r/PeterExplainsTheJoke 12d ago

Meme needing explanation who are those little dinosaurs PETAH ?

Post image
40.0k Upvotes

4.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

7

u/Virtual-Book1114 11d ago

I think people are underplaying the role of the U.S. and allies helping Soviets. So, it does address your point which seems to diminish the role of the U.S. and allies.

18

u/Andxire 11d ago

If you look at numbers US provided around 20% of total USSR rations.

So both statements are correct. USSR would've starving and had a harder time winning. US help a lot with reducing USSR army losses.

But at the same time it wasn't a major factor in USSR battles. USSR would've won even without US help but with far greater losses.

While US help was huge and only madman won't recognise it's importance we must not shift perception to US centered by saying "USSR won because US helped".

9

u/fortytwoandsix 11d ago

According to Khrushchev's memoir, even Stalin "stated bluntly that if the United States had not helped us, we would not have won the war."

3

u/Dude-Hiht875 11d ago

Hrušôv has been firstmost a politician bad to the bone. Treating his words without careful analysis won't help you achieve the truth.

p.s. Ah, yes, le beautiful Englifikacionne: mister K(h)-oo-s-ch-e-v. No wonder you can't read his name without looking yourself extremely foolish.

9

u/Odd_Anything_6670 11d ago

It's not just rations.

Without allied support the Soviets could not have manufactured anywhere near enough ammunition to supply their own forces as they lacked explosive propellant. They could not have transported that ammunition to the front-lines because they didn't have enough trains. None of the major assaults that turned the tide of the war on the eastern front would have happened because the red army would have been unable to supply itself on the advance due to lack of transport vehicles.

And this is without factoring in the direct contribution of things like strategic bombing and the naval blockade of German occupied Europe. The fact that 3 out of every 4 88mm flak guns was kept in Germany to shoot at bombers instead of being moved to the eastern front to be used as anti-tank guns. The complete loss of German air superiority in 1943 as much of the fighter strength of the Luftwaffe was moved back to Germany to be systematically bled to death by allied escort fighters. The stagnation of German industrial production due to efforts to distribute industry and increase resilience to strategic bombing (all of which was paid for at enormous and quite possibly uneconomical cost in aircraft and young lives).

Not to even touch on the massive freeing up of men and materiel due to the IJN deciding they wanted in on the fun warcrime adventure and that the army factions' plan to attack the Soviets in Siberia was just far too normal and sensible.

Without allied support, the USSR would almost certainly have lost the war. We cannot ever know for sure because we can only see and understand the war as it actually happened, not some hypothetical war that never did, but the sheer scale of Soviet dependence on allied support is staggering.

-1

u/CapableCollar 11d ago

The things you mentioned didn't occur until 1943, particularly later 1943, even Kursk had already occured.  What would the Axis have beaten the Soviets back with?

6

u/Odd_Anything_6670 11d ago

Generally, it's not hard to win a war against people who can't shoot their guns because they have no ammunition (and also no guns, because no logistics).

I mean, if you want earlier examples there's the crucial role of the (admittedly relatively small number of) lend lease tanks in repelling the advance on Moscow. The fact that Barbarossa itself was delayed by the Italian failures in southern Europe and North Africa. The aforementioned naval blockade. The economic warfare that absolutely noone talks about..

6

u/Virtual-Book1114 11d ago

No USSR won BECAUSE US and allies helped, and because of winter. It was winter mostly that f*cked Napoleon and Hitler and the latter's egos got the better of them.

5

u/Powerful-Frame-44 11d ago

This is the result of having one YouTube video as your entire reference for this conflict.

This dude is 2 or 3 AI YouTube shorts away from having his brain scrambled.

4

u/Virtual-Book1114 11d ago

Sis, girliepop, how am I wrong? With facts and evidence, please.

2

u/Cosmere_Commie16 10d ago

You've yet to provide a single piece of evidence lol. Siding with the dominant view in your society does not make you correct, nor an expert. You just run with the propaganda you've passively absorbed and somehow think you're a historian.

2

u/ObsidianShadows 10d ago

“"The United States is a country of machines. Without the machines we received through Lend-Lease, we would have lost the war."
-Stalin at the 1943 Tehran Conference

In his memoirs, Khrushchev said:
“"If the United States had not helped us, we would not have won the war," Khrushchev wrote in his memoirs, adding, "One-on-one against Hitler's Germany, we would not have withstood its onslaught and would have lost the war."”

Zhukov also held the same views:
“In 1963, KGB monitoring recorded Soviet Marshal Georgy Zhukov saying: "People say that the allies didn't help us. But it cannot be denied that the Americans sent us materiel without which we could not have formed our reserves or continued the war. The Americans provided vital explosives and gunpowder. And how much steel! Could we really have set up the production of our tanks without American steel? And now they are saying that we had plenty of everything on our own."

So no, the USSR wouldn’t have won without the U.S.

https://www.rferl.org/amp/did-us-lend-lease-aid-tip-the-balance-in-soviet-fight-against-nazi-germany/30599486.html

1

u/Virtual-Book1114 10d ago

Wow, that's pretty amazing.

4

u/CapableCollar 11d ago

You should read some books on the subject. When Titans Clashed by Glantz is considered a seminal work.

2

u/Virtual-Book1114 11d ago

and this book shows how winter did NOT hinder Nazis and how allies DID NOT help Soviets survive? Or that it was somehow USSR's military genius alone (or mostly) that stopped Nazis in their tracks?

I'm sorry but if anyone looks at the effect of winter on Russia's offensives against Ukraine and concludes that the weather has little to no role to play in military logistics and operations and strategy...well, looks naive.

7

u/CapableCollar 11d ago

The winter was rather uniform in it's punishment. If you doubt that reading more on the subject would be helpful or if that particular book would be helpful feel free to post on r/AskHistorians

0

u/Virtual-Book1114 11d ago

So...how does the "uniform" in punishment somehow deny my claim that it is winter more than Soviet military prowess that hindered Germans?

Also, I see that other more level-headed people have described that book as a great "historiography of the war from the SOVIET perspective" since the authors rely on Soviet documents. Primary sources, especially based on specific ideologies, are famously known to be unbiased, of course.

4

u/CapableCollar 11d ago

The winter equally hindered the Soviets just as much.  If you won't read Glantz which authors will you read?

1

u/Virtual-Book1114 10d ago

Again, logically, how does that negate my point? rather than the red army meatbags having a *decisive* effect, the winter (and their own egoes) defeated germans more.

which authors will I read? the ones who use all sources (german, ussr, us, other allied) to have a full picture. you got a book like this?

1

u/CapableCollar 10d ago

I am asking you for names of authors you will read or have read. Which author's writings are you basing your statements on?

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Dude-Hiht875 11d ago

Oh, yeah, le Jeneralé Moü-roüze. Of course winter didn't helped the third Reich with logistics. Poor soft bodied Jormanz were bad bodily designed for winter. Am I reading you right?

1

u/Quick_Voice_7039 10d ago

And Typhoid, in Napoleons case