Soviet Union didn't singlehandedly win WWII: Lend Lease

[Profileid]

Waiting for someone to refute this. Thank god Donald Trump doesn't have his head far up his ass & can see things clearly.

I did refute it.
LIBYA WAS NOT INVADED

[War Chef]

I did refute it.
LIBYA WAS NOT INVADED

Cheap semantics & dodging the question. Bombing Gaddafi's forces and supplying the rebels.

Besides, controlling the air-space is a form of invasion.

Anyway, let's hear it? Why can the U.S. do this but when Russia liberates ethnic Russians in Crimea suddenly they're the bad guy?

Fuck U.S. foreign policy so bad, this makes me blow steam from my ears. I hate hypocrites more than anything.

[Profileid]

Cheap semantics & dodging the question. Bombing Gaddafi's forces and supplying the rebels.

Besides, controlling the air-space is a form of invasion.

Anyway, let's hear it? Why can the U.S. do this but when Russia liberates ethnic Russians in Crimea suddenly they're the bad guy?

Fuck U.S. foreign policy so bad, this makes me blow steam from my ears. I hate hypocrites more than anything.

I've talked to many Libyans and none of them miss Gaddafi. Everyone seems to forget that. There's a reason the war didn't even last a year.

Reminder this is just off topic rambling on your part.

[Dandelion]

Nope. Alaska was completely paid for. Russia couldn't defend it, so at least they managed to sell it, while preventing its acquisition by the rival British and the humiliation of Russia by Britain. The deal was very fair at the time, but has obviously proved more serendipitous and of longer-term benefit for America.

Some people even mocked the US for it's stupid decision to buy Alaska for such a large sum back in the day. It turned out alright for the USA in the end.

Though it's a myth it was unpopular at the time. A minority position.

[War Chef]

I've talked to many Libyans and none of them miss Gaddafi. Everyone seems to forget that. There's a reason the war didn't even last a year.

Reminder this is just off topic rambling on your part.

hurr durr durr, Etain logic:

Asked an open-ended question about where respondents considered their “homeland” to be, Crimeans, unlike easterners or other southerners, showed fairly little affiliation with the Ukrainian state.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.02530e16a498

When asked “Do you endorse Russia’s annexation of Crimea?”, a total of 82% of the respondents answered “yes, definitely,” and another 11% answered “yes, for the most part.” Only 2% said they didn't know, and another 2% said no. Three percent did not specify their position.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapo.../#c1a61fb510db

[Profileid]

hurr durr durr, Etain logic:



https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.02530e16a498



https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapo.../#c1a61fb510db

what does any of this have to do with the lend lease act tho?

[glass]

what does any of this have to do with the lend lease act tho?

American/english supplies played negligible role, no matter if it is 4% or whole 7% as quoted in OP "historian" claims. Large part of these supplies was of inferior quality (tanks for example). And supplies started arriving when Hitlers plans of fast victory failed, thus he already lost the war. Overreseptantion of supplied materials in certain areas can be explained very easily. Having this covered by allies, soviet industry could have focused on something else.
For example, you buy half of your food in shop A. Does it mean if shop A gets closed your rations would get halved? No it does not, because you would buy more food in shop B. Or if someone covers 5% of your bills, does it mean you can not fully pay for yourself?
If you were not that dumb you would focused on more noticable american/british contribution to the victory. Bombing Germoney to the ground, destroying industrial facilities, killing civilians etc. But then again, it came to action too late, when war's outcome was already decided.

PS: No matter who exactly invaded Lybia, US directly or its minions. All shitstorms in Middle EAst is a result of US interference in the region. And no amount of CIA payed trolls pretending to be happy lybians would change that.

[Sacrificed Ram]

This is not correct. Soviet Union and Germany at the beginning were allies and decided the division of Europe.

A not agression pact isn't exactly an alliance...

[Sarmatian]

In 1939.

Nazi invasion of Poland: September 1
GB-France declaration of war against 3rd Reich: September 3
USSR invasion of Poland: September 17
Fall of Warsaw (capital): September 27 to German Nazis.

If USSR was friend of the western democratic world, technically they should have declared war against Nazis on Sept. 3 and directly attack the German forces. Yet they didn't. However, GB-France still didn't bother to see the USSR as enemy. I think Soviets were opportunist. Soviets can't be blamed for what they were however it seems GB-France were hypocrites.

Don't be an idiot. There are no friends in international politics unless it's formally confirmed by agreements. And USSR had no agreements of alliance with any of Western powers. UK had alliance with Poland hence the reasons behind declaration of war on Germany. They were simply obliged to do so.

[Sarmatian]

Partizans were really just bunch of rapists. They did nothing else than harass the civilians. They're effect on the real war was insignificant.

You should educate yourself better on that matter. For example read about Sidor Kovpak and his partisan army. His experience might come handy to you one day