>Germany massacred Europe single-handedly >Russia could

File: 1485251534265.jpg (145KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 600x600px

what are you on about

the babby is EU

>>2347763
>>Russia could just destroy the world without nukes in 1945 if they wanted to

Go home Ivan.

>>2347763
>Russia is called the Motherland
Only in American vidya

>>2347763
>>Russia could just destroy the world without nukes in 1945 if they wanted to
are you drunk?

>>2347763
>Jesus fucking Christ what would the baby be?
West slavs?

>>2347795
>what is poдинa мaть?

>>2347776
>>2347803
I'm Bulgarian and I hate Commies as much as the next sensible guy, but 1945 USSR could crush Europe and very possibly conquer the U.S next, Churchill's plan and all...

>>2347769
I'm thinking Prussia II: World Conquest Boogaloo

>>2347847
>but 1945 USSR could crush Europe

Not even close. The WAllies were in every way more well-equipped and capable than they were.

That the USA economy alone was four times the size of the USSR economy is icing on the cake.

>and very possibly conquer the U.S next

This has to be b8. Do you even navy bro?

>>2347852
To imagine that the W. Allies could stand up to a manpower ratio of 3/4:1 is laughable on its own, belying the even greater threat that was the Soviet military being far better trained and supplied by wars end. There was a reason that portions of the non-politically mobilized Wehrmacht were re-called.

>>2347875
Except the US had a bigger population and Britain had the entirety of India. If they needed to they could go full human wave tactics and overwhelm the USSR.

>>2347875
>To imagine that the W. Allies could stand up to a manpower ratio of 3/4:1 is laughable on its own

A ratio that didn't exist. The WAllies had 4.5 million men in Germany, another 1.4 million in Italy. Soviets had about 6.5 million in Europe.

>belying the even greater threat that was the Soviet military being far better trained

What a joke. The Soviet army was consistently taking outsized or equal casualties against the Germans throughout 1944-1945 despite their absolutely massive advantages in men and materiel. In the same period the WAllies were inflicting upon them utterly lopsided casualty ratios.

>and supplied

This is just an outright lie. The Americans and Brits had more tanks, aircraft, and artillery ammunition. Also tons of man-portable anti-tank weapons. Most importantly of all, they had some 970,000 trucks while the Soviets had about a third of that, meaning the Allies effectively had much much higher strategic mobility. They were far better equipped than the Soviets in just about every way.

>>2347763
America which has BTFO both of those numerous times.

>>2347763
>Jesus fucking Christ what would the baby be?
Poland