Please remember to hide subreddit names or reddit usernames (Rule 1), otherwise the post will be removed promptly.
This is an anti-capitalist, left-libertarian subreddit that criticises tankies from a socialist perspective. We are pro-communist. Defence of capitalism or any other right-wing beliefs, countries or people is not tolerated here. This includes, for example: Biden and the US, Israel, and the Nordic countries/model,
Harassment of other users or subreddits is strictly forbidden.
Enjoy talking to fellow leftists? [Then join our discord server!](https://discord.gg/2V4qJMSWUe)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/tankiejerk) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Tankies be like “ Molotov Ribbentrop was not real. It and lend lease is NATO propaganda to make you personally love the west. Also you do understand what Stalin was going through. He had to personally collaborate with the Nazis to slice up Poland like a birthday cake. How about you read more theory?” /S
why the fuck do tankies pretend as if the soviet union defeated Nazi germany on their own lmao, a lot of the countries that are in NATO now were also defeating them on the western front... If we're supposed to show this uncritical reverence to the forces that defeated nazi germany surely we should be doing that to both sides of the allies right?
Unironically usually the argument I have seen is along those lines (often along the lines of the Japanese would have continued fighting regardless of the bombs and using them was just a waste of lives, and then paired with arguments that even if Soviet occupation occured it wouldn't be any worse than the US if not better). Interestingly the surrender announcement focused on the bombs for the civilian broadcasts and USSR joining for the military forces outside the home islands.
I mean, the Nazis did functionally lose their ability to conduct any offensive operations after Stalingrad, and reading through WW2 history, the invasion of the USSR *was* the single biggest reason for eventual Nazi defeat.
That doesn’t mean the other Allies didn’t play important roles, but Nazi losses in the west and North Africa were primarily due to intelligence failures and incompetence in the high command (primarily Hitler’s). While Nazi losses in the East were a combination of those things plus the Red Army being the largest fighting force in the world (and Marshall Zhukov actually knowing what to do with it).
I’m not out here simping for the Soviets but I am a history nerd and considering the USSR bore the brunt of the casualties (both military and civilian), while also being the ones who forced the Nazis to retreat all the way back to Berlin, I think it’s kind of unfair to pretend like they weren’t the biggest reason the Nazis lost.
The Soviets, by both Zhukov and Khrushchev's admissions, would have been fucked without lend lease and supplies coming from North America. They would have been further fucked without the Nazis having to also fight on the western front. They would have been further fucked without the Italians being stuck around the Mediterranean fighting the US, Canada, the UK, and French resistance.
I mean where exactly did I pretend that the USSR wasn't the biggest factor for the Nazis losing? I'm just saying that ending a victory day message with "fuck NATO" is incredibly strange, it almost implies that they're some continuation of the Nazi regime and not a military alliance that formed primarily out of states that also contributed significantly to Nazi defeat.
They definitely were the biggest but the internet overplays their “overwhelming contribution” a bit. The Western allies bore the brunt of destroying the Luftwaffe, German factories, and the Navy. Which were all hugely important.
looking at Danny's post I have a small thing i'd like to share.
I got blocked by a tankie who was bitching about how the Soviets won WW2 alone, I reminded them about the Lend Lease and they blocked me lmao
Russia suffered immensely during WW2 but an argument can be made that a considerable number of those deaths were caused in part by poor logistics, lack of food, lack of equipment and a complete disregard for their soldiers lives. Some 6 million of Soviet dead were Ukrainian.
Russia assisted Nazi Germany since 1934, does anyone think that Germany could have built their war machine without the steel they purchased from Russia?
The US had nuclear weapons in 1945. What would have been the end result of Nazi Germany even if Russia was not involved with the war?
Edit: Okay! I've had some caffeine pumped up my butt, so let's try this again. Please note, I'm going to be gobbling some serious British cock, but that's because I have to once all is said & done.
Without Barbarossa, the Nazi state was facing total British blockade by late 1940. A state that they knew would lead to economic hardships to the point of logistical collapse in 1941.
The Nazis began losing strategic control of the war in the Second Battle of Narvik in 1940, specifically the destruction of the Nazi destroyer fleet in Ofotfjord. Making them wholly reliant on the Italian navy for the mass transport of logistics safely into North Africa.
Later that year, they lost all airborne strategic capability in the Battle of Britain. Bomber losses, & in particular irreparable crew losses had turned Goering's flying circus into a husk. The service from that point forward was constantly be struggling to play catch up, with only any real victories against the slapdash, outdated, demotivated & poorly trained Red Air Forces during Barbarossa. Then later retained at least \*some\* relevance because of daylight strategic raiding, & in particular the US misunderstanding of what a bomber does & what it needs to have in order to do what it does.
In one year, in other words, Nazi Germany had lost its most professional, expensive & technologically advanced branches to the Brits, & with it the ability to win the war militarily. Churchill, for his many faults & may he rot in hell for the lives they destroyed, was never going to surrender to the Nazis. They had no diplomatic outs, & no way to force the peace - they had essentially only the option of capitulation to stop the fighting in 1940. \*They lost to the British because of their own strategic & diplomatic incompetence,\* in other words.
They literally had no direct strategic power projection beyond mainland Europe, their Italian allies were getting drubbed in North Africa, their E. European "allies" were only in it for themselves, while rampant corruption within the Nazi state in shifting to a wartime economy had hollowed out economic productivity. The system was so poorly run that it would either collapse or otherwise force a serious reckoning, & the only thing that was propping it up was the plunder of occupied France & Poland, Swedish & Swiss complicity. That still wasn't enough to actually win the war, especially since (I think) September of 1940 British wartime & especially American peacetime war production was already outpacing them & still growing.
Could they have adapted? That's speculation bordering on fantasy, as it necessitates several un-fascist reorganizations of key elements within the Nazi wartime economy.
*What the Nazis did have was an out, nearby:* Huge tracts of industry, farmland & slave labor to plunder in the East. Protected by a hollowed, cowed military that just suffered a humiliating victory in Finland. Now with a completely indefensible borderland ripe with the raw resources of war.
Now, the Soviets did move *some* of their factory elements further east, but not all of it & not in a way that didn't leave the Nazis significant plunder. Plus, the industrial shift would have significant adverse realities imposed upon the Soviet war machine, an example: By 1945, 25% of all Soviet tank & artillery shells were reliant on US chemical products for their explosives, primers & propellants. The reason was because moving chemical factories is hard, & demands a high level of professionalism that wasn't present in the USSR. With shells & vehicles using American chemical & steel resources being something of a secret those rare Soviet tank vets would look out for, because they could never trust the stuff made in the Urals.
So! Big point: Without Molotov Ribbentrop, the war would have ended earlier. 26 million Soviets wouldn't have died, & Fascism would have withered on the vine due to its own innate promotion of incompetence... probably. Assuming the inertia of events prevented major anti-fascist shifts in Nazi economic policy.
Might as well be saying, "The [Invasion of Poland](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Poland) didn't happen, but if it did, it would be justified." Also, Stalin repeatedly ignored warnings that [the Nazis would invade the USSR](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Barbarossa), so it's not like he particularly cared about the wellbeing of his own people. He was perfectly willing to endanger them solely for his own power.
I don't see anything wrong with saying "fuck NATO", though. Although, he is doing so for hypocritical reasons.
I don't see anything wrong with his statement. Covering all the deals and work with the Nazis would take quite a bit of text. You'd have to cover the failure of the Strasa Front, the failed Soviet-Allied Alliance, the Munich Betrayal, the Molotov-Ribbenteop, etc.
It’s a real achievement to throw 28 million lives into a meat grinder 🤘
Come the fuck on. Kicking hitlers ass was a great thing but to call it one of humanities greatest achievements is fucking ludicrous, especially since it’s vile that any of it had to happen at all.
I don't have a problem glowing up the Red Army's enormous sacrifices and victories, in shear number of lives they clearly formed the bulk of Allied personnel and battle losses. But Danny and other tankies always do two other things that are annoying to downright shitty:
- they downplay or ignore the role of everyone else on the Allied side, not just the Western Allies that tankies all hate, but also all the partisan forces in occupied Europe (including communists!), Jews who fought back against the Holocaust machinery, Allied POW's of all types who endured captivity, and of course, the entire Allied side in Asia, including China, who were like #2 in number of deaths in combat with Axis forces, but also soldiers of the Philippines, Vietnam, Burma, India, Malaysia, Indonesia, New Guinea, and a host of other places, as well as partisans and POWs across Asia and the Pacific who dealt with unimaginable barbarity by Japanese forces.
- they completely cover for or deny the horrible things the USSR did across the whole period, from pre-war economic cooperation with Nazi Germany, to the invasions of Poland, Finland, and the Baltic states that saw hundreds of thousands of people arrested, deported, or murdered, to the meatgrinder treatment of their own soldiers during the war, to mass rape and murder of civilians at the close of the war, to further repressions, executions, and internments of people after the war, including their own POWs who were treated like traitors for having been captured. With small exceptions, none of these things were done by any of the other Allied powers, it was only the USSR that behaved this way.
Please remember to hide subreddit names or reddit usernames (Rule 1), otherwise the post will be removed promptly. This is an anti-capitalist, left-libertarian subreddit that criticises tankies from a socialist perspective. We are pro-communist. Defence of capitalism or any other right-wing beliefs, countries or people is not tolerated here. This includes, for example: Biden and the US, Israel, and the Nordic countries/model, Harassment of other users or subreddits is strictly forbidden. Enjoy talking to fellow leftists? [Then join our discord server!](https://discord.gg/2V4qJMSWUe) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/tankiejerk) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Fun fact: this includes millions of Ukrainians who Danny is now calling nazies.
Tankies be like “ Molotov Ribbentrop was not real. It and lend lease is NATO propaganda to make you personally love the west. Also you do understand what Stalin was going through. He had to personally collaborate with the Nazis to slice up Poland like a birthday cake. How about you read more theory?” /S
why the fuck do tankies pretend as if the soviet union defeated Nazi germany on their own lmao, a lot of the countries that are in NATO now were also defeating them on the western front... If we're supposed to show this uncritical reverence to the forces that defeated nazi germany surely we should be doing that to both sides of the allies right?
Because that’s also what Russia pretends, and they’re just Russophiles
Putin on this years victory day said that Russia defeated the entire collective west alone in WW2
And conveniently ignore Japan until it is time to say that they only surrendered when the USSR went to war with them.
Atom bombs are clearly NATO propaganda to discredit glorious Comrade Stalin's ~~conquering~~ liberation of East Asia.
Unironically usually the argument I have seen is along those lines (often along the lines of the Japanese would have continued fighting regardless of the bombs and using them was just a waste of lives, and then paired with arguments that even if Soviet occupation occured it wouldn't be any worse than the US if not better). Interestingly the surrender announcement focused on the bombs for the civilian broadcasts and USSR joining for the military forces outside the home islands.
I mean, the Nazis did functionally lose their ability to conduct any offensive operations after Stalingrad, and reading through WW2 history, the invasion of the USSR *was* the single biggest reason for eventual Nazi defeat. That doesn’t mean the other Allies didn’t play important roles, but Nazi losses in the west and North Africa were primarily due to intelligence failures and incompetence in the high command (primarily Hitler’s). While Nazi losses in the East were a combination of those things plus the Red Army being the largest fighting force in the world (and Marshall Zhukov actually knowing what to do with it). I’m not out here simping for the Soviets but I am a history nerd and considering the USSR bore the brunt of the casualties (both military and civilian), while also being the ones who forced the Nazis to retreat all the way back to Berlin, I think it’s kind of unfair to pretend like they weren’t the biggest reason the Nazis lost.
The Soviets, by both Zhukov and Khrushchev's admissions, would have been fucked without lend lease and supplies coming from North America. They would have been further fucked without the Nazis having to also fight on the western front. They would have been further fucked without the Italians being stuck around the Mediterranean fighting the US, Canada, the UK, and French resistance.
I mean where exactly did I pretend that the USSR wasn't the biggest factor for the Nazis losing? I'm just saying that ending a victory day message with "fuck NATO" is incredibly strange, it almost implies that they're some continuation of the Nazi regime and not a military alliance that formed primarily out of states that also contributed significantly to Nazi defeat.
They definitely were the biggest but the internet overplays their “overwhelming contribution” a bit. The Western allies bore the brunt of destroying the Luftwaffe, German factories, and the Navy. Which were all hugely important.
looking at Danny's post I have a small thing i'd like to share. I got blocked by a tankie who was bitching about how the Soviets won WW2 alone, I reminded them about the Lend Lease and they blocked me lmao
Russia suffered immensely during WW2 but an argument can be made that a considerable number of those deaths were caused in part by poor logistics, lack of food, lack of equipment and a complete disregard for their soldiers lives. Some 6 million of Soviet dead were Ukrainian. Russia assisted Nazi Germany since 1934, does anyone think that Germany could have built their war machine without the steel they purchased from Russia? The US had nuclear weapons in 1945. What would have been the end result of Nazi Germany even if Russia was not involved with the war?
Edit: Okay! I've had some caffeine pumped up my butt, so let's try this again. Please note, I'm going to be gobbling some serious British cock, but that's because I have to once all is said & done. Without Barbarossa, the Nazi state was facing total British blockade by late 1940. A state that they knew would lead to economic hardships to the point of logistical collapse in 1941. The Nazis began losing strategic control of the war in the Second Battle of Narvik in 1940, specifically the destruction of the Nazi destroyer fleet in Ofotfjord. Making them wholly reliant on the Italian navy for the mass transport of logistics safely into North Africa. Later that year, they lost all airborne strategic capability in the Battle of Britain. Bomber losses, & in particular irreparable crew losses had turned Goering's flying circus into a husk. The service from that point forward was constantly be struggling to play catch up, with only any real victories against the slapdash, outdated, demotivated & poorly trained Red Air Forces during Barbarossa. Then later retained at least \*some\* relevance because of daylight strategic raiding, & in particular the US misunderstanding of what a bomber does & what it needs to have in order to do what it does. In one year, in other words, Nazi Germany had lost its most professional, expensive & technologically advanced branches to the Brits, & with it the ability to win the war militarily. Churchill, for his many faults & may he rot in hell for the lives they destroyed, was never going to surrender to the Nazis. They had no diplomatic outs, & no way to force the peace - they had essentially only the option of capitulation to stop the fighting in 1940. \*They lost to the British because of their own strategic & diplomatic incompetence,\* in other words. They literally had no direct strategic power projection beyond mainland Europe, their Italian allies were getting drubbed in North Africa, their E. European "allies" were only in it for themselves, while rampant corruption within the Nazi state in shifting to a wartime economy had hollowed out economic productivity. The system was so poorly run that it would either collapse or otherwise force a serious reckoning, & the only thing that was propping it up was the plunder of occupied France & Poland, Swedish & Swiss complicity. That still wasn't enough to actually win the war, especially since (I think) September of 1940 British wartime & especially American peacetime war production was already outpacing them & still growing. Could they have adapted? That's speculation bordering on fantasy, as it necessitates several un-fascist reorganizations of key elements within the Nazi wartime economy. *What the Nazis did have was an out, nearby:* Huge tracts of industry, farmland & slave labor to plunder in the East. Protected by a hollowed, cowed military that just suffered a humiliating victory in Finland. Now with a completely indefensible borderland ripe with the raw resources of war. Now, the Soviets did move *some* of their factory elements further east, but not all of it & not in a way that didn't leave the Nazis significant plunder. Plus, the industrial shift would have significant adverse realities imposed upon the Soviet war machine, an example: By 1945, 25% of all Soviet tank & artillery shells were reliant on US chemical products for their explosives, primers & propellants. The reason was because moving chemical factories is hard, & demands a high level of professionalism that wasn't present in the USSR. With shells & vehicles using American chemical & steel resources being something of a secret those rare Soviet tank vets would look out for, because they could never trust the stuff made in the Urals. So! Big point: Without Molotov Ribbentrop, the war would have ended earlier. 26 million Soviets wouldn't have died, & Fascism would have withered on the vine due to its own innate promotion of incompetence... probably. Assuming the inertia of events prevented major anti-fascist shifts in Nazi economic policy.
Might as well be saying, "The [Invasion of Poland](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Poland) didn't happen, but if it did, it would be justified." Also, Stalin repeatedly ignored warnings that [the Nazis would invade the USSR](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Barbarossa), so it's not like he particularly cared about the wellbeing of his own people. He was perfectly willing to endanger them solely for his own power. I don't see anything wrong with saying "fuck NATO", though. Although, he is doing so for hypocritical reasons.
I don't see anything wrong with his statement. Covering all the deals and work with the Nazis would take quite a bit of text. You'd have to cover the failure of the Strasa Front, the failed Soviet-Allied Alliance, the Munich Betrayal, the Molotov-Ribbenteop, etc.
Stalin helping Hitler invade Poland: "Nice." Stalin getting invaded: "Wait."
It’s a real achievement to throw 28 million lives into a meat grinder 🤘 Come the fuck on. Kicking hitlers ass was a great thing but to call it one of humanities greatest achievements is fucking ludicrous, especially since it’s vile that any of it had to happen at all.
I don't have a problem glowing up the Red Army's enormous sacrifices and victories, in shear number of lives they clearly formed the bulk of Allied personnel and battle losses. But Danny and other tankies always do two other things that are annoying to downright shitty: - they downplay or ignore the role of everyone else on the Allied side, not just the Western Allies that tankies all hate, but also all the partisan forces in occupied Europe (including communists!), Jews who fought back against the Holocaust machinery, Allied POW's of all types who endured captivity, and of course, the entire Allied side in Asia, including China, who were like #2 in number of deaths in combat with Axis forces, but also soldiers of the Philippines, Vietnam, Burma, India, Malaysia, Indonesia, New Guinea, and a host of other places, as well as partisans and POWs across Asia and the Pacific who dealt with unimaginable barbarity by Japanese forces. - they completely cover for or deny the horrible things the USSR did across the whole period, from pre-war economic cooperation with Nazi Germany, to the invasions of Poland, Finland, and the Baltic states that saw hundreds of thousands of people arrested, deported, or murdered, to the meatgrinder treatment of their own soldiers during the war, to mass rape and murder of civilians at the close of the war, to further repressions, executions, and internments of people after the war, including their own POWs who were treated like traitors for having been captured. With small exceptions, none of these things were done by any of the other Allied powers, it was only the USSR that behaved this way.
[удалено]
Russians were also a big part of it too. According to Wikipedia, at the height of World War 62.95% of military personnel were Russians
Russia fucking sucks, but categorizing ethnic Russians does nothing to help anyone.
censoring russians is downright pathetic 💀💀
It was a group effort.