Was Patton right? Should they just have kept the tanks rolling?

He suggested to keep the tanks filled with gas and rolling towards Moscow, taking the Wehrmacht along.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=9oofI0AKrJs
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Unthinkable
youtube.com/watch?v=dcbp1uB8Qmc
youtube.com/watch?v=epW5ktfYt9Q
nytimes.com/books/98/11/22/specials/ambrose-atrocities.html
historynewsnetwork.org/article/1266
hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.CHAP13.HTM
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lend-Lease#US_deliveries_to_the_Soviet_Union
youtube.com/watch?v=e8B3ceKwV8Q
amazon.com/Wages-Destruction-Making-Breaking-Economy-ebook/dp/B008DR6YXO
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Yes

Yes

Yes

Patton was a nerd who got too excited in the war, of course he wasn't right. He would have taken the tanks across the world for the sake of war if he could.

It would have been enough to just not extend lend-lease to the Russians. Germany would have pushed deeper into Russia killing unarmed reds fulfilling the goal of the war, and the thinning of German troops would have reduced casualties further on the Western front.

Yes, our God Emperor knows best.

Yes. We should have nuked a couple Russian cities right after we zapped the Jap so they knew we were fucking serious.

>Russia defeats the Nazis for you
>You try to backstab them and invade them in return
Tyoical Anglo. Either way they woukd have BTFOd you just like the BTFOd Hitler (which Anglos couldnt do)

t. NEET sharts that have no idea what total war is or have never experienced real civil unrest.

Yes

Soviet infiltration and subversion ruined this country. Of course he was right.

Sadly, the subversion was already in full swing in his time. That's why he was assassinated and the Soviets given half the world.

>t. retard that doesn't understand that we could have prevented half a century of proxy wars by changing our policy towards the russians for a few years during WWII

anyone who thinks allies had a chance against soviets in europe is moron..

World War 2 didn't happen. It was all a bunch of mirrors and holograms and fake news.

Sorry, not all of us live in Zombieniggerland and have over 300 confirmed necklacings. It would have saved everyone a lot of trouble in the 50 years after the war if we'd just burned Russia.

alies would get completely steamrolled by the Soviets, kek

Fuck off chocolate fag

Yes

Your point about lend-lease makes more sense than going to war with an enemy of an enemy.

But the Axis would have lost regardless of lend-lease, it helped a lot but it would have changed the course of war.

Yes

>then the Jews

>complete Anglosphere
>onto space conquest

he was absolutely right.

We should've sided with Germany against communism and then used that as a bargaining chip when it came to negotiations

>stomp out both socialist threats in one fell swoop
Patton was always right.

"We Defeated the Wrong Enemy." - General George S. Patton

youtube.com/watch?v=9oofI0AKrJs

He was talking about the Jews, not the commies.

who knows really, the late war massive motorized offensives of the soviets were partly enabled/aided by lend-lease.

the eastern front could have turned into an even larger and more prolonged bloodbath than it was.

America has no room to mock anyone about crime rate, sort your own niggers out before talking about ours.

And do you think the US public would have been happy about millions of US deaths to try and defeat an enemy of an enemy?

footage ok, music is gay tho

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Unthinkable

I'm pretty sure he meant leaves

They're commies

>>stomp out both socialist threats in one fell swoop
you mean the soviets planting flags in Paris in less then 3 weeks?

You actually think the allies had any sort of chance against the Soviets?

What's the difference?

without lend lease, they would just reroll some factories to produce trucks instead of tanks, wouldnt really make a difference..

Absolutely

Instead Eisenhover captured the surrendered Germans, found a loophole in the Geneva Convention, and put 1.5 million Germans in camps. The order was to not give them food, all though they had it. Do you ever wonder why germans doesn't look like they used to? Because the allies killed their best and brightest. Google Rhine Meadow Camps. The soviets did the same thing, in a much more brutal way.

youtube.com/watch?v=dcbp1uB8Qmc

no, continuing WW2 right into WW3 would have been retarded. Pattons meme status on the internet has led people to think he was some genius when he was really an eccentric retard

also, Bradly>Patton and even he admitted this

america is a bloodthirsty, competitive and warlike nation.

it wouldn't have been millions regardless btw, U.S. would not be hampered by the idealogical and racial contexts that the german army was. Also British and American intelligence was far better than Germany's.

Those are literally one and the same

youtube.com/watch?v=epW5ktfYt9Q

yes

not to go all muh lend-lease on you, because we don't necessarily disagree. but lend-lease aid to the soviets was much more than just trucks.

>Larger and more prolonged

The Soviets win here, the German plan was 'kick the door in and let the whole rotten structure collapse' they wanted a rapid advance and quick conclusion to the fight, the longer it went on the more the reds could pull in more manpower and material. Look at the Axis vs Commie stats at the start of Barbarossa. Axis could never have fought a longer war.

And I think people have a habit of underrating Soviet war-time industry. They spat out tanks and other gear faster than anyone could.

Regardless of it's quality or lack there of.

it probably wouldnt have been millions, since after losing europe, making another d-day, this time against soviets would be political suicide, so they would go for peace instead

>He was talking about the Jews, not the commies.

Implying

Implying the soviets would've survived without the logistic support provided by lend-lease, fucking medkit.

bullshit. This claim comes from ONE shitty book by some non historian named James Bacque in his meme book Other Losses

>Mr. Bacque is wrong on every major charge and nearly all his minor ones. Eisenhower was not a Hitler, he did not run death camps, German prisoners did not die by the hundreds of thousands, there was a severe food shortage in 1945, there was nothing sinister or secret about the "disarmed enemy forces" designation or about the column "other losses." Mr. Bacque's "missing million" were old men and young boys in the Volkssturm (People's Militia) released without formal discharge and transfers of POWs to other allies control areas. Maj. Ruediger Overmans of the German Office of Military History in Freiburg who wrote the final volume of the official German history of the war estimated that the total death by all causes of German prisoners in American hands could not have been greater than 56,000 approximately 1% of the over 5,000,000 German POWs in Allied hands exclusive of the Soviets.

nytimes.com/books/98/11/22/specials/ambrose-atrocities.html

There was a panel of 8 historians as well that all called the book out for its shitty made up history as well found the book to be bullshit

>Historians Gunter Bischof and Brian Loring Villa stated that a research report from the panel "soundly refuted the charges of Other Losses, especially Bacque's fanciful handling of statistics."

historynewsnetwork.org/article/1266


>"Bacque misread, misinterpreted, or ignored the relevant documents and that his mortality statistics are simply impossible." -R.J. Rummell

hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.CHAP13.HTM

>"That German prisoners were treated very badly in the months immediately after the war […] is beyond dispute. All in all, however, Bacque's thesis and mortality figures cannot be taken as accurate" -S.P.MacKenzie The Encyclopedia of Internment and Prisoners of War pg. 294

fuck off with your gay youtube vids retard

Read about Op Unthinkable.

Regardless of who would have won, another war in Europe that would kill millions was the last think anyone would have needed.

War is a tiresome business, many here hate our current situation but prefer it to constant war.

i am aware of lend lease, it made difference in 1942, it didnt make difference in 1945.. and if allies wouldnt lend lease soviets in early years of war, they would risk victorious germany, which would be unstoppable and thus not in interest of allies..

>taking the Wehrmacht along
Why would they fight for the enemy? Unless they had forced conscription most would probably be too demoralised to fight for an invader.

Yup, and polish armed forces would have eagerly turned against soviets.

what kind of faggot frat boy wigger shit music is that? kys

>And I think people have a habit of underrating Soviet war-time industry.

I certainly don't.

You must also consider the magnitude of the casualties sustained by the soviets in their late-war offensives. Yes, it was exacerbated by the impetus to drive to Berlin at all costs, but when youre racking up such a death toll -- Soviet manpower was not unlimited. Vast, but not unlimited. Indomitable political will, but not necessarily unbreakable. In the context of the race-war on the Eastern Front, the political will may have been endless.

Wasn't he the guy that wanted to invade china during the Korean war?

this.

Try to convince people you have been telling since the start of Barbarossa that the Soviets are good guys.

>Why would they fight for the enemy?
The Russians were the enemy, not the Americans.

patton was disillusioned retard, nuf said.

the point of this thread is whether or not Patton was right in his assessment that he should have rearmed the germans and started fighting the Russians AFTER the war was already over

Yeah, total dominance of the anglosphere over everyone else, make Germany into friends so we avoid another ww21 to ww2 situation and remove the greatest ideological force that would impede global unity.

Seriously if we just steam rolled Russia we'd have colonies on fucking Mars by now.

You are so wrong it hurts.

>Was Patton right?

Yes.

Patton was one of the greatest men to have lived in the last 100 years.

>race-war on the Eastern Front

Explain?

You severely underestimate the importance of lend-lease for the soviets before they could set up their military industry; food, logistic vehicles (when neither Germany or the SU had much of), ammo, spare tanks and planes. Allowed the SU to last until the Wehrmacht had been stretched to thin from a stupid two front war.

Yes. Communism should have been eradicated both abroad and domestic. Every open commie should have been executed.

The enemy was communism, and every Wehrmacht soldier and SS member gladly fought commies, especially when the US and Britain suddenly start backing them. Keeping the red pest out was #1 goal.

Some pages from an unnamed book with no source material or referencing.

From Germany.

Mkay.

What was the western front? What was the post war guilt trip propaganda?

The partisan campaign engaged by the Soviets, and german retaliation (also their racial/political doctrine) snowballed into a full-blown race-war by 1942/3

German units take a town -> partisans sabotage shit -> executions take place -> etc.

You are deluded. Eisenhower and other allied said several times that they wanted to destroy the german beast or animals. They captured them and classified them as unarmed combat personell, going past the Geneva POW convention. They captured and starved them to death. The Russians killed and tortured several millions of surrendered soldiers, and sent civilians to gulags. You are quoting jews.

80% of the german army was on the eastern front anyway

>capturing Russia
>ever

lyl

Patton was right

yes

>rapid advance and quick conclusion to the fight
Which is the exact strategy we would've used, but better

No I don't.

I just don't think the Axis would have won regardless.

They picked a fight that they weren't capable of winning or ready for and came off second best.

>patton was disillusioned retard

He was. He was really good at war, but a fucking idiot when it came to everything else. He almost ruined his career based entirly on his retarded ways and sticking his foot in his mouth and was only saved because Eisenhower stood up for him by appealing to the US government with a reasoning that was basically "look, I know hes a fucking idiot, but hes pretty good at his job and I need good men right now"

this is why he was playing with his dick in England while Bradly was in charge of storming Normandy beach.

Enjoy the sources

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lend-Lease#US_deliveries_to_the_Soviet_Union

>inb4 wikipedia hurrrr

...

Was there anything left of the Werhmacht at that point?

>enemy of an enemy
Meaning the international communists weren't already slated as an enemy by the west including USA?
Because that's wrong

>especially when the US and Britain suddenly start backing them
They never did that.

youtube.com/watch?v=e8B3ceKwV8Q

muh, pootton

>Eisenhower and other allied said several times that they wanted to destroy the german beast or animals.

[citation needed]

> They captured and starved them to death.

No they didnt. I just thoroughly explained why you are wrong. Just doubling down on your bullshit with nothing to back it up isnt an argument

no, he was the right man, at the right time, for the right job and they didn't let him do it.
He wanted to hang commies by their entrails from trees but nooooooo we have to fight proxy wars for the next 50 years and build a permanent military industrial complex.

Or if you want the Tldr version: All relevant support vehicles came from lend lease needed to send troops and supplies to the front. 30-40% of resources needed to keep the war industry going came from lend lease and most importantly, food came from lend lease. Also lots of ammo came from lend lease... The USSR wouldn't have functioned without lend lease beyond 1941 and even if the industry would have gone well, they still would have done what commies do best: starve to death.

>logistic support
It was fucking nothing. Stop giving yourself too much credit

You should read The Wages of Destruction by Adam Tooze.

It's the definitive work on the economics, and underlying aim and impetus for Barbarossa. Excellent book, and clears up several popular myths about the German economy.

>Stupid two front war
>Waiting till June
>Speer

etc.

amazon.com/Wages-Destruction-Making-Breaking-Economy-ebook/dp/B008DR6YXO

yes

Ah, finally a true red pilled leaf.

I think the major problem a scenario of war between the Allies(notably the US) and the USSR is; Just how prepared is the allied public, specifically of the US, to sustain casualties in the millions fighting someone who was your ally yesterday?

Secondly, just how prepared are allied soldiers to turn around and go attack the Soviets after they finally thought the war is over and they'll be able to go home?


The whole discussion is a what if that requires the suspension of belief and be then "measured" in a vacuum.

Cool, that's what I thought. Thought you may have been talking about something else.

My Uncle was in the SS, he fought alongside Poles. He was killed somewhere in West Poland in '45. Don't know much about him because his surviving family don't talk about it but I know 4 of the Polish soldiers came to find him after the war and stayed in Berlin for a while to help his family get back on it's feet.

youre a child

I neither have the time or patience to argue with a person who cites jews.

wikipedia hurrr

>The enemy was communism

stupid krauts never can get into politics and see anything behind propaganda gobbledygook for peasants

IF HITLER WON WW2

No USSR (the Soviet government murdered millions of its own people during its 70 year reign)

No cold war (without the USSR)

No Communist Eastern Europe/Iron Curtain (when WW2 ended, Eastern Europe fell to Communism)

No Red China and Mao's subsequent killing of 40-60 million Chinese (the USSR created favorable conditions for Mao's Communists)

No Communist North Vietnam (both the Soviet Union and Red China aided Ho Chi Minh)

No Communist Cambodia and Pol Pot's slaughter of 2,000,000 Cambodians (Red China aided Pol Pot)

No dividing Korea into North Korea and South Korea (the Allies split Korea after WW2 ended with North Korea becoming Communist)

No Communist Cuba and no Communism anywhere (Hitler was the world's most fervent anti-Communist)

Liberalism and multiculturalism wouldn't dominate Western ethos (both are Jewish creations and both have always been heavily promoted by Jews)

No Cultural Marxism and no political correctness (these are social engineering tools which came out of the Jewish think tank known as the Frankfurt School)

No third world immigration into Western nations (Jews wouldn't be in power positions to craft and force through liberal immigration laws)

No depraved filth on TV, in movies, etc. (because Jews wouldn't run Hollywood)

No widespread pornography (Jewish lawyers and Jewish activists were the main challengers of anti-obscenity laws, under the guise of "freedom of speech")

There would still be prayer in public schools (Jewish lawyers were instrumental in banning prayer in public schools under the guise of so-called "separation of church and state")

No radical feminist movement (Jews such as Betty Friedan, Sonia Pressman, and Gloria Steinem were the key drivers of radical feminism)

No Israel and the problems it has brought the US, and the immeasurable misery it has wrought on Palestinians

*Full Must-Read Article: immigration-globalization.blogspot.com/2011/10/if-hitler-won-world-war-ii-we-would.html

>*were
And? Still saved your ass.