was there a possibility that USSR wouldn't join the allies in WW2?
Yeh. It had horrible relations with the entente because they fought in ww1.
>>894948
I often see threads on /k/ and /pol/ stating how USSR would've collapsed without amercian industrial support, which is, to the extent of my knowledge a little far fetched, seeing how flexible and seemingly unstoppable were ussr industrial facilities.
So to which extent is any of this true?
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/hitler-and-the-socialist-dream-1186455.html
I think Goebbels or Hitler remarked that capitalism would be even worse than Bolshevism.
OP your post is shit and this shit thread needs to stop being made. Stalin and Hitler were always going to fight and whiggish great man history of personality is ridiculous; the political interests of the USSR and United Germany were and always would be diametrically opposed
>>895134
>on /pol/ and /k/
No, and the Burgers and buttblasted Poles/Czechs on there are lying through their teeth
>>895178
Why are you making me post this again? Educate yourself from something other than socialisms=stuff I don't like lmao
>>894948
> was there a possibility that USSR wouldn't join the allies in WW2?
Yes. Soviets were content with sitting WW2 out and getting the whole World Revolution thing done at some point far off in future, when they've achieved total technological and industrial supremacy over capitalists.
>>895134
> USSR would've collapsed without amercian industrial support
> So to which extent is any of this true?
Soviets claimed something along the lines of "4%", IIRC.
Hitler and Stalin were petty people obsessed with wars of ideology, the conflict was inevitable
>>894948
Well the Soviets had their own agenda independent of the Allies but I don't think so. They joined them because they lost their former allies and almost pissed themselves in 1941.
Soviets plan for ww2 was to stay neutral and have Hitler ruin europe for them. They had long reaching plans to expand but at the time they were mostly preparing for it. To my understanding its the main reason why germany attacked. Winter war gave the impression the soviets were so behind their preparations that the most ideal time to attack them was now and not later.
>>895218
> They joined them
Who joined whom?
Soviets didn't have a single ally (except Mongolia, of course).
>>895233
They were formelly in the Allies but of course we have to differentiate between the so-called liberal democracies and the USSR with its satelite states. It's difficult to talk about real allies with a country like USSR.
>>894948
Of course, Hitler and Stalin were practically allies up until operation Barbarossa.
>>895197
>Stalin and Hitler were always going to fight and whiggish great man history of personality is ridiculous
>t. high school marxist
WW2 is the epitomization of "big man history". Operation Barbarossa was vehemently decried by every single nazi general under Hitler's command, and it is Hitler's will alone which made the operation go forward, and changed world history forever.
>muh economic structures determine historical events!!
Kill yourself
>>895233
>mongolia
I can see it now, Krauts running in fear from their foxholes as soon as they hear this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qx8hrhBZJ98
>>895233
While most see the baltic expansion as them just setting up puppet states, the soviets called them allies at the time. They didnt absorb them compleatly until after WW2 if i remember right.
>>895238
Why am I imagining an American writing this post?
>>895247
Because you're an anti-american idiot?
>>895245
> absorb
Soviets never "absorbed" Baltics. Each republic of USSR was (in theory) independent. There was a separate government, budget, etc. The West simply refused to recognize them as such. Kinda hypocritical, in light of EU policies.
As for becoming part of USSR - that happened in 1940.
>>895262
Yeah, I'm sure the baltic republics enjoyed considerable degrees of autonomy and self-determination!
Jesus...
>>895202
>Soviets claimed something along the lines of "4%", IIRC.
Joseph Stalin did claim that, however internal documents and post Stalin era soviets commentators paint a different picture. I have seen figures of 7, 8, 8.6, and 11 %. Personal I disregard the 11% figure because it is a outlier and appears to have its origin in soviet post mortem political slander rather then research.
>>895239
>Operation Barbarossa was vehemently decried by every single nazi general under Hitler's command, and it is Hitler's will alone which made the operation go forward, and changed world history forever.
Don't be retarded. Hitler had the support of the people, the Luftwaffe, and the industrial elites. This support didn't result exclusively from Hitler's wishing to have Barbarossa really bad.
Simple narratives may appeal to simple people, but they are seldom even remotely accurate.
![russia-1926[3].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/w7hhUIs.jpg "russia-1926[3].jpg")
>>895134
They weren't very flexible or unstoppable, and they lost absolute most of it when Germans steamrolled everything in 1941. Urals industrial cluster was the only one left by then, essentially; and there were some evacuated factories. Add to that low population density of Soviet Union to the East of Don (pic related) and atrocious logistics to the East of Moscow, only then you can picture how dire the situation had really been. In addition, the most valuable American support was in logistics, fuel, explosives and rare metals, i.e. something USSR couldn't really produce.
However, it is also true that Lend-Lease started working at full capacity past 1943, when USSR managed to more or less switch economy to constant tonk production and most strategic battles had already been won.
In short, who the fuck knows, but you shouldn't underestimate American aid.
>>894948
No. Stalin actually planned to attack Germany eventually.
>>895276
By 1939 Baltic states were authocratic shit-holes with secret police, political prisoners, semi-fascist regime and fucked-up economy.
Not glorious independent beacons of FREEDUMS you seem to imagine.
>>895289
And they still were better than worker's paradise.
>>895282
> I have seen figures of 7, 8, 8.6, and 11 %.
Where exactly have you seen those?
I've seen 7%, but that was some article in US military journal.
>>895247
I don't know. Personally I don't think many Americans know too much about WWII in Europe. Need a continental for that.
>>895293
Proofs, please.
>>895283
>Don't be retarded. Hitler had the support of the people, the Luftwaffe, and the industrial elites
Wrong, don't really know if Goering supported him, and wrong.
Hitler had very little support for his wars. For instance, when the Poland was vanquished, he staged a big parade in Berlin. Practically no one showed up and he was infuriated.
>This support didn't result exclusively from Hitler's wishing to have Barbarossa really bad.
It did, Hitler had to sack most of his generals in order to push through operation Barbarossa. At least he didn't kill them like Stalin would've done...
>Simple narratives may appeal to simple people, but they are seldom even remotely accurate.
Says the guy spouting John Green tier history. I suggest you pick up those collections of slices of wood which are painted upon, usually called "books".
>>895303
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NKVD_Order_No._00447
>>895312
Please, die in fire. Screaming.
>>895289
This guy is right. Interwar Baltics were shitholes so it wasn't surprising some of the populace was even pro Soviet especially those in the Army who got incorporated into the Red Army. When they came back they built most Soviet institutions in the country and a nativist policy lead to bizarre shit like local NKVD border guards being Russian but with exclusively Latvian or Lithuanian officers, a trend which ended by the early 60s and Kruschev reversal of the policy
>>895276
Yeah except the Baltics were Soviet Quebec. Local party apparatus often did wtv the fuck it wanted and defended people it deemed important for nationalist purposes. They had a disproportionate amount of money in relation to their size.
I'm not saying average people lived super well or enjoyed muh freedoms (though of course they didn't have those in the interwar states to begin with), I'm just pointing out people who think the USSR was this place with a grey skies machine where dictate come from Moscow and are followed unquestionably by secret police are retarded. The amount of autonomy enjoyed by party and local governments could often be staggering hence why huge amounts of black marketeering and under the table trade with Finland and Sweden were tolerated in the Baltic states. Along with local language protection etc.
>>895293
>t. Government of Estonia
Nawhhh, those countries were still shitholes and modern post cold war nationalism claiming otherwise is retarded
>>895303
You're gonna get the same sources as always. Service and buttblasted Balts
>>895303
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovietization_of_the_Baltic_states#Mass_deportations_1940-1941
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Priboi
>soviet """"""""""liberation"""""""""""
Go back to /leftypol/ you stalinboo
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_deportations_from_Estonia
I'm sure the balts were thrilled.
![7UfgYWU[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/4Esvfpn.png "7UfgYWU[1].png")
>>895316
>Russian lying compulsively again
Oh boy here we go.
>>895318
>I'm not saying average people lived super well or enjoyed muh freedoms (though of course they didn't have those in the interwar states to begin with),
The interwar baltic states enjoyed a gorillion times more freedom than under soviet occupation. You cannot compare the stalinian totalitarian nightmare to run of the mill dictatorships.
>'m just pointing out people who think the USSR was this place with a grey skies machine where dictate come from Moscow and are followed unquestionably by secret police are retarded.
No, it's the historical truth. You're american, aren't you?
>>895319
> Black Book of Communism
Can I has some less retarted sources?
Soviets were deporting from Baltics:
a) prisoners (non-political)
b) political convicts (i.e. corrupt officials of the previous regime and people literally caught preparing for armed insurrection)
c) people with no proper home/work (prostitutes, homeless, petty criminals)
That's 10-20 thousand people in total from each Baltic state.
Also, start with the deportation of Germans from Baltics, if you want to be fair.
>>895289
Not to mention they were not "national" republics, there were shitloads of Jews, Russians and Poles, especially in capitals and other big cities.
>>895356
>Can I has some less retarted sources?
Like what, Stalinian propaganda sources?
What's wrong with the black book of communism, other than it hurts your fee-fees?
Anyways, no point in arguing. You're a brain dead commie, you're immune to facts and reason.
>>895308
>Hitler had to sack most of his generals in order to push through operation Barbarossa
Name a single general who was sacked for opposing to begin Barbarossa.
>>895308
>don't really know if Goering supported him
You really don't know if Goering supported Hitler? Really?
>For instance, when the Poland was vanquished, he staged a big parade in Berlin. Practically no one showed up and he was infuriated.
Yeah getting people to show up to parades was a real headache for Hitler.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWAhfY-vo7g
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQtxnZrFg_4
>>895364
> What's wrong with the black book of communism, other than it hurts your fee-fees?
It's bullshit.
> You're a brain dead commie
From a fucking Lithuania. But our glorious American overlords obviously know The Truth about my own history.
>>895392
>It's bullshit.
Lol, can't argue with someone like this. You'll dismiss historical evidence as "bullshit".
I'm done.
>>895295
>> I have seen figures of 7, 8, 8.6, and 11 %.
>Where exactly have you seen those?
I has been some time since I have done reading on the subject, so i can not name were i came across it. Sorry.
>I've seen 7%, but that was some article in US military journal.
But I can say a thing about the 7 % figure. I get the feeling that 7 % is for US aid to the Soviets only, but it is some times mislabeled for the grand total.
> U.S. aid constituted only about 7 percent of what the Soviet Union itself produced during the war, but it did allow the Soviets to concentrate their production in the most efficient manner.
http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/lend-lease.aspx
People forget that the UK also gave aid to the soviets.
>>895378
>You really don't know if Goering supported Hitler?
Yes, I don't really know if Goering personally supported Operation Barbarossa. Could you provide a historical source to back up your claim?
>Yeah getting people to show up to parades was a real headache for Hitler.
People weren't forced to go to parades, y'know.
Stupid faggot
>>895374
He didn't sack them for opposing Barbarossa, the purges happened earlier on. By the time Barbarossa came along all the army staff were puppets of Hitler.
There was a big wave of replacement among german officers in 1938 and 1939 iirc
>>895405
> People forget that the UK also gave aid to the soviets.
Well, Soviets also supplied UK, so it could cancel out (unlike with the US).
>>895412
>Well, Soviets also supplied UK
Really? I did not know about that.
What did they give? Was it just prototypes, or was it production models?
>>895406
>People weren't forced to go to parades, y'know.
So first you claim that practically no one showed up, then now you imply that they were forced to go to parades? You do realize those two statements are irreconcilable, right?
>>895410
There was no "purge." There was one high profile sacking of a couple people, but that was in 1938. The general staff was anything but "puppets of Hitler," and even after 1938 sacking, continued to conspire against Hitler and opposed him openly.
>There was a big wave of replacement among german officers in 1938 and 1939 iirc
You don't remember correctly, or you never knew anything.
>>895406
>Yes, I don't really know if Goering personally supported Operation Barbarossa. Could you provide a historical source to back up your claim?
You really need "a historical source" to be convinced that the Luftwaffe supported Hitler? Holy shit.
>>895430
>then now you imply that they were forced to go to parades?
Do you know how to read? I said people ===> weren't <==== forced to go to parades.
Perhaps you should wipe the cum from your eyes?
>>895439
>You don't remember correctly
Right after saying :
>There was one high profile sacking of a couple people, but that was in 1938.
Top fucking kek.
Also it was more than "a couple of people".
>>895442
>like what, you need evidence and shit? What are you a nazi? I'm literally shaking as I'm typing this!
Obviously the Luftwaffe didn't sit one the sidelines you fucking moron. My question was whether Goering held any reservations concerning the viability of operation Barbarossa and whether he expressed those reservations towards Hitler.
>>895425
> What did they give? Was it just prototypes, or was it production models?
Well, I'm not 100% certain what Soviets actually gave (Soviet Supply Protocols are about negotiations), but British requested 250 thousand rifles with ammunition from USSR in 1941.
>>895502
>Do you know how to read? I said people ===> weren't <==== forced to go to parades.
So what are you trying to say? That you were wrong and people in fact did go to parades? Do you even remember what you meant to say?
>Also it was more than "a couple of people".
Who?
>My question was whether Goering held any reservations concerning the viability of operation Barbarossa and whether he expressed those reservations towards Hitler
You are hopeless.
>>895517
>So what are you trying to say? That you were wrong and people in fact did go to parades?
I never denied that people went to parades you stupid fucking nigger. That was the shitty strawman you constructed. I said that there was a specific parade held after the fall of Poland, which nobody went to and which made Hitler absolutely furious. It was a little historical anecdote, and you've decided to sperg out hard about it like an autistic nigger.
>Do you even remember what you meant to say?
Tough talk coming from someone who can't tell the difference between "were" and "weren't".
>Who?
After 5 seconds of googling : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blomberg%E2%80%93Fritsch_Affair
And no, before you say so, the purge was not limited to fritsch and blomberg. They were just the two most senior officers concerned.
>You are hopeless.
Yes by all means, avoid my question. That makes you look real smart, cool and witty.
