I’ve been arguing this with Soviet sycophants since the beginning of the internet.
Without US and UK aid the Soviets would never have defeated Germany on their own. Large percentages of aircraft and armor defending Moscow 41/42 were of US/UK origin.
Over the course of the war the vast majority of Soviet soldiers were fed, clothed and transported by US food/clothing/trucks. The US supplied the Soviets with enough raw steel to build every single T-34 they built during the war.
The single most crucial nation in the defeat of both Germany and Japan was the US, as much as that fact annoys many Europeans.
Copper electrical wiring, batteries, radios and all sorts of things a modern army needs. That the Soviets supplied a lot, a LOT a lot of warm bodies is certainly true though.
The U.S. contribution to the Soviets was huge. I’ve read “Stalin’s War” by Sean McMeekin, and he gives elaborate detail of how the U,S, contributed billions of dollars in aid to Soviet Russia. I think his argument that WWII was a Soviet creation with help from the U.S. and England, and that the USSR was the ultimate winner of WWII is a striking contrast to what is commonly taught in the USA (as if anyone really pays attention to history!).
Let’s give credit where it’s due. Don’t forget Stalin’s teaming up with Hitler to start things going in Poland.
Yes, however as Russians all know from what they were taught in school, the Patriotic War started on June 22, 1941 not before. The Finns might disagree.
As would the Chinese.
IMO there is a strong argument for WW-2 starting in Spain and/or China …it detonated in Poland.
Ron Unz had a recent article about the blank spots in national history, both our and the USSR’s. While the Russian story may be that the Soviet side of WW2 started in June 41, there is ample historical proof that it started several years earlier. Again, I point to McMeekin’s book for the details of that.
While the Russian story may be that the Soviet side of WW2 started in June 41, there is ample historical proof that it started several years earlier.
FEME REVELATIONS APPALL GERMANY; Latest Trial of “Series” Raises Number of Murder Victims From 20 to 200. HIGH OFFICERS TAKE STAND Regulars and Black Reichswehr Chiefs, Pitted Against Each Other, Try to Shift Responsibility. Testimony of Leaders Amazing. Number of Victims Rises to 200. Still Higher Ranks on the Stand. Munich Rowdies Insult Stresemann.
What’s not revealed in the blurb I can quote is that those were victims of black ops groups in the German military overseen by Kurt von Schleicher (who later became the German Chancellor before Hitler and died in the Night of the Long Knives) in order to hush up widespread violations of the Treaty of Versailles. The German military started fighting the next war as soon as the ink dried on the Treaty of Versailles (perhaps even before when it became clear that Germany would lose the First World War).
Also during 1921 and 1922, Germany negotiated for several research facilities to be built in the USSR in order to circumvent Treaty of Versailles restrictions.
Negotiations on military cooperation between Moscow and Berlin began before the end of the Soviet-Polish war (1919-1921). Both countries shared a strong affinity based on anti-Polish sentiments: Just like Russia, Germany too had to cede parts of its territory to Poland, as was the case during the Greater Poland uprising in 1919. Nevertheless, there was no talk of any military-political alliance.
In 1922, during talks in the small Italian town of Rapallo, the Germans and the Bolsheviks agreed to restore diplomatic relations. While publicly they were signing economic agreements, unofficially, negotiations were under way on cooperation in training military pilots and tank crews and the development of chemical weapons.
As a result, in the 1920s, several German secret schools, training and military research centers were opened in Russia. The government of the Weimar Republic spared no expense to maintain them, allocating up to 10 percent of the country’s military budget for the purpose annually.
As I’ve mentioned before, the Nazis were just the people who happened to be in charge. Here, we see that there was more than a decade of planning that preceded Nazi involvement. My bet is that by early 1933, when it became clear that Hitler would be the dictator in charge, he was handed a battle plan for turning a weak German republic into a superpower in a few short years (shooting past those powerful neighbors like the allied countries and USSR and then attacking before they could catch up).
His mark was in very aggressively carrying that plan out.
In any case, a narrative that doesn’t take into account the German contribution to the Second World War is missing the big picture. Sure, even if Germany stayed a peaceful country, the USSR would likely have started a world war on its own. But the German contribution is far larger than anything the USSR did, much less the US or UK. It would be wise to remember that.
I would put the start of WW-II as December 13th, 1939.
China and Japan had been at war for years, so Asia was already going at it.
Poland was invaded on Sept 1st, 1939, kicking off the war in Europe.
Australia entered the war on Sept 3rd, 1939.
South Africa declared war on Sept 6th, 1939, so Africa became involved.
Canada joined the war on Sept 10th, 1939, so North America became involved.
On December 13th, 1939 the war came to South American theater with the Battle of the River Plate, with three British ships taking on the Graff Spee.
And that was when the war had spread to all six permanently inhabited continents.
However, I don’t think any South American country declared war on the Axis until Bolivia did in April of 1943, so a doctrinaire purist might go with that for the date.
I’ve wondered how many of those 20 million were political casualties of the Soviets rather than being killed by the Germans.
Given the UK’s dependence on the US, the last question in the thread is, Could the US have defeated the Germans and Japanese single-handedly? Probably. I bet there’s 8,000 KDP novels already written about it.
Fascinating article, though I have to caution against jumping to the conclusion that Stalin was dissuaded from simply taking over all of Europe by our having the atomic bomb. My wife and I recently read Stalin and the Bomb by David Holloway, one of the most referenced historical works on the Soviet atomic bomb and its effect on Soviet policy. Holloway’s access not only to source material but also the people involved is nothing short of breathtaking.
He concludes that there is little evidence that the American atomic bomb played a major part in deterring Stalin from taking over all of Europe. Indeed, Soviet and American military planners as of 1949 both agreed that our atomic stockpile would not be decisive in defeating the Soviet Union. The Soviet threat assessment concluded that 330 Hiroshima-size bombs would be required to do the same amount of damage to the USSR as conventional Allied bombing had inflicted on Germany (without, they emphasized, destroying Germany’s war machine). They didn’t think we had that many (though we were closer than they realized), and so concluded that the bomb would not be decisive in a US/Soviet war.
I recommend that book highly. It gives one a little bit different perspective on what a former-KGB dictator, with desires on putting the Soviet band back together, might be thinking about nuclear weapons. It probably isn’t what Western snowflakes think he’s thinking.
He concludes that there is little evidence that the American atomic bomb played a major part in deterring Stalin from taking over all of Europe.
The counterevidence is that the Soviet invasion of Europe came to a full stop in 1945. Before that, they took over something on the order of two dozen countries in the preceding few decades.
In addition, the USSR immediately devoted immense resources to the development of their own atomic bombs and over the next 45 years put extraordinary resources into outbuilding the US’s nuclear force. This expenditure was so extraordinary it contributed significantly to the eventual ending of the USSR and its empire by 1991 (both as a unproductive permanent drain on resources and as the Chernobyl accident in 1986 which was a huge hit to Soviet reputation).
How do we explain such a radical change in behavior?
The Soviet threat assessment concluded that 330 Hiroshima-size bombs would be required to do the same amount of damage to the USSR as conventional Allied bombing had inflicted on Germany (without, they emphasized, destroying Germany’s war machine). They didn’t think we had that many (though we were closer than they realized), and so concluded that the bomb would not be decisive in a US/Soviet war.
And yet, what’s said here is that the US couldn’t immediately defeat an all-out Soviet push with nuclear weapons. What happens if the war lasts longer than a few months so that the US can build those weapons and then use them? It’s much harder for the USSR to bomb the US than it is for the US to bomb the USSR at this point and the US had more bombs.
Without Soviet nuclear forces, and in view of the totalitarian logic of conquer or be conquered, either the USSR conquered the US before it could build those nukes, or it would eventually be conquered at low cost to its foe. The USSR had to build a superior quantity and quality of nuclear weapons before it could return to a policy of conquest. Fortunately, that was never achieved.
And thus, the world was dumped suddenly into a phase change where all-out war was so destructive that no one could get any advantage out of it.
I’ve been arguing this with Soviet sycophants since the beginning of the internet.
Without US and UK aid the Soviets would never have defeated Germany on their own. Large percentages of aircraft and armor defending Moscow 41/42 were of US/UK origin.
Over the course of the war the vast majority of Soviet soldiers were fed, clothed and transported by US food/clothing/trucks. The US supplied the Soviets with enough raw steel to build every single T-34 they built during the war.
The single most crucial nation in the defeat of both Germany and Japan was the US, as much as that fact annoys many Europeans.
Copper electrical wiring, batteries, radios and all sorts of things a modern army needs. That the Soviets supplied a lot, a LOT a lot of warm bodies is certainly true though.
The U.S. contribution to the Soviets was huge. I’ve read “Stalin’s War” by Sean McMeekin, and he gives elaborate detail of how the U,S, contributed billions of dollars in aid to Soviet Russia. I think his argument that WWII was a Soviet creation with help from the U.S. and England, and that the USSR was the ultimate winner of WWII is a striking contrast to what is commonly taught in the USA (as if anyone really pays attention to history!).
Let’s give credit where it’s due. Don’t forget Stalin’s teaming up with Hitler to start things going in Poland.
Yes, however as Russians all know from what they were taught in school, the Patriotic War started on June 22, 1941 not before. The Finns might disagree.
As would the Chinese.
IMO there is a strong argument for WW-2 starting in Spain and/or China …it detonated in Poland.
Ron Unz had a recent article about the blank spots in national history, both our and the USSR’s. While the Russian story may be that the Soviet side of WW2 started in June 41, there is ample historical proof that it started several years earlier. Again, I point to McMeekin’s book for the details of that.
While the Russian story may be that the Soviet side of WW2 started in June 41, there is ample historical proof that it started several years earlier.
I’ll point to this 1928 article:
What’s not revealed in the blurb I can quote is that those were victims of black ops groups in the German military overseen by Kurt von Schleicher (who later became the German Chancellor before Hitler and died in the Night of the Long Knives) in order to hush up widespread violations of the Treaty of Versailles. The German military started fighting the next war as soon as the ink dried on the Treaty of Versailles (perhaps even before when it became clear that Germany would lose the First World War).
Also during 1921 and 1922, Germany negotiated for several research facilities to be built in the USSR in order to circumvent Treaty of Versailles restrictions.
As I’ve mentioned before, the Nazis were just the people who happened to be in charge. Here, we see that there was more than a decade of planning that preceded Nazi involvement. My bet is that by early 1933, when it became clear that Hitler would be the dictator in charge, he was handed a battle plan for turning a weak German republic into a superpower in a few short years (shooting past those powerful neighbors like the allied countries and USSR and then attacking before they could catch up).
His mark was in very aggressively carrying that plan out.
In any case, a narrative that doesn’t take into account the German contribution to the Second World War is missing the big picture. Sure, even if Germany stayed a peaceful country, the USSR would likely have started a world war on its own. But the German contribution is far larger than anything the USSR did, much less the US or UK. It would be wise to remember that.
I would put the start of WW-II as December 13th, 1939.
China and Japan had been at war for years, so Asia was already going at it.
Poland was invaded on Sept 1st, 1939, kicking off the war in Europe.
Australia entered the war on Sept 3rd, 1939.
South Africa declared war on Sept 6th, 1939, so Africa became involved.
Canada joined the war on Sept 10th, 1939, so North America became involved.
On December 13th, 1939 the war came to South American theater with the Battle of the River Plate, with three British ships taking on the Graff Spee.
And that was when the war had spread to all six permanently inhabited continents.
However, I don’t think any South American country declared war on the Axis until Bolivia did in April of 1943, so a doctrinaire purist might go with that for the date.
I’ve wondered how many of those 20 million were political casualties of the Soviets rather than being killed by the Germans.
Given the UK’s dependence on the US, the last question in the thread is, Could the US have defeated the Germans and Japanese single-handedly? Probably. I bet there’s 8,000 KDP novels already written about it.
I see Weeks has joined Suvorov in declaring the Soviets the origin of WW2, and that Hitler turned around from his invasion of England to attack the USSR because he knew they were about to attack Germany.
I’d be interested in reading Week’s book but $50 for a paper is a bit over my budget. Here’s Suvorov’s book
https://www.amazon.com/Icebreaker-Who-Started-Second-World-ebook/dp/B07NRV2XRZ/ref=sr_1_1?crid=3HVL028N84NUJ&keywords=Suvorov+The+real&qid=1679598824&s=books&sprefix=suvorov+the+real+%2Cstripbooks%2C163&sr=1-1
Fascinating article, though I have to caution against jumping to the conclusion that Stalin was dissuaded from simply taking over all of Europe by our having the atomic bomb. My wife and I recently read Stalin and the Bomb by David Holloway, one of the most referenced historical works on the Soviet atomic bomb and its effect on Soviet policy. Holloway’s access not only to source material but also the people involved is nothing short of breathtaking.
He concludes that there is little evidence that the American atomic bomb played a major part in deterring Stalin from taking over all of Europe. Indeed, Soviet and American military planners as of 1949 both agreed that our atomic stockpile would not be decisive in defeating the Soviet Union. The Soviet threat assessment concluded that 330 Hiroshima-size bombs would be required to do the same amount of damage to the USSR as conventional Allied bombing had inflicted on Germany (without, they emphasized, destroying Germany’s war machine). They didn’t think we had that many (though we were closer than they realized), and so concluded that the bomb would not be decisive in a US/Soviet war.
I recommend that book highly. It gives one a little bit different perspective on what a former-KGB dictator, with desires on putting the Soviet band back together, might be thinking about nuclear weapons. It probably isn’t what Western snowflakes think he’s thinking.
He concludes that there is little evidence that the American atomic bomb played a major part in deterring Stalin from taking over all of Europe.
The counterevidence is that the Soviet invasion of Europe came to a full stop in 1945. Before that, they took over something on the order of two dozen countries in the preceding few decades.
In addition, the USSR immediately devoted immense resources to the development of their own atomic bombs and over the next 45 years put extraordinary resources into outbuilding the US’s nuclear force. This expenditure was so extraordinary it contributed significantly to the eventual ending of the USSR and its empire by 1991 (both as a unproductive permanent drain on resources and as the Chernobyl accident in 1986 which was a huge hit to Soviet reputation).
How do we explain such a radical change in behavior?
The Soviet threat assessment concluded that 330 Hiroshima-size bombs would be required to do the same amount of damage to the USSR as conventional Allied bombing had inflicted on Germany (without, they emphasized, destroying Germany’s war machine). They didn’t think we had that many (though we were closer than they realized), and so concluded that the bomb would not be decisive in a US/Soviet war.
And yet, what’s said here is that the US couldn’t immediately defeat an all-out Soviet push with nuclear weapons. What happens if the war lasts longer than a few months so that the US can build those weapons and then use them? It’s much harder for the USSR to bomb the US than it is for the US to bomb the USSR at this point and the US had more bombs.
Without Soviet nuclear forces, and in view of the totalitarian logic of conquer or be conquered, either the USSR conquered the US before it could build those nukes, or it would eventually be conquered at low cost to its foe. The USSR had to build a superior quantity and quality of nuclear weapons before it could return to a policy of conquest. Fortunately, that was never achieved.
And thus, the world was dumped suddenly into a phase change where all-out war was so destructive that no one could get any advantage out of it.