were racing to get the glory of liberating Paris the Soviets were taking Berlin. Imagine what that was like, the fighting in those streets
 
Dumbo has a video claiming Russia lost 51 million people in WWII. Tell me he is not the most ignorant rodent to ever occupy the Oval Office. He has said he hates to read. Well fine but being ignorant as a result is no reason to open his little square mouth to verify it. Add the fact that England shared in beating Hitler but not according to Fozzy Bear.


This is the moron that prattled on about revolutionary war airports.
 
Dumbo has a video claiming Russia lost 51 million people in WWII. Tell me he is not the most ignorant rodent to ever occupy the Oval Office. He has said he hates to read. Well fine but being ignorant as a result is no reason to open his little square mouth to verify it. Add the fact that England shared in beating Hitler but not according to Fozzy Bear.

"It is better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool, than to open it and remove all doubt".
 
More like the bulk of the dying.
Bulk of the killing. 80% of German casualties were on the Eastern Front.
Go ahead, take credit for half of what's left. 10%.
 
Operation Bagration, that most Americans never heard of, was the Soviet Union pushing Germany back across Eastern Europe and was one of the biggest battles in history.
While the Brits and Yanks were racing to get the glory of liberating Paris the Soviets were taking Berlin. Imagine what that was like, the fighting in those streets
The three year war with Ukraine is nearing one million casualties compared to WWII losses shows the world went mad.
 
More like the bulk of the dying.
Given they were fighting the vast majority of the Nazi military and their pals, that doesn’t say much.

The US, meanwhile, was up against garrison units and units pulled out of the USSR to recover from the ass kicking they’d gotten....and still struggled immensely
 
Bulk of the killing. 80% of German casualties were on the Eastern Front.
Go ahead, take credit for half of what's left. 10%.
If you totally ignore industry and tech, and forget the fact that they were allied with Nazi Germany in 1939 and jointly started the war in Europe, you'd probably calculate they won 80% of the war.
 
If you totally ignore industry and tech, and forget the fact that they were allied with Nazi Germany in 1939 and jointly started the war in Europe, you'd probably calculate they won 80% of the war.
80% of German casualties. Don't try to weasel-word away from that. 80% is nearly all- nearly all Germans were killed on the Eastern Front.
Your schools taught you a version of history that wasn't designed to inform you, it was designed to make you proud and loyal.
 
Given they were fighting the vast majority of the Nazi military and their pals, that doesn’t say much.

The US, meanwhile, was up against garrison units and units pulled out of the USSR to recover from the ass kicking they’d gotten....and still struggled immensely
The Russian citizens were brutalized by the Nazis especially the women. When the Russians conquered towns in Germany they returned the brutality with added bonuses.
 
If you totally ignore industry and tech, and forget the fact that they were allied with Nazi Germany in 1939 and jointly started the war in Europe, you'd probably calculate they won 80% of the war.
Tech? The Soviets’ tanks were top notch. The Tiger and Panther were designed to counter the T-34, and the IS-2 was better than anything the US had.
 
Given they were fighting the vast majority of the Nazi military and their pals, that doesn’t say much.

The US, meanwhile, was up against garrison units and units pulled out of the USSR to recover from the ass kicking they’d gotten....and still struggled immensely
The Western allies were fighting against Germany long before the USSR even got involved against them, even back when the USSR was still Nazi Germany's military ally jointly waging war against Poland.
1749517864384.webp
Unlike the USSR and their reliance on meat assaults, the West had brains and relied more heavily on tech and industry to tie up Germany resources and destroy German equipment (this is a bit harder to calculate than going off a single number like casualties, so don't bother). Russia's casualties would have been even greater (and it's likely they would have given up like they did in WWI) if they didn't get enormous industrial support from the West not just in terms of trucks and tanks, but also in simple stuff they should have had plenty of like blankets and food.
 
80% of German casualties. Don't try to weasel-word away from that. 80% is nearly all- nearly all Germans were killed on the Eastern Front.
Your schools taught you a version of history that wasn't designed to inform you, it was designed to make you proud and loyal.
No weaseling out of anything. If you like your 80% statistic because it's a nice, simple number you can wrap your mind around without thinking too hard, then by all means, enjoy!
 
The Western allies were fighting against Germany long before the USSR even got involved against them, even back when the USSR was still Nazi Germany's military ally jointly waging war against Poland.
View attachment 67573791
Unlike the USSR and their reliance on meat assaults, the West had brains and relied more heavily on tech and industry to tie up Germany resources and destroy German equipment (this is a bit harder to calculate than going off a single number like casualties, so don't bother). Russia's casualties would have been even greater (and it's likely they would have given up like they did in WWI) if they didn't get enormous industrial support from the West not just in terms of trucks and tanks, but also in simple stuff they should have had plenty of like blankets and food.
Weasel-words. Nearly all the Germans killed in WW2 were killed on the Eastern Front.
The USSR won WW2 in Europe. The only people who don't realize that are the ones with American high school educations.
 
The Western allies were fighting against Germany long before the USSR even got involved against them, even back when the USSR was still Nazi Germany's military ally jointly waging war against Poland.
View attachment 67573791
Unlike the USSR and their reliance on meat assaults, the West had brains and relied more heavily on tech and industry to tie up Germany resources and destroy German equipment (this is a bit harder to calculate than going off a single number like casualties, so don't bother). Russia's casualties would have been even greater (and it's likely they would have given up like they did in WWI) if they didn't get enormous industrial support from the West not just in terms of trucks and tanks, but also in simple stuff they should have had plenty of like blankets and food.
No they weren’t. The Soviets spent five years trying to build a “popular front” against the Germans in the interwar period. Soviet advisors were fighting against the Nazis in Spain long before the West belatedly decided to go to war.

😂😂😂

Tell that to the troops in Italy or the bocage.

“The Red Army was outnumbered by Axis forces in 1941 at the beginning of Operation Barbarossa. Soviet mobilization efforts and steady German losses began to change the force ratios in 1942, but the Red Army only had a roughly 2:1 advantage from February 1943 until mid-1944 before maxing out at a little over 4: 1 at the very end of the war.

Here’s another way of looking at the force ratios. The Red Army in the field actually peaked in size in mid-1943, but the ratios continued to shift in its favor due to Germany’s inability to replace losses. The Red Army didn’t keep getting bigger, but it maintained its size while the Wehrmacht steadily lost ground, literally and figuratively.

What’s interesting is that the Soviet Union was not able to draw on a bottomless well of recruits to achieve these ratios. The Soviet Union had a larger population than Germany in 1939 — about twice as large. But the Soviet Union that fought World War II was not the Soviet Union of 1939. In 1941 the Axis occupied about a third of Soviet territory where 45 percent of its populationlived — nearly 90 million people out of 190 million. Some refugees fled the occupied zones. The best estimate is that 110 to 120 million people remained in the unoccupied areas of the Soviet Union. For nearly two years, the Soviets actually fought with a lower population base than the United States.

In 1990, John Ellis wrote Brute Force: Allied Strategy and Tactics in the Second World War in which he suggested that American, Russian, and British commanders alike “seemed unable to impose their will upon the enemy except by slowly and persistently battering him to death with a blunt instrument.”

Ellis detailed the advantages of the Allies. For example: once American troops began landing in North Africa in late 1942, the Allies quickly achieved rough parity with Axis forces, and by March 1943 had a 3:1 overall advantage in divisions in North Africa. The Allies had more divisions in Italy than the Axis from July 1943 until the end of the war, at times achieving a ratio there of 1.5:1.”


Lend lease tasks and aircraft made up only a small fraction of the Soviet arsenal, so that excuse doesn’t hold up either.
 
Tech? The Soviets’ tanks were top notch. The Tiger and Panther were designed to counter the T-34, and the IS-2 was better than anything the US had.
The casualties tell a different story. The Soviet Union lost more in military casualties alone than Germany managed to exterminate Jewish prisoners in literal death camps. Even Stalin figured it out.

"I want to tell you what, from the Russian point of view, the president and the United States have done for victory in this war," Stalin said. "The most important things in this war are the machines.... The United States is a country of machines. Without the machines we received through Lend-Lease, we would have lost the war."
 
No weaseling out of anything. If you like your 80% statistic because it's a nice, simple number you can wrap your mind around without thinking too hard, then by all means, enjoy!
Look it up. Google it.
"Approximately 80% of German military deaths during World War II occurred on the Eastern Front, according to The National WWII Museum. This translates to roughly four million out of the five million German soldiers killed during the war. The Eastern Front was the primary theater of operations for the Wehrmacht, accounting for a large portion of their combat strength and casualties."
 
The casualties tell a different story. The Soviet Union lost more in military casualties alone than Germany managed to exterminate Jewish prisoners in literal death camps. Even Stalin figured it out.

Gee dude, given the German habit of executing captured or wounded Soviet POWs, that’s not a huge shock. American losses would have been much higher if they’d been facing the bulk of the German military and such policies.

Except the basic facts don’t support that claim, especially since Soviet tanks were superior to the lend lease ones they received to begin with.

David Glantz, an American military historian known for his books on the Eastern front, offers a similar view:

Although Soviet accounts have routinely belittled the significance of Lend-Lease in the sustainment of the Soviet war effort, the overall importance of the assistance cannot be understated. Lend-Lease aid did not arrive in sufficient quantities to make the difference between defeat and victory in 1941–1942; that achievement must be attributed solely to the Soviet people and to the iron nerve of Stalin, Zhukov, Shaposhnikov, Vasilevsky, and their subordinates. As the war continued, however, the United States and Great Britain provided many of the implements of war and strategic raw materials necessary for Soviet victory. Without Lend-Lease food, clothing, and raw materials (especially metals), the Soviet economy would have been even more heavily burdened by the war effort. Perhaps most directly, without Lend-Lease trucks, rail engines, and railroad cars, every Soviet offensive would have stalled at an earlier stage, outrunning its logistical tail in a matter of days. In turn, this would have allowed the German commanders to escape at least some encirclements, while forcing the Red Army to prepare and conduct many more deliberate penetration attacks in order to advance the same distance. Left to their own devices, Stalin and his commanders might have taken twelve to eighteen months longer to finish off the Wehrmacht; the ultimate result would probably have been the same, except that Soviet soldiers could have waded at France's Atlantic beaches.[47]
 
Trump claims that his buddy Vlad Putin fought in WW2. This must be new math because Vlad was born in;
Vladimir Putin was born on October 7, 1952.
Take a look at the bizarre moment Donald Trump appears to claim Vladimir Putin fought in WWII in a White House press conference on Thursday (June 12).

In his latest nonsensical numerical ramblings Trump claimed Russia lost 51 million people during WWII however researchers estimate the actual number to be closer to 27 million.

Trump went on to say he couldn't understand why others who fought in WWII were so beloved yet Russia is so hated.

Trump said, "He lost 51 million people, and he did fight... sort of interesting isn't it, he fought with us in WWII and everybody hates him, and Germany and Japan their fine... some day somebody will explain that."
 
Back
Top Bottom