I can't get tired of this pic, the truth behind, and, over all, the obnoxiously great butthurt.
What do russkies/baguettes/murricans of /int think?
Is it asking French people who they think contributed most to German defeat?
>>53129540
Yes.
>>53129395
I mean, it's wrong. Don't know what else to say.
>>53129395
As time goes on people tend to dispense with dated theories
>>53129395
Well, sad but true, we have bad reputation now.
>>53129886
Most people here still know the truth.
>>53129395
They should add profs for this "interview", desu.
For my point of you, it was just another internet provocation. Like: rook, muricans so stupid! And in this case muricans -> frogs
>>53129395
70 years into Hollywood WW2 films and shill and people will give you this look
>>53129990
Kind of hard to forget when you all descend from Slav rape babies
>>53129811
Actually, it's been the opposite, in my experience. After the fall of the USSR, we've been more open to credit the Soviets for their contribution to the war. And why not? It's obvious they won the war. We were fighting less than a year before Berlin fell. The only reason we entered the war was to keep the Soviets in check.
>>53130022
> desu
reeee
Another one autoreplacement.
>>53130059
Official Russian history position: muricans entered the war to not give the USSR conquer all the Europe.
And what they wanted to do is that soviets and german killed each other, so didn't help a lot.
>>53130059
>We were fighting less than a year before Berlin fell
>>53130022
It's from the IFOP, man. Not a joke.
But if you want... http://www.ifop.com/media/poll/3025-1-study_file.pdf
Page 7
>>53130028
underrated post
>>53129395
It's true though, all this does is prove that America has a much more effective propaganda machine than Russia. Hell, it's so effective that most people actually believe that in WW1, America did most of the heavy lifting and saved a France that was about to collapse.
>>53130157
>muh engagements in North Africa in which the USA got bitchslapped by the Heer
>>53130157
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Front_%28World_War_II%29#Casualties
Total axis dead on the eastern front: more than 5 million
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Front_%28World_War_II%29
Total axis killed on the western front: 263,000 (including casualties before d-day)
>>53130201
Ok. The thing is a point of view and words that are used. In Russia, the same official agency can get contradictory data on the same thing with different "wording".
Example:
What do you think about Mr. Putin? 90% positive
What do you think about the President? 60% positive
So, why a point of view is important?
Because they asked people in France. The USSR didn't liberate France. Muricans and brits did. So, for France the second war is only about THEIR lands. For Russians it is only about OUR lands. We even named it differently, the part about our war. And we less often say "WWII" (1939-1945), mostly "The great patriotic war" (1941-1945)
The French are huge Ameriboos. Most people don't realise that but it's true
Soviets would have lost without the American lend-lease, even if the Eastern front was the bigger meat grinder.
>>53130522
Sea battles? Ships, submarines are much labor-intensive things and they costs much more money, than tanks, for example.
>>53130566
Hmm, I get your point.
I think that's why I hate nationalism.
>>53130602
based
>>53130641
True. It's impossible to defend a front that large with so many men if you don't have train cars, locomotives, trucks, telegraph and phone lines, boots, etc. all of which were provided by the US.
>>53130522
>what is the Pacific
>>53129395
Americanization and propaganda
>>53132204
Lend lease shipments did not arrive in significant quantities until late 1942.
By that time Russia had begun pushing the Nazi's back out of Stalingrad, Moscow, and Leningrad. The war was over for the Nazis by then.
We just sped it up by using Russian bodies instead of our own. Why else did we wait till June 1944 to invade?