The USSR would have been nothing after WW2 without being propped up by Lend & Lease. Communism doesn't produce shit, that L&L equipment still ended up being used in Russia for decades for that reason too.
I think the reason Stalin changed the stance from "worldwide communism" to "socialism in one country" not because he was OMG BASED AND REDPILT but because he was pretty fucking smart, he knew that the shitty inefficient system can't take on the world so he'd rather have an iron fist over an established collection of populations living in abject poverty ignorant to the world outside.
muh lende lease
every thread.
you homos overestamate your gay little aid program, most of which england got, because you did barely any fighting in the war.
m-muh steel, muh trucks
the USSR was saved by the industry created in the 30s in northern caucases and behind the urals. millions of people were fucking deported to serve as a workforce of the industrial backbone there. and the trucks, much like the motorization of the red army, as with the german army, was overestemated aswell, as a major part of towing and similar tasks were done by horses which remained from the calvary reforms in the 30s and were generally moved to use in the far east. the only reason russians used trucks to the extent they did was because they were free gibs as was the fuel for them.
you dense motherfucker.
im gonna screencap my post just so i can throw it at you the next time you start shitposting about your gay little fundraiser
that tankie who can barely spell or construct a coherent sentence
Every thread.
If Lend & Lease didn't matter at all, is that why the Red Army got its ass kicked every time it was engaged with a real army, including one of an underdeveloped country of a bunch of reindeer herdsmen with nothing but snow during the Winter War until the Americans started propping it up, and all it was good for until then was brutalizing unarmed peasants?
OP states he's not Russian though. People in the West such as writers have had this strange fascination with Russia for centuries, they would romanticize it without knowing much how it actually is, projecting traits onto it that just plain don't apply, thinking it's on the same caliber as Western European nations when it was a pretty bad, un-Western place to live under the surface of pretty looking nobility. I suppose it's the same effect that created the myth of the Noble Savage.
The most terrible acts committed by the Red Army do not rest on the shoulders of Russian Whites.
The description of these troops made by Patton does not suggest Whites at all.
This does not mean there would have not been disgusting Slavs doing horrible things to Germans too, but it certainly was a racial mixed bag, with all those Eurasians, Turks, Mongols, etc. Look even at the faces of the Reds in those two paintings.
I know of the book Hellstorm. Do these two paintings refer to events in particular or are the general?
[–] 16732067? ago