Is the reason the Soviets lost 30 million people in WW2 due to military ineptness and corruption?

[Profileid]

The Soviet union needed homefield advantage, 5x the population, massive aid from the west to even have a chance.

[War Chef]

^ The but-hurt is strong with this one.

[Pansarkamrat]

The did lose 30million peapole because of their military doctrine.

[War Chef]

We lost 30 million people nd shiet

THUG LIFE

[Profileid]

Excuses Excuses.

And no that's not true. Germany is an extremely densely populated country with many urban centers.

The population of the Soviet Union in 1941 was 196 million. Even after Stalin went full retard and killed large portions of the population.
The population of Germany in the same year was approximately 70 million.

The USSR had over HUNDRED MILLION MORE PEOPLE but couldn't fight back against Germany without western help. Absolute subhumans

[Armenian Bishop]

because you OUTNUMBERED THEM BY MILLIONS.

Yes, Soviets did indeed outnumber the Eastern Front Axis Forces by millions -- it's not an excuse, it's reality. But, it went a lot deeper than that: The sheer size of the USSR caused a logistical nightmare for the Axis, on the other hand, America's "lend lease policy" provided vital assistance, especially in 1941 & 1942 when the Soviet military situation was in disarray.

Khrushchev acknowledged its importance: "First, I would like to tell about some remarks Stalin made and repeated several times when we were 'discussing freely' among ourselves. He stated bluntly that if the United States had not helped us, we would not have won the war. If we had had to fight Nazi Germany one on one, we could not have stood up against Germany's pressure, and we would have lost the war. No one ever discussed this subject officially, and I don't think Stalin left any written evidence of his opinion, but I will state here that several times in conversations with me he noted that these were the actual circumstances."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lend-Lease

[Rumata]

In the crucial battles of WWII the numerical advantage of Soviet side wasn't so big as to explain the Nazi losses. The matter is when the tide of war turned west both sides had experienced and well equipped troops while in the first stage of Eastern campaign only Nazi army had it.

[War Chef]

In the crucial battles of WWII the numerical advantage of Soviet side wasn't so big as to explain the Nazi losses. The matter is when the tide of war turned west both sides had experienced and well equipped troops while in the first stage of Eastern campaign only Nazi army had it.

Yup. Try to explain that to our raisin-brained friends. The Nazi's had already Blitzed their way through several European countries and their troops had become battle-hardened veterans with experience.

[Rumata]

Our losses in that war were extremely dire (for different reasons). So, indeed, in a sense the true winner was the West and families like Rothschild in particular.

[Teutone]

its due to german superiority, if it wasnt for the anglos we would have crushed them.