>The difficulty in understanding the Russian is that we do

That Russians aren't whites. They're a hodge podge of barbarians, Orientals, and savages.

File: Untitled.jpg (180KB, 1141x619px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 1141x619px

>>2629928

>>2629928
He looks kinda Mongoloid in that pic himself, just saying.

>>2629928
>Rednecks talking shit of slavs.
Lyl.

File: 1488214031624.png (175KB, 397x399px) Image search: [Google]

175KB, 397x399px

>>2630090
>Patton
>redneck

>>2629928
>Gradually I began to hate them

>>2630090
Patton was west coast scum.

Not everyone that owns a ranch is a Southern hick.

>August 8
>The difficulty in understanding the Russian is that we do not take cognizance of the fact that he is not a European but an Asiatic and therefore thinks deviously. We can no more understand a Russian than a Chinaman or a Japanese and, from what I have seen of them, I have no particular desire to understand them except to ascertain how much lead or iron it takes to kill them. In addition to his other amiable characteristics, the Russian has no regard for human life and is an all out son of a bitch, a barbarian, and a chronic drunk.

>14 May
>I have never seen in any army at any time, including the German Imperial Army of 1912, as severe discipline as exists in the Russian army. The officers with few exceptions give the appearance of recently civilized Mongolian bandits. The men passed in review with a very good imitation of the goose step. They give me the impression of something that is to be feared in future world political reorganization.

>18 May
>I believe that by taking a strong attitude, the Russians will back down. So far we have yielded too much to their Mongolian nature.

>21 July 1945
>Berlin gave me the blues. We have destroyed what could have been a good race and we about to replace them with Mongolian savages. And all Europe will be communist.

>31 August 1945
>The stuff in the papers about fraternization is all wet... All that sort of writing is done by Jews to get revenge. Actually the Germans are the only decent people left in Europe. It’s a choice between them and the Russians. I prefer the Germans.

>2 September 1945
>I had never heard that we fought to de-natzify Germany – live and learn. What we are doing is to utterly destroy the only semi-modern state in Europe so that Russia can swallow the whole.

-The Patton Papers, 1940–1945

Russia straddles Asia and Europe.

File: Final form.png (76KB, 657x527px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 657x527px

George S. "I'm the second coming of Hannibal" Patton.

>>2630189
What an asshole

>>2629928

He meant "I am educationally subnormal and I belong in a hospital with soft walls" Fortunately some shitty driving saved tax bux.

>>2630456
He's right though

IDK but Truman and Eisenhower thought Patton to be a bit of a Prima Donna.

>>2630456
From a military perspective, it was the germans who reinvented the terms of engagement so I can see why he could respect them. He had little respect for the brits & frogs who got btfo by employing shit tier tactics, and the russian were just a zerg.

File: Zhukov-LIFE-1944-1945.jpg (23KB, 230x318px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 230x318px

Who would win?

>>2630189
redpilled and gone too soon
patton > macjewther

>>2630036
>acrylic portrait painting
*BARF*

>>2631372
Bomb railroads
Suddenly Zhukov is useless

File: HoganAmerica.gif (3MB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 200x200px

>>2629928
Based

>>2629928
I don't understand Russia

>>2630456
no

>>2632136
It's enormously difficult to do what you're suggesting. The Transport plan took months of thousands of bombers working overtime against virtually nonexistant German air defenses in an occupied country where they had trouble effecting repairs, and it still didn't completely eliminate their ability to move troops around (although it did hamper it immensely). The Soviets might be in a position of air inferiority, but they're better off than the very late war Germans are, and they're much better at rapidly constructing or repairing railroad track.

>>2633258
Yeah but the Russians were on their last legs when Berlin fell

>>2630456
Patton was a crazy motherfucker
Here's some lines from his famous speech
>We'll win this war, but we'll win it only by fighting and showing the Germans that we've got more guts than they have or ever will have. We're not just going to shoot the bastards, we're going to rip out their living goddamned guts and use them to grease the treads of our tanks. We're going to murder those lousy Hun cocksuckers by the bushel-fucking-basket.

>>2633276
Are you retarded? No they fucking weren't, which is why they had been driving the Wehrmacht for hundreds of kilometers every month previous.

Sure, the U.S. and UK could eventually beat the Soviets, but it would be a long, messy, bloody affair, not a quick war in the sunshine and an easy roll to Moscow.

>>2631347
Britain had the best army of WW2.

>>2633281
They had been driving the Wermacht for hundreds of kilometers because the German army was completely out of steam. Their tanks were out of fuel, their guns out of ammo, and their men out of morale. Post War Allies were more mechanized and powerful than the Germans ever were. It would have been bloody, but Berlin was the last push for the bloodied and bruised Russian army.

>>2633313
>Their tanks were out of fuel, their guns out of ammo, and their men out of morale
I'm going to need a citation for... really all of this.

>. Post War Allies were more mechanized and powerful than the Germans ever were.
I never disputed that.

>It would have been bloody, but Berlin was the last push for the bloodied and bruised Russian army.
Again, where the fuck are you getting this idea from?

>>2633321
You really want a source saying that the Germans were out of supplies in the last months of WW2?

>>2630456
only a commie could say such a thing

>>2633321
>Their tanks were out of fuel, their guns out of ammo, and their men out of morale
>I'm going to need a citation for... really all of this.
Dude, are you retarded?

>>2633288
>this message was brought to you by a country that was funded and fed by American supplies during their darkest hour and took a subordinate role in the grand strategy of western europe, but hey they did stuff in africa

>>2633288
lol

>>2633321
>citation
Lmao what? The Germans didn't have shit at the end of either of the World Wars.

It's a shame we never got Operation Unthinkable

>>2633333
No, I want a source that the SOVIETS are out of supplies in the last few months of WW2, since that's being used as the basis of a claim that the Americans would have rolled over them had an Unthinkable esque war broken out.

>>2633354
Yes, I want a source that the Soviets were out of supplies in the last few months of the war.

>>2633394
Soviets, not Germans. All of you dumbasses, read the post chain.

>>2633276
>Yeah but the Russians were on their last legs when Berlin fell

>>2633281
>Are you retarded? No they fucking weren't,

>>2633444
No I was saying that it wasn't impressive that the Russians beat back the Germans, as the Germans were completely broken. As for the Russians, a majority of their transportation network was made up of American vehicles, and we also gave the Russians a lot of the fuel and bullets they were using to fight back the Russians. The fact is that the Russians never really known for having bullets or any supplies. They had fuel because of their oil fields, but that was about it.

>>2633444
See>>2633474
Looks like you're the one without reading comprehension, but good job retard.

>>2633474
So, in other words, you're raising something completely irrelevant, because your statements, if about the Germans, don't' actually support the original claim, that the Russians were "on their last legs".

>As for the Russians, a majority of their transportation network was made up of American vehicles,
This is wrong, as the majority of the Soviet rtransportation network was made up of pre-war railroad stock.

>and we also gave the Russians a lot of the fuel and bullets they were using to fight back the Russians.
Are you high? The Russians weren't fighting themselves.

>The fact is that the Russians never really known for having bullets or any supplies.
https://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/economics/staff/mharrison/public/jeh90.pdf
>>2633488
Yes, I'm truly sorry that I interpreted two separate clauses to be about two separate subjects, especially when in context it would make no sense to claim that as he's assumedly trying to show how the Soviets were out of steam, and says things like how they were a bloodied and bruised army, and it was their "last push".

>>2629928

he means that asians are savages,

>>2633505
I agree with you generally, but by '44 3/4 of every truck and jeep in the Red Army was American made.

>>2633505
>This is wrong, as the majority of the Soviet rtransportation network was made up of pre-war railroad stock.
Already disputed here>>2633567

>Are you high? The Russians weren't fighting themselves.
Of course I meant the fucking Russians were fighting the Germans with the Lend-Lease supplies.

And while that is a very interesting read, it doesn't change the fact that the Americans had double if not quintiple the manufactured output as well as millions of Soldiers, tens of thousands of trucks, planes, tanks, and artillery. The Russians weren't going to beat the "Allies" and the Americans probably weren't gonna suffer horrendous losses

File: Goalposts.jpg (24KB, 256x202px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 256x202px

>>2633567

Yes, but jeeps were not how they were transporting the bulk of their cargo.

>>2633753
>Already disputed here>>2633567

You can't read too good, can you?

>And while that is a very interesting read, it doesn't change the fact that the Americans had double if not quintiple the manufactured output as well as millions of Soldiers, tens of thousands of trucks, planes, tanks, and artillery. The Russians weren't going to beat the "Allies" and the Americans probably weren't gonna suffer horrendous losses

Which is of course why the historic Unthinkable planners came to the opposite conclusion; that they WERE going to suffer horrendous losses, and be driven back a great deal in that first summer after the initial (surprise) advance wore off. But I'm sure you know better than the British general staff.

>>2633313
how can you even say they were out of morale

>>2633867
The problem was that the British general Staff didn't know how much support the Soviets had. We have the privilege of documents that weren't available to them. Can you really say that the Russians could have taken another 2 million losses? What about 3 million? The Allied army versus the Russian Army would have been a victory for the allies clearly. Can you give some reasons why the British thought it would have been a huge bloodbath for the Allies?

>>2633887
>The problem was that the British general Staff didn't know how much support the Soviets had.
I'm not even sure what the hell this is supposed to mean.

>We have the privilege of documents that weren't available to them. Can you really say that the Russians could have taken another 2 million losses? What about 3 million? The Allied army versus the Russian Army would have been a victory for the allies clearly
Unless say, the French, who had been occupied, and the British, who were still undergoing rationing (and would until well after the war), and the other shattered economies of Europe don't want to plunge into WW3 on the ashes of WW2, especially when the initial blows are likely to be losses, and their will to fight gives out long before the Soviet material resources do.

>Can you give some reasons why the British thought it would have been a huge bloodbath for the Allies?

They had a magical ability called 'counting' which led them to believe that the Soviets had far more troops right there at the point of contact than the Allies did. (Which means that if a war breaks out, the first moves are going to be throwing the Western Allies back into Germany, maybe even over the Rhine. Then a long, long, long buildup and struggle to weaken them indirectly with things like strategic and operational bombing, and just building up enough of a conventional advantage to take to the offensive; even if you buy their assumptions that a Western division packed roughly twice the firepower of a Soviet one, that means you'll need a 1.5:1 numerical advantage to take to the offensive under most estimates at the time, and the Allies had nowhere near that kind of manpower and wouldn't be able to raise it in a timespan of weeks. Months to years, sure, but how do you think another round of conscription is going to go over to attack the ally you just had a few months ago?

>>2633903
>At the end of the war, the total U.S. Army strength in Europe was almost 1.9 million: two Army groups (6th and 12th), five field armies (First, Third, Seventh, Ninth and Fifteenth), 13 corps headquarters, and 62 combat divisions (43 infantry, 16 armor, and 3 airborne).

These were just the American troops though. Let me be clear, fully motorized, fully supplied, and fully supported American soldiers. We can then add the 100,000 German soldiers that were to be re purposed. Along with the British and Canadians, that leaves the Allies with around 2.5 million men in Europe, but the Russians still had the numerical superiority. The Russians were never loved, they were a useful enemy. The American public, while not wanting to get into another war, would not raise pitchforks because we were attacking the USSR. Riflemen didn't win WW2, it was artillery and trucks.

File: Cyrus.jpg (6KB, 320x180px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 320x180px

>>2633443
But then none of us would be alive.

>>2630189
Dude, Chinaman is not the preferred nomenclature. Asian-American, please.

>>2635001
But they're not American.

>>2629928
He's literally just pulling some "Eternal Anglo" bullshit, except with Russians and Asians.

Dumb but pretty funny.

File: 1445742187425.jpg (14KB, 192x154px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 192x154px

>>2630189

>>2632141
HULK HOGAN, WE COMIN FOR U NIGGA

>>2634972
Because we would have ascended