How Soviet Russia Won World War II

If by "won" you mean "caused"

By stutefish on May 23, 2005 7:24:01 PM from

stutefish

Join Date 02/2005

SETTING: A bar.

CAST:
Bartender
Patrons
Lion

BARTENDER: What can I get you?

PATRON: Draft beer, please.

BARTENDER: Here you go.

PATRON pays, takes beer back to table.

BARTENDER: What can I get you?

LION: Actually, do you mind if I rampage in here a bit?

BARTENDER: I dunno... a rampaging lion isn't really what the bar scene is all about.

LION: I'll let you loot the bodies of any victims too maimed or dead to resist.

BARTENDER: Oh, well. In that case, be my guest.

LION goes on a rampage, maiming and killing many PATRONS.

PATRONS: Aah! The pain! The teeth! The agony! Save us, please!

BARTENDER stops wiping bar to pick the pocket of a horribly maimed PATRON.

LION: Okay, enough rampaging on the Patrons. Now it's your turn, Barkeep.

BARTENDER: It's BarTENDER, stupid cat.

LION: Whatever. Now comes the rampage!

BARTENDER produces shotgun, shoots LION dead.

PATRONS: Yay! You saved us! Thank you so much!

BARTENDER: Whatever. My shotgun says anybody I haven't looted yet needs to give me all their valuables right now.

THE END.

Yes but today you're not the country of last resort but instead the imperialist. And if you think im from Europe then you're mistaken.

That is your Bush hatred. We did today what we should have 60 years ago. By your own words.

Different time, different president. Same results. and you vilify him.

You are the Grima.

Successfully updated karma reason!

We did today what we should have 60 years ago.

Anyone comparing the Iraq of today to the Germany of the 1940's is a total Noddy which in this case Dr Guy is you. Keep trying though. We appreciate you have real world issues and will make the appropriate allowances.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Anyone comparing the Iraq of today to the Germany of the 1940's is a total Noddy which in this case Dr Guy is you. Keep trying though.

Whatever a noddy is, remember the 3 fingers. And I would suggest you read up more on the Germany of 1930, and the Iraq of 1990. The Parallels are very compelling, and the rhetoric almost the same.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Whatever, rick.

Let's start over, shall we?

Here's my thesis: The Soviet Union, under Stalin, allied with Nazi Germany, enabling and empowering Hitler to perpetrate his crimes against humanity. Not only that, but Stalin even supported Hitler's offensives with offensives of his own, notably against Finland and Poland. I'll go ahead and repeat that: the Soviet Union, as a matter of government policy, invaded Finland and Poland and killed a great many people, in direct support of Hitler's war effort.

When Hitler betrayed Stalin and invaded Russia, no one can deny that the Russian people fought heroically and to great effect in defense of their motherland. Nor can anyone deny that their brave sacrifices were a significant factor in turning the tide of the war. What I do deny, however, is that the Soviet leadership, and especially Stalin, deserve any credit for helping to win the war.

Let's say Tony Soprano and Johnny Sack agree to split New Jersey between their two families. Let's further say that Johnny Sack breaks the agreement, betrays Tony Soprano, and tries to take over his territory. Tony is finally forced to whack Johnny, in order to restore peace and rebuild his mob empire. Does the FBI give Tony credit for fighting crime? Do we say to each other, "well, Tony did sacrifice a lot of his best earners, fighting that turf war, so let's give him a medal"?

Let's see where we stand on the whole Soviet Russia thing first, before we move on to whether or not the U.S. deserves any credit for winning the war.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Couldn't agree more with you.

Successfully updated karma reason!

There are many such arguments. But to my mind, there's only one argument that matters, and it is this: Russia began the war on Germany's side.

Minor fact that most people seem to overlook was that Stalin had a pact with Hitler prior to the start of WWII. He provided land and recourses for the German army to gear up for the war; Stalin later understood that the planning for Hitler’s attack on the USSR was being made during that time he was practicing for the invasion of Poland since all of it was done on USSR soil so Germany could not violate the peace treaty of WWI. When Stalin’s spies reported that Hitler was planning an attack on the USSR Stalin refused to start building defenses because he had Hitler's word that he would never attack his friend and buddy, the pact they signed was to split up Europe and share the wealth as partners if Stalin would not enter the war on either side. It was a win, win situation for Stalin that almost cost him his country and life.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Yes but today you're not the country of last resort but instead the imperialist.

Define "imperialism".

And if you think im from Europe then you're mistaken.

Don't worry.

Successfully updated karma reason!

you left out the competing bartender who showed up and helped the first one blast the lion to fuzzballs. instead of going directly back to his own place afterwards, he spent a long while standing outside the first barkeep's joint, looking thru the window and taking notes to help him devise ways to keep his own patrons under control.

you also forgot that the competing bartender gave the first one the bullets for his shotgun.

Successfully updated karma reason!

A month later, Roosevelt announced the USA's neutrality. In June 1940, the USA rejected a renewed appeal from France for help fighting the Nazi occupation. A week after this, France signed an armistice with Germany. It took the bombng of Pearl Harbor in December 1941 before the USA entered the war. (' It seems that the U.S. actually gave everything it could, as quickly as it could.' Hmm, does it really?) Would they have done the same thing with the benefit of hindsight? Again, I think not.

in 1939 when we started building our military to fight in world war 2. we had 10 machine guns 10 world war 1 tanks. basic training they were using wooden mockups for guns.

at the end of 1941, we had enough material to fight a two front war. in 1940 we were just not ready.

Successfully updated karma reason!

There are many such arguments. But to my mind, there's only one argument that matters, and it is this: Russia began the war on Germany's side.

not really they just agreed not to attack each other. and divided Poland.

Successfully updated karma reason!

What I do deny, however, is that the Soviet leadership, and especially Stalin, deserve any credit for helping to win the war.

Agreed.

I forget the Soviet leaders name who led the victory at the Battle of Stalingrad. He is actually the hero for the Soviet's although Stalin did what he could to take the credit. It was his tactics used in Stalingrad that changed how the Soviets fought the war.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I forget the Soviet leaders name who led the victory at the Battle of Stalingrad. He is actually the hero for the Soviet's although Stalin did what he could to take the credit. It was his tactics used in Stalingrad that changed how the Soviets fought the war.

i disagree.

the man that saved the soviet union was hitler because he kept changing his mind

if he had kept his eye on the target until he got the target. there would have been no soviet union.

Successfully updated karma reason!

the man that saved the soviet union was hitler because he kept changing his mind

if he had kept his eye on the target until he got the target. there would have been no soviet union.

So you give no credit to the Soviet leader who changed how the Soviet's fought?

Successfully updated karma reason!

So you give no credit to the Soviet leader who changed how the Soviet's fought?

ok give him as much credit as you want.

but when you gearing up to face three divisions. and all of a sudden there is only one.

Successfully updated karma reason!

hitler wanted to take moscow, stalingrad and kiev. problem is he couldn't decide which one to take first.

Successfully updated karma reason!

the Soviet leaders name who led the victory at the Battle of Stalingrad

marhall georgy zhukov.

Stalin did what he could to take the credit. It was his tactics used in Stalingrad that changed how the Soviets fought the war.

a lotta people seem to have tried takin credit for the great patriotic war victory in stalingrad. check this out:

hero or ?

first i've heard about a zhukov plan for a preemptive strike against hitler while the soviets and nazis were still allies.

Successfully updated karma reason!

marhall georgy zhukov.

Thanks King Bee!

Successfully updated karma reason!

The soviet union and north america as well as others contributed well to WWII near the end.

However it was the British who brought them together, payed for the war and turned the tide with victory at the BOB. Without this the world would be firmly under nazi rule.

The soviets and north americans joined the war when attacked and had no probelms with hitlers ideals, and none would have fought without the British holding court.

The soviets and north amerians had no problems with sitting back while 6 million jews where slaughtered. The British payed for the European resistance, the soviets and their own war effort, so all used British equipment, once you buy something it belongs to you.

The British won the war with help from others, but mainly the courage, principles and driving force of the British.

The soviets and north americans would have handed over their blacks and jews in a second had Britain gone under, but tit never came to that, we can thank the British for that one.

Successfully updated karma reason!