>Americans and Britons have to cut back on some luxury foods for the war effort
>Russians are literally eating each other in Leningrad
>US and UK lose about 800,000 military personnel and civilians combined
>USSR loses 8 million soldiers alone. 9 million civilians
Should Americans and British people even be allowed to talk about 'muh wartime effort and sacrifices'?
Yes, all sides should be able to share their story.
>>796221
No. And on top of this is the fact that the Americans and Britons aiding/engaging in war against the Soviets during the civil war period, worsening the conditions of the pre-WWII USSR. Cunts, the lot of them.
>>796221
I don't think so.
We should spend a bigger part of our education on learning on the suffering of people that weren't Jews or west Europeans during world war two, but crying that we care more about those that are similar to us is like crying that people cared more about the massacre in Paris than those occuring outside of Europe.
Just because their effort was smaller don't mean it didn't matter or was an unimportant part of their daily lives.
Yes. I don't see why not. They did provide services and expend energy to fight the Nazis. Pretty sure Russia didn't fight the Pacific War as much as the Americans and Brits did.
>>796221
>UK had to cut back some luxuries
Mate, you could easily eat one persons whole weeks rations for breakfast.
I'm not going to try and say the brits or Americans got it worse, but they all contributed and many lost their lives from all countries involved.
>>796221
>abloo bloo bloo countries that weren't shit had it easier
My what a shocker
>>796221
You're ignoring that much of the suffering was self-inflicted and a result of their own government's policies.
A funny aside to British rationing was the improvement of general health. Infant mortality declined and life expectancy rose because nutrition and vitamin intake was essentially mandated.
>>796221
Can't compare rationing in USA or Canada to the UK, which was quite stringent (although fish and chips were never on the ration, according to my grandmother).
The continent was a whole other story. Bad in Germany and Occupied Europe, but nightmarish in Russia (and in Japan, where the civilian population was not getting much more than the Allied POWs held there). Schoolkids forced to make components for the crazy FUGO scheme wound up eating most of the paste they were supposed to assemble the balloons with.
http://scribol.com/anthropology-and-history/history/the-japanese-fu-go-fire-balloon-bombs-of-world-war-two
>>796221
>Leningrad
Probably one of the worst parts of WW2 that doesn't get enough attention.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-sVPjvZ7YT8&feature=youtu.be&list=PLnNmfyY_ccRHl0yAJZy3r5Nfq2-Xr22di&t=1513
>>797388
I know is deliberately inflammatory but I still can't help but get mad at it since I know there's some McCarthy type out there that believes this.
>>797388
>were farther away from Germany
>>797290
>countries that weren't subject to genocidal wars of extermination had it easier
>>797388
>person 1 and person 2 are fighting person 3
>person 1 is nearer to person 3 and has almost completely beaten them to a bloody pulp by the time person 1 shows up and kicks person 3 in the shin lightly
>>797417
*person 2 shows up
>>797413
Caused by said incompetence.
If Stalin hadn't been a paranoid retard it wouldn't have been as bad.
>>797388
Actually you forgot something.
If the Russians had been halfway competent at warfare it wouldn't have been 8 million. Unarmed soldiers charging at heavy machine guns...
>>797388
All I can say about World War 2 is the fact that French are literally the shittiest fighters and deserved to be partitioned after the war.
>>797440
>muh human waves meme
You should probably do some research on the Eastern Front beyond watching Enemy at the Gates.
>>797451
The worst part is they got a fucking occupation zone.
>>797458
I know right.
>>797430
Map needs lend-lease routes
>>797440
Soviet logistics in the beginning of the war were hilariously bad. Not until Stalingrad did Stalin put his foot down and tell them to fucking fight did they do anything. And by then, the death toll was commensurable with their ammo supply.
>horrible logistics
>too many untrained soldiers/conscripts
>high death rate
>horribly low morale due to death rate and invasion
Not a fun time to be in Russia.
>>797451
Some based partisans though
>>797467
>Some based partisans though
They lost in 1 month even Greece kept on fighting.
>>797463
Stalin was still purging the red airforce during Barbarosa.
At least the Brits were getting hit at home. The most America suffered was at a base in territory that was oh so technically theirs by that time.
>>797470
Blame the Belgins.
>>797467
The French Resistance was fucking tiny. Almost nobody joined, and the majority of French people recognized Vichy as legitimate. Far more French died fighting for the Germans than for the Allies between the fall of France and the end of the war.
Not that those resistance fighters who did exist weren't cool, but they get exaggerated a lot.
>>797388
left pic (USA) involved less than 1 million people in total
right pic (USSR) involved about 30 million people.
you suck
go back to /pol/ or /k/ or wherever the fuck you came from
>>797476
>Blame the Belgins
Why blame them there just a little European country while France was supposed to be some regional power.
>>797471
I know. What does that have to do with my post? That helps my point by showing that Russia's fighting incompetence was not entirely the fault of the soldiers.
>>796221
While your point isn't without merit, the way you try to justify it is fucking stupid. If a nation's contribution to a war is based on its death toll and suffering, then China must have singlehandedly won the Pacific War due to the 15-20 million deaths it suffered.
>>797486
>While your point isn't without merit, the way you try to justify it is fucking stupid. If a nation's contribution to a war is based on its death toll and suffering, then China must have singlehandedly won the Pacific War due to the 15-20 million deaths it suffered.
China was loosing the whole time until the Soviets initiated August storm.
>>797480
>left pic (USA) involved less than 1 million people in total
epic dude
>>797487
>China was loosing the whole time until the Soviets initiated August storm.
>What is the Second Guangxi Campagin and the Zhijiang Campaign
The Japanese were already on the back foot thanks to Anglo-American assistance and the securing of the Ledo Road by the time the USSR invaded Manchuria and Korea.
The Soviets in August storm were just rushing in to claim the spoils against a Kwantung army that had already been largely gutted by continued setbacks and costly victories in China.
>>797509
This still proves my point.
>>797516
It doesn't, the Soviets contributed nothing to a war that the Americans had already won in the Pacific, and the idea that the Soviet Union contributed the most overall just because they lost more people is just as problematic as the idea that China won the Pacific War because it lost the most people.
A better argument would be the amount of German forces killed on the Eastern Front, rather than the number of bodies the Soviets could hurl at the Germans to buy time.
>>797467
lol
Poland had twice as much resistance fighters while having smaller population, did several uprising, while frogs did exactly zero and waited for Bongs and USA to do everything for them.
>>797388
>>796221
Is it really a sacrifice when you didn't mean to kill 13.7 fucking percent of your population you fucking idiot russkies? also leave finland alone
t. simo häyhä
>and then the soviet union won the war for us
you cannot expect the eternal anglo to agree with this
>>797486
This Anon speaks the truth, how much you contribute to a war isn't based on how many people you lose or how much of the enemy you kill.
>>797388
What about japan, the Balkans and eastern Europe?
