If all WW2 leaders had to fight to death in a Mortal Kombat

If all WW2 leaders had to fight to death in a Mortal Kombat
tournament...Who do you think would win?

Other urls found in this thread:

telegraph.co.uk/news/health/11380891/Churchills-drinking-was-one-thing-but-what-about-his-drug-taking.html
drugabuse.com/20-genius-minds-and-the-drugs-they-were-addicted-to/
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

why does it have that shitty german flag

I would put my money on either Mussolini or Churchill.

>a fat manlet
>a cripple
>a angry manlet

VS

>an angry manlet
>an honurabu manlet
>another angry manlet

Roosevelt throws it for the allies.

Stalin was a manlet but he was pure muscle, Mussolini also looks pretty rough. De Gaulle was 6'6 so that gives him a chance

Stalin or Mussolini. Churchill was a fat shit, Hitler used to be a painter, definitely not the little japanese guy. Roosevelt was probably a sissy. Why did his parents grow his hair long and make him wear a dress?

Churchill was also a cripple.

shall not pass at goro

>Why did his parents grow his hair long and make him wear a dress?

that was just the thing back then.

...

Roosevelt , will run over them with his Wheelchair

Stalin.

"A single H" and "Heimtrain" will win tagteam. Soviet losers be prepared.

Mussolini.

Mussolini. Guy was a fencer, wouldn't surprise me if he was into boxing and shit like that.

He wasn't a leader during WWII you fucking retard.

Franklin Roosvelt looked like Chad when he was young

I have my money on AH.

it would all come down to stalin vs mussolini

Suppose that each one of them has a special ability. What would them be like?

Mussolini hands down. The rest of them were either cripples or manlets, and AH doesn't look like he can fight

Even though literally everyone in this picture is a turbo-manlet, Mussolini would win. Mussolini was a fucking thug, big league, and was always very physically violent

AH was a WWI hero in his own right. I think he even got into a fight with a German NCO because the NCO was being defeatist.

ALLIES

Churchill
>short - 5'6"
>fat as hell - 210? lbs
>66 yo @ 1940
>military commander with no fighting experience
Roosevelt
>in a fucking wheelchair - 3'6"?
>no legs, probably ripped arms - 130lbs?
>58 yo @ 1940
>never commanded a military in battle, lived in lap of luxury
Stalin
>Short - 5'6"
>A little pudgy - 170 lbs?
>61 yo @ 1940
>Bureaucrat, no military experience

AXIS

Hitler (pbuh)
>5'8" or 5'9" (seems to get shorter every decade)
>great discipline and health 160 lbs
>51 yo @1940
>Fought in WWI, led an armed revolt from a beerhall
Hirohito
>5'5"
>skinny - 130lbs
>39 yo @1940
>No military experience, lavish life
Mussolini
>5'6-1/2" (not sure why they add the half but it seems common)
>a little fat, probably 190
>56 yo @ 1940
>fought in WWI trenches

I've got to call the fight for one of the Axis members. FDR and Churchill will likely be non players, being too fat or crippled to do any damage. Hirohito, despite his youth, is a little small to take Stalin, but Stalin couldn't possibly take Benito or Hitler, given their military experience. Ultimately, it will come down to Benito vs Hitler, a battle which I believe hitler would win, with a minor height advantage and simply healthier lifestyle.

Honestly that's one of the things I admire most about the third reich; defeatism wasn't tolerated. No matter how things got everyone was still made to believe in the Final Victory

The height average was alot different back then m8

what's funny is that height increase happened first in America and UK as they were among the best fed and most industrialized. There's a photo of British and American soliders towering over their russian and indian counterparts, don't have it on me sadly.

Mussolini, no contest.

Manletry isn't defined in relation to average height buddy.

found it on google.

See
>Father worked as a blacksmith
>Guy was a fencer, wouldn't surprise me if he was into boxing and shit like that.
>Mussolini was a fucking thug, big league, and was always very physically violent

Knife fighting maybe? I don't know about the others.

Mussolini, there are only three soldiers there, one was a politically appointed officer, the other a messenger, Mussolini was a sniper and saw alot of fighting in WWI

Never fight a Russian.

Stalin was beefy as fuck. Nigga could probably beat Mussolini and Hitler together in a fight with one arm behind his back.

This tbqh. Roosvelt is a nonplayer cause of his legs sadly.

Churchil could use his weight to his advantage if he tried to bodyslam someone, but if the manage to be quick on their feet they can dodge and then its just a matter of using fatty's inertia against him to throw him on the ground.

Mussolini had the strongest looking build overall, and I belive Hirorito would have at least a yellow belt in Judo. Hitler is the weakes axis fight, but he could still fight.

De Gaulle.
stop posting the same fucking thread over and over

Hitler is biggest and strongest

>churchill cripple
>fdr retarded cripple
>hitler fit 5'9 alpha with highest test

Are you going off movies? Even his own favorite propaganda film, Fall Of Berlin, admitted he was short. Also he only had one good arm.

Only one of them was high as a kite on amphetamines and pain killers constantly.

Guess which one? Give ya a clue, shares my flag.

Who has the deepest voice?

/this
Take a rare Stalin, he was swole

stalin was a midget with one arm and a cripple.

>a spic and a leaf

walls going up on both sides now

where is the red cross of ulster in that jack? FIX THIS NOW!

Fucking brits fed us worse than commies
Good thing my family sold out to them though

Owning 42 villages was good,probably why I'm 6'1"

But user, I see no pakis there

feeding millions is kind of hard pajeet

we dragged you into the modern day...gave you tools..railroads..schools...dont be a cunt

>no one remember the classic mortal kombat

Nigger that aint stalin that looks more like Mark Twain.

Mussolini alone would fuck all those niggas up

Axis of course.

Churchill was fat

churchil barely walks amerifag doesn't if stalin cant beat the others alone then the allys but i doubt it

Mussolini hands down. Dude has a boulder for a jaw and is built like a brick. Churchill in his prime no doubt, but old fat and drunk, nah.

Churvhill was drunk, not on opiates and meth. That was mein fuhrer.

Hitler used to be a painter but also a front line corporal. Also high on meth 24/7.

Try looking in your wife's room.

telegraph.co.uk/news/health/11380891/Churchills-drinking-was-one-thing-but-what-about-his-drug-taking.html

Winston Churchill is pretty much the face of World War Two Britain. He was notorious for drinking whisky, although to say that he was an addict might be a misnomer. He did, however, take amphetamines repeatedly to be able to stay up and plan the war. His resilience inspired many, but he paid for it with his health. The Allied forces won the war, however, although at an appalling cost.

drugabuse.com/20-genius-minds-and-the-drugs-they-were-addicted-to/

All soldiers in WW2 were given small boxes, each box contained a piece of chocolate, a small bag of cocaine and something else I forget.

But all soldiers were kept high on coke/speed/amphetamines during the war. Saw the tins in the Imperial War Museum, was interesting stuff.

And Trujillo was thrown to jail for stealing farm animals.

The photo you see in this post is of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt when he was two and a half years old. Yes, that is a boy.

It seems strange for us now to see a boy with his hair long and styled (fixed) in this way, wearing a dress, and with a big frilly (with a lot of decoration) hat with feathers. But in 1884 when this photo was taken, it was the norm (usual thing to do).

Historian Jo Paoletti says that before the World Wars, children were dressed in white dresses like these with white diapers (cloth or other material wrapped around a baby’s or young child’s bottom for going to the bathroom) for convenience. It was easier to change children’s diapers when they were wearing a dress, and the color white allowed for bleaching (the use of a chemical to make fabric white if it gets dirty or stained).

Both the wearing of the white dresses and the long hair were typical (normal) until age six or seven, when children had their first haircut. Believe it or not, this outfit (set of clothing and accessories) was considered gender-neutral (not indicating whether a person is male or female).

And the color pink for girls and blue for boys didn’t become the trend until just before World War I. Before that time, many people actually considered pink the masculine (related to men and strength) color and blue the feminine (related to women and delicacy) one. Some of the major department stores (large stores with many departments including clothing, shoes, make-up, and housewares (things used in the kitchen or home)) even published guidelines during this period for dressing children, suggesting blue for girls and pink for boys.

Eventually, in the 1940s, clothing manufacturers began making more pink clothing for girls and blue for boys, reflecting (following) what they believed were customer preferences. Who knows how color conventions (what is considered normal and socially accepted) will be in 100 years?

Stalin fought in the revolution.

I think he has some experience...

Also, 5 6" were not short during the 40s

Stalin said himself he was short, also Stalin actually never fought in a war. Get the hell out of my helicopter next time you try to spread your pro commie BS.