Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm extremely appreciatitve of the Russian sacrifice (after first teaming up with Hitler to tag-team Poland etc.) but anyone that is well read on the topic knows that Russias great contribution would have failed without the US and British (see link) support nor vice-versa.
Happy to have an educated discussion about this further if you have other insights. Thanks.
I'm well aware of Lend-Lease. It was an absolutely awful policy that dragged this country into yet another European conflict.
Even without the U.S. contributions to the Soviet Union, they still would've defeated the Germans, due to the harsh weather conditions and the arrogance of the Nazis. My point stands.
What a silly comparison. Atom bomb technology under the control of a US president isn't even in the same universe as atom bomb technology under the control of Hitler. Get real.
What's silly about it?
Are U.S. Presidents angels descended from heaven? Do no U.S. Presidents commit war crimes?
I mean, Trump is literally Hitler, and he has the nuclear codes.
We all supplied the Nazi line to slow down the Russian advance.
Don't kid yourself, Russia won the war.
Nope it was a group effort. Without the USA and it's work and finished material Russia would not have survived. 2 front war was always the failure of Hitler and his plans. Ego and crazy were Hitler's weakness.
Are U.S. Presidents angels descended from heaven? Do no U.S. Presidents commit war crimes?
I mean, Trump is literally Hitler, and he has the nuclear codes.
Get real.
I don't know what planet you live on. You sound like you don't know Hitler's personality, goals, and insanity very well.
He would have no problem using nukes on anyone and everyone who isn't German. The USA would use them only as a last resort. HUGE difference.
The current world is stabilized by Mutual Assured Destruction. That strategy would never work if Hitler was the leader of a nuclear capable country. How can you not see that? He makes North Korea's insane leader seem tame by comparison.
Yep, I know a Canadian guy who is pretty damn conservative...but he is the first to say it was the Russians who defeated Hitler. Of course, we'll never know for sure but the Russians probably deserve more credit than many of us would like to admit.
I don't know what planet you live on. You sound like you don't know Hitler's personality, goals, and insanity very well.
He would have no problem using nukes on anyone and everyone who isn't German. The USA would use them only as a last resort. HUGE difference.
The current world is stabilized by Mutual Assured Destruction. That strategy would never work if Hitler was the leader of a nuclear capable country. How can you not see that?
I admire your tenacity and agree with the above post but you are debating with an ideologue. Truth, nuance and reality be damned.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
