I don't think that does the Red Army justice. It was a brutal, ideologically driven force that absorbed horrific losses and kept fighting. It wasn't a "warrior cult" in the Japanese or Nazi sense, but it wasn't a bunch of civilians who'd "rather be doing anything else," either.

In my fantasy, it doesn't matter. It should be irrelevant. (Gender, race, identity, etc...)

Wars of conquest or empire aren't what I'm referring to, to be clear.

It is. That does seem on brand for movie execs though. Glad I went this long without knowing about them.

If you want to look it at from a statistical perspective, the soviets did a lot more dying than killing. They lost more soldiers than the nazis for crying out loud

Yes. Because Soviets fought instead of surrendering.

Indonesia was a bloodbath helped along by the CIA and the British

what a fucking mess

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indonesian_mass_killings_of_1965%E2%80%9366?wprov=sfla1

Because Soviets fought instead of surrendering.

Did they have good leadership? I hear stories about how soldiers had to fight without enough guns or ammo, or they'd be shot by their commanders.

They did not have Christmas parties with the Nazis unlike the Allies. Wonder why.

They did not have Christmas parties with the Nazis unlike the Allies. Wonder why.

Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact. Also the Soviets literally invaded Poland opposite of Germany in '39.

Back to my question about actual battlefield behavior, though: did the Soviet commanders shoot their own troops and send them into fights without enough guns and ammo?

I see you know nothing about history except spouting propaganda so no need to discuss further. You prefer surrender to the Nazis and joining them like Europe did of course.

Look everyone, it's one of the guys from the meme.

Mostly, yes, the West was only busy trying to steal German oil colonies in Africa instead of actually fighting the Nazis.

Not to liberate the people of course but to colonize the land themselves and steal the oil for themselves.

America only swooped in after the Nazis had already been defeated at Stalingrad, and the Soviets were at the point of taking over all of Europe.

After that NATO integrated many top Nazi leaders directly into leadership roles and put a Nazi official at the top of NATO not long after WW2 was over.

You prefer surrender to the Nazis and joining them like Europe did of course.

My family left behind died in the resistance. Surrender isn't an option against fascism, imo.

Europe as a whole resisted the spread of Nazis in WW2, and didn't join them like you're implying. Many died fighting the Axis powers that took over part of Europe. The Axis powers that were also in Europe were defeated.

Nice quote. Is it from you?

The allies killed a whole bunch in Tokyo and Dresden, et al., but those are mostly citizens so... 😬

To be fair, they had to defend their homeland from a ground invasion. In winter. While Leningrad was being sieged and blockaded. Many Soviet soldiers starved because of that.

All while being present on other fronts.

Based on my cursory search, It's from a British officer sir William Butler

Wasn't that WW1

Europe as a whole resisted the spread of Nazis in WW2, and didn't join them like you're implying. Many died fighting the Axis powers that took over part of Europe

Then why are you on here criticizing the USSR for doing exactly that?

The post you're replying doesn't claim the Allies killed more, less or whatever than the USSR. It's about the importance of holding territory vs. killing. Did you just jump into this because you wanted to point out the outsized effort the USSR made in defeating the Nazis?

Starship Troopers has a part about non-wartime?

I recall Rambo (2008) leaving me with a strong sense that war and fighting was horrible, by design (not only because i am a big softie).

The invasion that started WW2 in Europe was conducted by the Germans in Poland.... and by the Soviets in Poland! They also invaded and occupied Lithuania, Estonia, and Latvia. They invaded Finland. The list of countries invaded by the Soviet Union is long and shameful. Not a good look for an anti-imperialist ideology, IMHO.

I feel like this post deserves a NSFW spolier thingy. 🙈😅

Nope! It's Sir William Francis Butler. It's often misattributed to Thucydides, and usually misquoted

No to subjegate their colonies and steal their oil. And now deliver weapons to Israel so it can commit genocide.

What territory? The Allies were only able to swoop in and capture the West of Europe because the Nazis threw everything at the Soviets and lost.

I mean, just reread the comment.

did the Soviet commanders shoot their own troops

Yes, as did every other country during the war. Some more than others, but there wasn't a single country in WWII where officers did not shoot their own soldiers for insubordination.

and send them into fights without enough guns and ammo?

No, this is common propaganda pushed by COD and Enemy at the Gates, based on a single officer's report from the Battle of Stalingrad that they did not have enough guns to equip his troops. Conveniently, the second half of the officers report is usually left out, where he states that he is diverting his troop ship to a supply depot to rearm before heading into combat.

Well, because that’s not what the warrior ethos is to begin with.

The ones seeking out an unnecessary fight are not following the warrior ethos as taught to the military. At least the Marines when it was required reading for me.

The warrior ethos is about being willing to rise to the fight when it’s necessary, putting the others around you above yourself, and not backing down from the fight even in the face of death. Honor is the cornerstone of the warrior ethos, and being the aggressor in an unnecessary fight is not honorable.

That’s exactly what all those school teachers, store clerks, and other everyday men in WWII did. The fight was necessary, they recognized that and stood up when called, left behind their homes and families to meet the fight head on, faced extreme circumstances and certain death and refused to back down.

THAT is the warrior ethos. Not some blood lust.

It’s a shame that those with a blood lust have coopted it.

Uh, they were directly responsible for the start of WWII when they jointly invaded Poland with the Nazis. They were one of the principal causes of the war before Hitler turned on them. They get absolutely zero fucking pass for WWII and only survived at all because the US provided them the logistics and equipment under Lend-Lease to hold off the Nazis on the Eastern Front long enough for the rest of the allies to take the Western Front.

The Holodomor in Ukraine.

Like 7 wars in Afghanistan between 1925 and 1990 including the Soviet-Afghan War.

Several wars with China over territory like Georgia.

Two decades of guerilla wars suppressing rebellion and uprisings within captured territories.

The invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968.

And that only happened because the US provided basically everything to the Soviets under Lend-Lease.

Without American equipment, the Soviets were getting absolutely slaughtered.

Their infrastructure was collapsed, they were out of equipment and couldn’t produce more. The US provided tanks, guns, bullets, clothes, food, and even railway to them to keep them afloat and hold off the Nazis while they fought the Western Front.

Without Lend-Lease, the Soviets stood exactly zero chance.

Am I?

So did the British? What's your point?

Lend Lease supplied 10% of the Soviets supplies tops. This is such gigantic hypercope.

Nobody says it did not help, but you are exaggerating the role of the US into infinity.

Exactly like how the US propaganda tried to rewrite history after the fact.

Stalin and Kruschev both openly stated that without the US lend lease, the Soviets would have lost.

That’s not cope. That’s the Soviets themselves.

To pretend like Lend Lease was the entire war is massive cope. 10% is a lot but nowhere close to 100%.

Battles are won by fighters. Wars are won by logistics clerks.

alt text!!! yippee!!!

Someone noticed! You're welcome, could I improve anything?

ehh, i guess saying "tumblr user" multiple times is repetitive, unless they added federation while i wasn't looking, i guess you could just say "tumblr screenshot"

Nice, had the same thought and was gonna stop doing that

An important thing for myself (and a disturbing number of lefty Fedizens) to remember.