Posted on 05/03/2025 3:45:58 AM PDT by marcusmaximus
Dmitry Medvedev, deputy chairman of Russia's Security Council, said on Saturday that President Donald Trump's assertion that the U.S. had done more than any other country to win World War Two was "pretentious nonsense".
Trump posted on social network Truth Social late on Thursday that "nobody was close to us in terms of strength, bravery, or military brilliance" in both world wars, and that "we did more than any other country, by far, in producing a victorious result in World War II."
-snip-
"Trump recently announced that the U.S. made the biggest contribution to victory in World War Two and that he will introduce a special holiday on May 8. A holiday is not a bad thing, but his first statement is pretentious nonsense," Medvedev said in a post on the VK social network.
"Our people sacrificed 27 million lives of their sons and daughters in the name of destroying accursed fascism. Therefore, Victory Day is ours and it is May 9! So it was, so it is, so it will always be!" wrote Medvedev.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
As far as the European theater goes this is correct. Russia’s part was vastly larger than ours.
Since Russia had 4-5 times more forces than the Allies had attacking them would have been very foolish. Patton was up in the night.
Yes, of course 🙂
Thank you very much again 👍🏻🙂
That’s also another reason. I was responding to Racketeer’s comment that it was the MIC that prevented Patton from attacking the Soviet Union.
If not for the Non-Aggression Pact, Hitler doesn’t invade Poland.
And why didn’t the Soviet Union ally with Britain and France, and instead allied with Hitler?
Hitler promised them half of Poland. The Soviets demanded Poland as a condition of allying with Britain and France.
During WWII, both Joseph Stalin and Nikita Khrushchev acknowledged the crucial role of U.S. Lend-Lease aid in the Soviet Union’s struggle against Nazi Germany, with Stalin explicitly stating they would have lost the war without it. Khrushchev, in his memoirs, echoed this sentiment, emphasizing the decisive impact of American aid in the Soviet Union’s counteroffensives.
One of the most important battles of WWII is one few even know about. The Battle of Khalkin Gol in 1939. It’s where Zhukov made his bones. And it happened despite the fact that Japan and the Soviet Union at the time were not technically at war with each other.
But the defeat of the Japs there, greatly changed the course of the war, mainly that Japan and the Soviet Union, wound up signing a non-aggression pact, which meant that Japan would not help Hitler against the Soviet Union.
The Soviet Union only declared war on Japan at the end, so they could get the spoils of half of the Korean Peninsula, and the Salkhalin Islands. And frankly, if not for Fat Man and Little Boy, they probably would have gotten at least half of Japan, as well.
Best case scenario. Hitler takes Moscow, which leads to a coup, with Khrushchev replacing Stalin.
I believe Khrushchev would have taken a much different course, basically abandoning Bolshevism, at least for the duration of the war, to unite the people, and ultimately defeating the Nazis. But certainly, the Soviet Union would have been a much different place after the war.
Stalin cynically used the high Soviet death count as a bargaining chip.
“We lost 20 million people, so we deserve half of Europe!”
Aussies beat the Japanese in the fist victory jungle land battle of the war for Bougainville.They were civilians drafted in a hurry. The Japanese never recovered. All they had was air power and some land forces but Guadalcanal Marines stopped that real quick.
“The German army was like an elephant attacking a host of ants. The elephant may kill thousands, maybe millions, but in the end, their numbers will overcome him, and he will be eaten to the bone.” - Colonel Berndt von Kleist
Yes, it would, and a more humane one as well without Stalin, just as China became less inhumane after Mao‘s death and the ousting of the Gang of Four from power.
To this day, I believe that Nazi Germany would have had reforms after the bloodhound‘s death, though there might have been an interlude, a power struggle between the top Nazis. As there was with the Gang of Four and the reformers under Hua Guo-Feng.
Maybe Heydrich, had he not been assassinated, could have become the new man at the top. He was, in his way, an opportunist, and while he was evil, he was not stupid.
The war got in the way of Hitler’s true vision.
Remember he had to curry favor with the industrialists, in order to build his war machine. But what would have become of them as a class once the war was won, and they were no longer needed? I say they would have gone to the showers, as well, ultimately. Hitler wanted to eliminate all traces of “Old Germany”, the Junkers, the Generals with the “vons” in their name, and implement his true warped vision.
Also, once Jewry was eradicated, their attention would turn to Christianity.
Yes, in Hitler‘s twisted mind. What an abyss of evil 👿
He was close to Pol Pot in his vision for the future, which does remind me of fascist Italian intellectual Gabriele d‘Annunzio, who also wrote of filling the canals of Venice with rubble, shedding the past.
Sounds like Pol Pot and his vision of the classless society, starting in the Year Zero (shudder).
Communism and fascism are really mirror images of one another. Same feces, different anuses (sorry).
However, I had been drifting away from reality in my vision: in this alternate timeline I had been contemplating, Hitler and the USSR would somehow have made peace. Hitler, however, was suffering from Parkinsons disease in 1945, and even, had he not killed himself, he would not have lived much longer.
And I conjectured that under his successor, the state might have become somewhat more humane, maybe along the lines of China after Mao, the USSR after Stalin or Spain in the 1950s, where Franco, too, relaxed his grip.
Yes, it would have been interesting to know who Hitler’s replacement would have been.
I think there would have been the real possibility of a Civil War, as rival factions vied for power, not unlike what we saw during Operation Valkyrie.
Yes, I agree.
Unlike what some people seem to believe, a good number would have fought for their freedom-and their lives and that of their loved ones.
Or the system might have decayed like real-life Communism, with millions of workers „going Galt“, so that, in the end, the national economy wouldn’t have been able to sustain the country and the people any longer. We have seen a similar development in the seventies and eighties in the Eastern Bloc.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.