So how many thousands of these does Russia have? They’re literally never going to run out of take.
INB4 “A TANK IS A TANK”
https://x.com/defmon3/status/1700996350429868067?s=46&t=32W1Oi8jU-W4xzxTDymKHQ
T-55 WUNDERWAFFE
So how many thousands of these does Russia have? They’re literally never going to run out of take.
INB4 “A TANK IS A TANK”
https://x.com/defmon3/status/1700996350429868067?s=46&t=32W1Oi8jU-W4xzxTDymKHQ
it's amazing how we've gone from "Kiev in three days! to deploying rusty ass t-55s
Deploying them DEFENSIVELY too.
The way they've been treating them so far, they don't seem thrilled. First one seen destroyed was literally a VBIED. Some real ISIS-American tactics.
A question regarding the kamikaze T-55.
Besides the significant blast effect, what do you think, how good is its fragmentation effect?
From WWII to this point, we could see that welds, hatches, and the turret itself are the weakpoints, so to say. The front glacis is too robust to fragment from the detonation, becoming a large quasi EFP as it is thrown away whole, seperating from the hull at the welds. The turret is similar, it gets lifted and thrown whole, with perhaps the gun coming loose. The side armor is more likely to shatter, possibly generating very large fragments. The tracks usually stay in place, as they both have minimal cross section and are also held in place by the mass of the vehicle. The roadwheels, we've seen they are capable of covering a great distance, while staying relatively intact.
In conclusion, I'd say everything in the side aspect of the T-55 will recieve heavy fragmentation damage, with the front area mostly being safe, as long as you are not hit by the gun or the front glacis. The turret with the hatches, sights and all the other small bits on it fly skywards, falling at random spots.
Here it should be mentioned, the large pieces landed in a zone where the blast is already lethal, so they only really affect structures and vehicles.
Thoughts?
I mean it was designed to protect from explosions on the outside(nominally kek) so FILLING it with explosives and detonating them would probably cause multiple breeches as it wasn’t designed for such an occurrence, throwing around a good bit of metal in every direction.
That said, using a tank as a suicide vehicle is still retarded
I said this would happen after Kyiv collapsed and only a couple anons believed me
I believed you, anon
>russia uses old inventory
“Hah! Muh second army”
>the ukraine uses old american inventory
“It’s cheaper than disposing of it!”
Its a different story when the old American inventory mogs the shit out of ancient russhit "equipment"
>Its a different story when the old American inventory mogs the shit out of the latest russhit "equipment"
fixed that for you
Except US isn’t fighting in this war. They’re just giving Ukraine 40+ year old equipment that still BTFO vatnik crap.
>Russians, 2021
>xaxaxa rossiya stronk! we can take over world if we want and none of you can do anything to stop us *~~)
>Russians, 2023
>why are we being judged to higher standards than the poorest country on the european continent? this isn't fair ~~*
The hardware USA-Europe is sending to Ukraine was top of the line hardware from the 80's and 90's which still massively outperforms Russian hardware by miles. They've also gotten modernizations so they're not flash frozen hardware from 1992.
btw we should also be sending more shit to Taiwan, specifically air defenses and anti-ship weapons.
I don't see any M26 Pershings or F-86 Sabres fighting in this war, do you?
How many of those does America have just laying around? We already donated all of them to South America or Africa.
>M26, M46, M47
declared obsolete in the 50s, so they were all sold off as soon as possible
>M48
last seen with US forces in the 80s, where they were listed as reserve units
as in: 2000 of them in europe compared to 4000 M1 abrams, but there were 0 apart from specialist vehicles once the 90s rolled around
a few are still in use by smaller countries like greece, the kind of people who basically wont ever see any serious fighting
>M60
last used in the 90s, but even the national guard no longer had them by the 2000s
outside of a few specialist vehicles, no M60s are in use with the US
sees a fair bit use on foreign countries like turkey, who even make modernization kits for them to get them to close to modern standard
but their former biggest user, israel, has already fully replaced them with merkavas, and are now solely reservist fodder or kept around for foreign sales
Wouldn't M48 be more appropriate?
T-54 is from 1947 the M48 didn’t enter service until the 1950s.
M46 then.
When did Ukraine LARP as the world's second army?
Get me back once Ukraine starts using Shermans.
sneed
Well, Ukraine isn't a regional power larping as a superpower for one.
meanwhile in real life, us private owners have newer tanks than world second army
sexo livery
>all this beautiful NATO domination
They are turning the graveyard into a permanent cemetery not a road/parking lot fyi
Good point! Soooooo it's like almost month passed any updates on the perma cemetery? lol
Yeah, Ukies should get new NATO tech instead just old shit
They should get both. Older NATO shit is cheap and fills gaps relatively quickly and cost effectively. On the other point, even late 90s/early 2000s technology like Storm Shadow/Scalp or PAC-3 Patriot systems have turned out to function magnificently.
Now we just need to give Ukraine some F-35s.
Old American inventory - Bradley's from the 1990's
Old Russian inventory - Tanks from the 1950's
This. Everything the US has done Russia is doing but it’s absolutely hilarious.
>US soldiers in iraq without body armor and up armored vehicles?
Not funny!
>us soldiers improvising by using anything they can to increase their chance of survival like putting a toaster on a stick to counter ieds
GENIUS!
but when Russia does it, it’s a joke to you
>US soldiers in iraq without body armor and up armored vehicles?
It was 20 years ago before body armour became widespread. US forces were critiziced and the problems were solved.
Unlike russians still being the same retards without socks since the first Chechen war.
>lying when everyone can read Kruschev and Stalin words here
>russia won WW2
No it didn't. First of all it wasn't Russia alone, it was the USSR, and it survived the war just like the UK or France, nothing more.
The real winner of WW2 was the US by all metrics. Soviets just bled more.
no amount of denial and misdirection will save you, zigger.
>US soldiers in iraq without body armor
Frontline troops always had body armor you lying gay. The US has at a minimum given flak jackets to everyone since Vietnam. Yet Russia, the self proclaimed equal, doesn’t even do that 50 years after the US did
>>US soldiers in iraq without body armor and up armored vehicles?
KekMaxxx, we've been issuing body armor / flak jackets to frontline units since the fucking korean war
>Vest, Armored, M-1951, M-1952, and M-1955
>but when Russia does it, it’s a joke to you
See, everything Russia does is a joke to me because the entire shithole is a fucking sad joke.
>US soldiers in iraq without body armor and up armored vehicles?
The up-armored vehicles were a response to insurgency tactics. Rear echelon troops doing supply runs could be targeted out of nowhere.
That's understandable in a counter insurgency, but a fucking disgrace when you're Russia in near-peer warfare.
>Russia having worse equipment than the poorest country on the continent is somehow excusable
no it isn't
Russia had decades to reform their armed forces, but anyone who tried was sidelined. You are browntarded.
no, but you can't read for shit
>The second best army in ukraine resorting to pulling out rusted relics because the general in charge of procurement REALLY needed that new yacht pls understand
Cringe
>Western nations donating their cold war hand me downs so the ukes can kill russians more efficiently while creating an excuse to modernize their own militaries
Based
>Russians start using bows and arrows
>US give yooks Winchesters
"Xaxaxaxa west is using old technology!"
I knew russians were incompetent and retarded, but before 2022, even in my wildest drug fuelled dreams I never once thought russia would be forced to deploy T-55s within 2 years of starting an undeclared war against their neighbours, one of the poorest in europe.
>one of the poorest in europe.
Officially.
First, like 60% of our economy is "grey", it isn't fully reported, because noone wants to pay taxes
Second, mothballed factories don't generate GDP, but they sure as fuck can generate dead ziggers
the only things Russia has is material and bodies. always been that way, will always be that way.
I remember playing wargame and spamming t55s for shits and giggles. Never would have I thought that would actually happen kek
And it's not even the "gucci" MVs kek
How embarrassing
tank is a tank
why is russia still retreating? what happened to taking kyiv in 3 days?
>still beating Ukraine
Then why are they losing ground?
>didn’t even have to spend 3/4 of a trillion dollars every year tor 2 decades to do it
Russia's military has been crippled to such an extent that it will take decades to recover (never mind catch back up with the rest of the world), and all it cost the USA was a fraction of its annual military budget.
Around 270 count em from space.
I bet they really regret scrapping em now.
the counteroffensyiv is currently stretching the bussy of those russian lines and it's not gonna stop
Some fun news from Opytne recently, apparently Yooks are controlling the Northern part. Some zigger telegrams are saying that ziggers abandoned the town completely, but that's probably still doomposting at this point.
TANK IS TANK
LA LAAA LA LA LA
I want one so fucking badly it's unreal. The fact that these are handed out like candy to conscripts who will blindly drive it straight into a ditch, or an anti-tank mine, or into range of a sixty year old botanist with an ATGM, while I sit here alone, tankless, is one of today's great injustices. Is it really so much to ask? Can I not even have this? Can the world not spare one measly T-55 for my happiness?
underrated
>Is it really so much to ask? Can I not even have this? Can the world not spare one measly T-55 for my happiness?
Now look at them vatniks, that's the way you do it. You just don't join the VDV. That ain't warring, that's the way you do it. Money for nothing and the T-55's for free.
Sequel to the “bought all Russian milsurp” post
You will never have Yukari teaching you to drive t-55 during highschool summer vacations near some coastal town and then discovering her as a woman at some empty beach, all that's left for you is a bleak future shitposting at this place, playing subpar tank simulators filled with lootboxes and paid DLC and pretending that shitty lobotomized version of ChatGPT your tried to program is your girlfriend telling you she loves you and you will get a t-55 some day.
Why even live? AAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH.
I would like nothing more than for you to have a T-55
>Can I not even have this?
You can anon. Just goto http://m.exarmyvehicles.com/offer/tracked-vehicles/tanks/main-battle-tank-t-55a, add one to your cart, then click on "check out". D9nt forget to verify your shipping address is correct
Just make your own lol. You just need the chasis and a 300 hp diesel engine.
>kek they can’t hold a village of 2 dozen homesteads.
that must be why the russians are advancing backwards
>deflecting with whataboutisms
still following the script, huh?
They'll require AT weapons to take out, but unlike Leo 1A5s their FCS is garbage so they're really only going to be useful as shitty field guns. Offensively they'll expend some Ukrainian ATGMs but that's about it, and forget any kind of complex night operations. Prior to when the first images of them being dragged out of storage came out I genuinely thought they scrapped most of them so them even having a regiment's worth of them is shocking.
Any RPG-7 counts as an ATGM for a T-55
If they have them the Ukrainians will blast them with ATGMs. Letting them get close enough for RPGs is not a good idea. They can, however, use older ATGMs against them.
The issue with using a RPG is you have to be in RPG range. It’s certainly doable but much more of a risk than other options (if you have them).
>The issue with using a RPG is you have to be in RPG range
🙂
>their FCS is garbage
That can be fixed, it will probably be high on Putins shopping list when he meets Kim.
>night operations
Also the NK upgrades can include thermals.
Note Syria had to get upgrades from the DPRK implying Russia couldn't do it.
Ummm.....
>looks at North Korea range finder/thermal sight
>Looks at 3rd and 4th tank in OP
Do those tanks already have North Korean parts on them?
No, that box is a KTD series laser rangefinder.
Woops hand slipped, didn't mean to quote
>KTD series laser rangefinder
No it isn't. This is a KTD with a thermal mounted above it:
This is a North Korean FCS with a combine RF and Thermal:
The 4th tank here has the front of the FCS exposed, we need a higher resolution shot to confirm but it looks like it has a large thermal lens in the same position as the NK FCS.
If it is a KTD-1/2 then the tank doesn't have thermals just active IR and they sould really buy some DPRK FCS immediatly.
You quoted the Syrian upgrades twice and no, that looks like the single large lens cover on a KTD-1/2 rangefinder. Even if it isn't that says that in the entire reinforced tank company a single tank has thermals and a second tank has a rangefinder. The rest are bare.
The lens cover on the KTD is rectangular not round.
I get that but you're judging that by OP's image which is a still of a video. All other external geometry points to it being a KTD-1/2 type sight. Here's a closeup of the one we know has a KTD-1/2 sight from the video and the tank to its right clearly has a KTD-1/2 box on top. Unless they've designed a new sight that fits the KTD-1/2 housing I don't think it's anything but a KTD-1/2.
>sight
I meant rangefinder but you know what I mean. Anyways, I've taken more looks at the image and video and it still looks like a KTD-1/2. The lens cover looking round is just an artifact of the video, and we've literally never seen a thermal sight in a KTD box before, the Norks have their own (larger) housing for their combos and the presumed imager on Syrian T-55s is a bolt-on is a different form factor (and I feel like I should add that I don't think it was ever established that the box was an imager, much less a thermal imager). Why would the Russians re-use the KTD housing, that's been out of production for what, decades now? To house a thermal imager which likely has different dimensions from the rangefinder? Plus it'd indicate a lack of a rangefinder unless they've magically made it so the rangefinder goes through the same optics as the imager, most imager + rangefinder combos have oblong or rectangular lens covers and protective glass viewports for this reason after all.
Paid for with what money?
wheat
PT-76 in Ukraine when?
What comes after this? My guess technicals and tractors.
It must not be since Russia is begging North Korea for table scraps.
>these Russians are still beating ukraine
Suffering 3-ö5 casualties for every one you inflict on the enemy while you are reduced to trying and failing to hold gorund in a static defense means you're beating the enemy now?
Well by that definition the Germans were still winning the war in late 1944.
>Well by that definition the Germans were still winning the war in late 1944.
Hitler was obviously still winning even in 1945 because why else would Stalin be begging for Lend-Lease? Lmao. Look at this picture of Stalin dancing while Truman throws money at him.
That was because the Americans desperately needed the Soviets to hold back the Japanese who were still occupying China, Dutch East Indies, Malaya and other United Nations territory.
Soviets didn't do anything until Japan was getting nuked
Apparently Russians are taught in school that it was the Soviets who defeated Japan and forced them to surrender,
They did. With the Soviet Union no longer a neutral power, the Japanese couldn't negotiate a surrender on their own terms.
anon russia pretty much won the entire WW2 by the time the japs nukes the silly american island.
bonus kek:
pic related is when the western front DIDNT EVEN EXIST YET.
>funded and made possible exclusively through lend-lease
sure, britain didnt exist, africa didnt exist, the atlantic didnt exist. also, only puccia and not the ussr was fighting, the rest of the coutries were only cheering them up. also, mighty puccia did all this without any help from the allies (like 80% of the materiel). puccia skronk!
you are so full of shit, vanya
russia won WW2 and western front is a meme that pretty much didnt exist.
>sure, britain didnt exist, africa didnt exist, the atlantic didnt exist.
none of these are the "western front", thanks.
british involvement in WW2 is an absolute joke, and africa was such a worthless operation, that went poor Rommel kept begging Berlin for more supplies, the only answer he got was "fuck off, we need all that stuff in the real war over here, fuck your africa".
Poor Rommel.
meds, now
i accept your concession.
vanya, if I invent some schizo story, or worse, just parrot what I have been told by other schizos, which is clearly your case, and a sane person calls me a retard instead of talking to a fucking wall, doesnt make my story true
but whatever mekes you feel good kek
>yes ok the western front is an absolute made-up meme and Russia won WW2 but but but but
but what?
>uh uh uh uh
thats right.
took you half an hour for that? jesus
>7900% of all russian tanks in WW2 were uh uh uh uh western!
>no no... ten trillion percent! was western!
>and and and and
lol
>the zhukov quote! the zhukov quote!
what about it?
>me, zhukov, says that Russia won WW2, with allied assistance
so.... zhukov says Russia won WW2, and you agree with that statement.
cool, thanks.
Genuinely fascinated to find out where these absolute schizo ahistorical opinions come from
Dearest schizophrenic, please tell me where you got these opinions from?
are there loke books?
Is there a website?
Dis it come to you in a dream?
>posts nonsense
>posts even more nonsense
>can’t prove any of it so it turns into complete babble
Every fucking time with you idiots
>he wants proof Russia won WW2
uhhh.... open a book, lmao.
or, if you're a kid, play CoD single player or something.
It wasn't Russia, it was the USSR. They were not the same, and without amrican help, the USSR would have never being able to reconquer all their land, much less reach Berlin. The war would have become a stalemate in the east at best.
Deal with it.
It's pretty funny because I (like many others I'm sure) always just thought of the USSR as Russia + some hangers-on
It has become abundantly clear how much of their military tech was made in Ukraine now
>The war would have become a stalemate in the east at best.
is there even 1 historian that actually said that?
its pretty much common knowledge right now that Russia would win WW2 either way, and literally every single competent person knows this.
No one givs a shit about zigger history because its meaningless lies that does not even recognise Russia started world war 2 as Germanies ally by treaty when it invaded Poland in 1939, let alone Stalins completely unjustified aggression against Finland. Anthiny Beevoirs books are banned in Russia and the sschool curriculum textbooks of kids in Russia have just been altered to say that teh fall of the USSR was a disaster for humanity and that victory in Ukraine is inevitable, they also say WW2 began in 1941 when Hitler attacked Stalin and that Russia single handily defeated Germany. Want to know the truth about Russian losses in WW2? They include ten million people Stalin murdered because he considered them a threat, in the Baltics, in Poland, in Ukraine and in Russia itself. Modern Russia is a lie built on a stack of lies.
>school curriculum textbooks of kids in Russia have just been altered to say that teh fall of the USSR was a disaster for humanity and that victory in Ukraine is inevitable
"“Like their grandfathers, they are fighting for goodness and truth shoulder to shoulder,” the book says of Russian soldiers in Ukraine. “Blowing themselves up with the enemy, dragging wounded comrades from under fire, fighting in burning tanks, commanding their units until the last breath,” the book states. “Courage and bravery to give up your life for the Motherland is something inherent to a Russian, Soviet soldier.”"
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/08/13/russia-history-textbook-revision-ukraine/
>these are the seething schizo ramblings westerners are screaming when confronted with the fact even their own historians and experts agree Russia won WW2
tough shit, init.
The Russian history of WW2 is very important to the kremlin as it has always helped move the balance of the numbers of people that stalin murdered to the column that says they 'sacrificed themselves for the motherland'. When it comes to history Russia can call the world back on it when it again recognises that it entered WW2 as Hitlers military ally. Pic related joint Soviet-Nazi military victory parade in Poland. Everything ziggers think they know is quite literally bullshit from the descendants of Stalinists who shot their family members for sport and personal gain
>its pretty much common knowledge right now that Russia would win WW2 either way
Khrushchev and Stalin disagree.
>Khrushchev and Stalin disagree.
where?
>"We (Russia, USSR) have won WW2, with allied assistance and I, Stalin, say so"
so Stalin says Russia won WW2 and you agree.
thanks.
>no no no not this one
>i dont like this one
sounds like a you problem.
every single expert and historian agrees with Glantz assessment.
>Russia won WW2
Did it win the communism? Russia entered WW2 as Hitlers ally. Did it loose because Hitler its ally at the start lost? Did it loose because it was stuck with stalins mass murdering tyranny?
damn son are you asking me which mental gymnastics will make you less butthurt abour Russia winning WW2?
shit, man, how should i know.....
Anthoiny Beevoirs books are banned in Russia. That's all you need to know about zigger 'history'. As full of shit and lies as everything else that the Russian state says.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antony_Beevor
"He was a visiting professor at Birkbeck, University of London, and the University of Kent. His best-selling books, Stalingrad (1998) and Berlin: The Downfall 1945 (2002), have been acclaimed for their detailed coverage of the battles between the Soviet Union and Germany, and their focus on the experiences of ordinary people. Berlin proved hugely controversial in Russia because of the information it contained from former Soviet archives about the mass rapes carried out by the Red Army in 1945. He was condemned for 'lies, slander and blasphemy' against the Red Army by the Russian ambassador at the time, Grigory Karasin,[1] and was frequently described as 'the chief slanderer of the Red Army' by Kremlin supporting media."
5 May 2018 · Sir Antony Beevor: ‘I’m liable to up to five years in prison in Russia’.
"When Sergei Shoigu was minister for emergency situations back in 2009, he tried to bring in a law to criminalise anybody who criticised the Red Army in the second world war. He said it was “tantamount to Holocaust denial”. Shoigu, who is now minister of defence and widely tipped as a successor to Vladimir Putin, has managed to have the law passed by the Duma with penalties of up to five years’ imprisonment. So in Russian terms I am technically a criminal, and yet I am still getting invitations from the current Russian ambassador. Churchill was right about Russia being “a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma”." -Antony Beevor
There is no mystery. It is all transparent. Russians (and commies in general) will say whatever they want at a particular moment without regard to past present or future fact.
"Russians are capable of literally eating an ox cart worth of shit, deny they are eating shit, claim the west is spreading misinformation how Russians eat shit, say they eat a little bit of shit - a teaspoon, educate everyone how putting a spoon of shit in your soup in beneficial for your immune system, show researches of independent Russian scientists how a scoop of shit 3 times a day keeps the doctor away, find historical evidences from Telegram how shit is full of vitamins so the more you eat of it the better for your organism, and by the time everyone outside of Russia is gagging and puking in their mouth looking at how Russians chew on fat shit logs, the ox cart of shit will be picked clean of its content. And at the end they will just say there was no shit in the cart, literally 0 evidence of that claim, can't you see its sparkling clean?"
>western losers telling me how to call Russia
i will call it how i want.
Motherland, Russia, USSR, its my country, i call it how i want it to.
>some western gays books are banned in russia
oh no thats so sad.
so, is there even 1 historian/expert in the west that says Russia would lose without western support?
ill wait.
>western losers
The West won the war, zigger. As in: we became better than before. We no longer fight each other like you and thirdworlders, and we became even more prosperous than during colonialism thanks to our superior society and culture.
You survived WW2, inherited a pile of ruin, fucked up again during the Cold War, and you have been trying to keep up unsucessfully for decades because your retarded refusal to join us.
>Motherland, Russia, USSR, its my country
Wrong. All those are a propaganda lie. You're just Moscow, St. Petersbourg and little more parasiting ill-gotten conquered foreign provinces.
That's why you hate so much those like the Baltics, Poland, and specially Ukraine, because they're proof of how life can improve once they become free of Moscow's influence and control. They prove that you and tour culture suck and is inferior. Just uppity thieves, liars, murderers, and rapists pretending to be a nation.
>its my country
Said from a packed apartment in Western Europe to avoid mobilization.
lol, you're the one butthurt because the USSR (including Ukraine) needed US help to win.
The fact that you keep mentioning "Russia" while talking about WW2 betrays your zigger brainwashing.
Putin is in his bed in teh Kremlin
He wakes up screaming in the darkness
Seat pours form his face
It is not the faces of the dead he mordered or the death in his wars that gives him nightmares.
It is the prospect of defeat in Ukraine and his own violent death.
He screams "Help Me!" in terror.
With a Fat greasy 'POP!' sound Stalin appears.
'Hello little Putin, it is I stalin!'
"I wander the kremlin at night until apocalypse for all the murders and torture I carried out after which I am to be cast into Hell" Stalin says "I will help you little Putin", says stalin
"O Stalin Stalin thank you" Says putin
"I have started a war in Ukraine, invaded it, I have sent the whole Russian army there but they are loosing" Putin cries out
"Have you tried mass murder" says stalin
"Yes yes Stalin, the Russian army has murdered whole villages in Ukraine, old women and men arms tied shot and thrown in pits, we have tortured to death innocent people, randomly executed everywhere and everyone we could but we are still loosing teh war in Ukraine" says Putin
"Well then says stalin, how about mass rape of their women and taking their children, as I did to families" says stalin
"O Stalin Stalin, we have taken hundreds of thousands of the Ukrainians children and raped and murdered women wherever we went in Ukraine but we are still loosing the war" cries out
Putin
"Well then little Putin, there is only one thing to try but it worked for me in WW2 and it will surely work now" says Stalin
"O yes...yes tell me" says Putin
"You must call the American president and ask him to send lorries and jeeps and tanks and money and factories because then you will certainly win" and to the sound of Putin's scream of despair Stalin vanishes
>Putin is in his bed in the Kremlin
>He wakes up screaming in the darkness
>Sweat pours from his face
>It is not the faces of the dead he murdered or the dead in his wars that gives him nightmares.
>It is the prospect of defeat in Ukraine and his own violent death.
>He screams "Help Me!" in terror.
>With a Fat greasy 'POP!' sound Stalin appears.
>"Hello little Putin, it is I stalin!'
>"I wander the kremlin at night until apocalypse for all the murders and torture I carried out after which I am to be cast into Hell" Stalin says "I will help you little Putin", says stalin
>"O Stalin Stalin thank you" Says putin
>"I have started a war in Ukraine, invaded it, I have sent the whole Russian army there but they are loosing" Putin cries out
>"Have you tried mass murder" says stalin
>"Yes yes Stalin, the Russian army has murdered whole villages in Ukraine, old women and men arms tied shot and thrown in pits, we have tortured to death innocent people, randomly executed everywhere and everyone we could but we are still loosing the war in Ukraine" says Putin
>"Well then says stalin, how about mass rape of their women and taking their children, as I did to families" says stalin
>"O Stalin Stalin, we have taken hundreds of thousands of the Ukrainians children and raped and murdered women wherever we went in Ukraine but we are still loosing the war" cries out
>Putin
>"Well then little Putin, there is only one thing to try but it worked for me in WW2 and it will surely work now" says Stalin
>"O yes...yes tell me" says Putin
>"You must call the American president and ask him to send lorries and jeeps and tanks and money and factories because then you will certainly win" and to the sound of Putin's scream of despair Stalin vanishes
Fixed typos
Post a gun you own. Even a Russian garbage rod like this
>every single expert and historian agrees with Glantz assessment.
Do you have proof of this?
This is the point of the book where Glantz says the Red army would have bled worse, but would have been on the beaches of France if not for lend lease which he earlier said was critical to its logistics. Glantz isn't just Soviet Union would win(Western Allies were also at war with Germany) its Soviet Union would conquer all of Europe while enduring a famine with insufficient logistics.
>do you have proof that historians disagree with Glantz assessment that Russia would win WW2 either way?
yes.
here, a list of books that disagree with Glantz's assessment:
-
-
-
-
-
So you're claiming to have read every other book on ww2 that mentions lend lease and that every historian deigns to look at alt history and make presumptions?
He's trying to defend Anthony Beevors books being banned in Russia. In other worlds he's a retarded underage zigger cunt with no future and no purpose other than illustrating that Russia should be erased.
guys i am trying to prove the lying motherfucking zigger wrong and i cant find anything.
i want to find books saying russia would lose WW2 without america, and i just cant find anything.
what the hell?
see
But I guess that the guys actually in charge of the USSR during WW2 aren't a valid source for ziggers
>see
>russia won WW2
No it didn't. First of all it wasn't Russia alone, it was the USSR, and it survived the war just like the UK or France, nothing more.
The real winner of WW2 was the US by all metrics. Soviets just bled more.
>zhukov the smug motherfucker saying Russia won WW2, with western support
>Zhukov is literally saying "Russia won WW2".
thanks again, i guess.
>Russia couldn't have won WW2 without lend-lease
>BASED RUSSIA WON WW2 ALL ON HER OWN
>Ukraine couldn't have halted and reversed Russia's advances without lend-lease
>REEEEEEEEEEEEEEE STUPID HATO WE'RE LITERALLY FIGHTING THE ENTIRE WORLD
>Zhukov says Russia won WW2
yes we have that established.
besides mr Zhukov saying Russia that won WW2, i asked for western experts and historians saying that Russia would lose WW2 without western support.
Do you have them?
>no
ok cool, thanks.
>getting pushed out of Ukraine after 50km without lend-lease
>Zhukov Zhukov Zhukov Zhukov Zhukov Zhukov
lol at this zigger trying to avoid talking about the proof here
with Nikita Khrushchev and Stalin saying that they only won thanks to the US.
I guess you handlers wouldn't like that, da comrade?
>Nikita Khrushchev and Stalin saying Russia won WW2, with western aid
yes we all know that Russia won WW2.
i keep asking for western historians and experts saying Russia would lose without western support.
can you post it?
>no
ok cool thanks.
Russians said they would have lost without lend-lease. Thanks for finally admitting that.
>lying about what Nikita Khrushchev and Stalin said
>moving goalposts to avoid admitting being wrong
you're only fooling yourself, zigger. Your nation and your life is a lie.
LMAO, I bet you also believe that USSR won the Winter War.
>illiterate zigger keeps mentioning zhukov while the book written by Khrushchev talks about Stalin admitting they couldn't win without the US
amazing how brainwashing makes people to not see proof in front of their eyes
Can you find a few that agree with his whole assessment? You're going to find a lot that agree that the Soviet Union wouldn't have lost, but I want the full package.
12-18 Months and the soviets could've or would've conquered France afterwards. Lets go.
no western trucks = no way to reach Berlin for the USSR, period.
Remember that 1944 was the hightest production year of german industry. With a way slower USSR, german would had more time and resources to stall them.
>no western trucks = no way to reach Berlin for the USSR, period.
you better not touch that subject.
>“In 1935, GM agreed to build a new plant near Berlin to produce the aptly named "Blitz" truck, which would later be used by the German army for its blitzkreig attacks on Poland, France and the Soviet Union. German Ford was the second-largest producer of trucks for the German army after GM/Opel, according to U.S. Army reports,” (Dobbs, 1998, para. 17). Not only did the American automakers produce trucks for the German army, but they also provided large quantities of strategic raw materials (Dobbs, 1998, para. 18). As the war approached, and due to an intense pressure from Berlin, the American automakers had to cooperate closely with the Nazi regime (Dobbs, 1998, para. 19). Hence, when the war broke out in 1939, the American
automakers, GM and Ford, became extremely crucial to the German army (Dobbs, 1998, para. 22).
The poor third world German army was 99% reliant on horses until america lend-leased the krauts.
in fact, the more you dig where germans got all their shit from, the more depressing it gets.
Thats not lend lease.
yes, thats kraut-lease.
Where is the lease in that?
damn i honestly have no idea how to call america arming and funding the entire third reich.
lend lease was russia.
kraut lease doesnt fit.
hmmm..... nazi-funding? yeah thats better.
>russia had american trucks! american trucks! russia had american trucks!
ok, how bout....
>america supplying germans with trucks
NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO
THIS DOESNT COUNT
YOU YOU YOU YOU
ZIGGER YOU YOU YOU
oh man.
redeeming american nazi-trucks is a boo-boo, i forgot, sorry.
Building automobile factories and buying out local automobile manufacturer before the war is funding the entire third Reich? Can you be any more obnoxious?
>america supplying infantry trucks to germans 5 minutes before WW2 doesnt count
he-he-he.
didnt america also sell all their military aircraft and tank patents to the germans for a proverbial 1$ between 1935-1940?
>yes, but that doesnt count either
oh ok i had no idea it doesnt count.
>military aircraft
That explains the German B-17
>tank patents
That would be sabotage
>well yeah ok america created the entire nazi truck fleet used to invade europe and sold the nazis plane engine and other patents for a dollar but that doesnt count
oh sorry, i had no idea that it didnt count.
So providing trucks for a nation means it's a significant investment into their war-making capabilities. Thanks for conceding
so if Nazis won against the vatniks in WW2, we'd all be patting ourselves on the backs that america won WW2 by giving Nazis all their trucks?
Yeah man I'm sure Germany gearing up for war wanted fucking American light tank patents from before they revved up their mechanization program
>even more moving goal posts
>comparing a bunch of private companies making money in the 1930s with the US government Lend Lease to the USSR
You made dishonesty and lying your entire culture and then you wonder why we dislike you
>america supplying infantry trucks to germans 5 minutes before WW2 doesnt count
the fuck are you talking about?
ford had no control over the factory in the war
>america is such a worthless banana republic it had ZERO SAY, it could do nothing, when its most gigantic car manufacturer is literally building an invasion truck fleet for the Nazis
the factory was on german soil.
yeah nsdap just put other nsdap guys in charge of the factory. just wait till you find out what nazis did with hugo junkers.
>america built a truck factory in nazi germany and built their entire truck fleet to invade europe, and now pretends it didnt happen or that it was outside of their control
lol
anon thats literally what kruschev and stalin said
>Russia won WW2, thanks for the stuff lol
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Germany
the factory was build in 1925 before nsdap was in power
>>“In 1935, GM agreed to build a new plant near Berlin
>>“In 1935, GM agreed to build a new plant near Berlin
>>“In 1935, GM agreed to build a new plant near Berlin
>>“In 1935, GM agreed to build a new plant near Berlin
>>“In 1935, GM agreed to build a new plant near Berlin
same arguments apply here just a bit later.
perople in charge were swapped and after the beginning of the war opel was defacto not under gm control
>it didnt happen
correct, the US didn't build the entire german truck fleet, and half of more of german logistics used fucking horses until the end of the war, unlike the USSR thanks to the US
> it was outside of their control
correct, in peace time in the 30s there was no reason to stop fucking car sales, an the US also helped create the USSR auto industry
>thats literally what kruschev and stalin said
Wrong, liar:
> [STALIN] STATED BLUNTLY THAT IF THE UNITED STATES HAD NOT HELPED US, WE WOULD NOT HAVE WON THE WAR. IF WE HAD TO FIGHT NAZI GERMANY ONE ON ONE, WE COULD NOT HAVE STOOD UP AGAINST GERMANY'S PRESSURE, AND WE WOULD HAVE LOST THE WAR
do you think vatniks are going to feel any less smug about Russia winning WW2 because stalin said "Russia won WW2 with allied help, thanks".
if anything, it makes the vatniks even more smug about winning WW2.
Why bother replying? Either bait or a complete moron is posting.
you must understand - western mental gymnastics to make their pathetic involvement in WW2 meaningful is only making Russians laugh.
>but we sent you stuuuuufffffff
we bled, we died, we did all the job to defeat the Nazi trash.
we literally did everything.
while the west sent packages.
thanks for the packages, but we still did everything, we won WW2.
>but the PACKAGEEEESSSSS
stop begging for attention.
>we bled, we died
you were cannon fodder
> we did all the job to defeat the Nazi trash
no, you didn't. in fact you made the problem worse by helping the Nazis between 1939 and 1941. But that's the part you false and lying history books do not speak of.
> we won WW2
No, you did not. You just survived among ruins while the US became the leading country of the world.
>nuh-uh! no you din't!
lets check.
>who killed 99%+ of all Germans in WW2
Russians
>who took over Germany and took Berlin
Russians
aww geez.
you're not replying to his post though, you're just creating anf fighting against strawmen
>who took over Germany
not russia fortunately
>who took over Germany
>not russia fortunately
They somewhat partially did and unfortunately you can still see the ever lasting effects as of today.
reading about the Allied invasion of west germany is just sad.
>4,000,000 allied troops
>8,000 allied tanks
>12,000 allied airplanes
vs
>german border guard, a sick dog
>8 german tanks, most decomissioned
its almost like everyone that could hold a gun was sent to the east.
there's a band of brothers episode about this.
>americans in western germany are chilling without any combat in sight, but still were scared shitless of dying randomly, accident or some shit
american tv forgot to show why it was so quiet in the western front.
>there's a band of brothers episode about this.
what the series or the book didn't told you is that the Battle of the Bulge/Bastogne episodes only happened because this previous US defeat:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_H%C3%BCrtgen_Forest
>america was losing battles against starving hitlerjugend
True, and yet they fought not only on equal footing with the western invaders, but actually outfought them, only losing because of attrition and logistics.
>well yeah ok russia took over germany, killed all the germans and destroyed all their armies but...
>but uhhh.....
>russia took over germany,
Never happened
>killed all the germans
Never happened
>and destroyed all their armies
Never happened
Do you have more zigger fanfiction you want to share?
>who killed 99%+ of all Germans in WW2
Not russians. It was around 2/3 of them by the USSR, while the Allies did the other 1/2, not to mention the US vs the Japanese while the USSR kept their deal with the japs: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet%E2%80%93Japanese_Neutrality_Pact
>who took over Germany
most of it was taken by the Allies
>and took Berlin
The Allies let the soviets do the dirty work and take the casualties. They could have reached the city before them, but they kept their word given at Yalta and Berlin wasn't as important strategically as to consolidate in south germany:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_to_Berlin#Final_moves_by_Western_Allies
You didn't. You just suck at war and lost millions fighting an army of meth-heads who relied on horse-drawn logistics. Which is how you're at over a quarter of a million slaughtered failing to annex Ukraine.
This mindset reminds me of those retards who at the end of a match say
>gg ez
with a kdr of 3:47
Didn't they ship it back to the US for maintenance somewhere in the 2000s?
a few years ago actually, there's an article online about it that I cant find at the moment
> we won WW2.
The Russian SSR participated in part of WW2, yes. Soviet Union participation in the Pacific theater was of measurably less impact than US participation in Europe. That's why it's called a WORLD war, Ivan.
>while the west sent packages
Let's not discount the value of 4.5 million tons of food, especially after boneheaded Muscovite attempts at collectivization caused a famine. Pretty hard to fight without food.
>we bled, we died, we did all the job to defeat the Nazi trash.
Go read up on how the Kremlin put ethnic Russians to work in plants and farms away from the fighting and trucked Ukrainians, Armenians, and everybody else to the front lines, I'll wait. *~~*~~*~~*~~*~~
Post salsa for the "five minutes before" claim, please.
>russia had american trucks!
No it didn't. It was the USSR.
>russia had american trucks!
About 400,000 trucks and jeeps through lend-lease in the early 1940s, yes.
But turn the clock back a little further: in 1928 the entire soviet union had about 20,000 automobiles tops, and a single truck factory. Enter the Dearborn agreement:
>Signed in Dearborn, Michigan, on May 31, 1929, the contract stipulated that Ford would oversee construction of a production plant at Nizhny Novgorod, located on the banks of the Volga River, to manufacture Model A cars. An assembly plant would also start operating immediately within Moscow city limits. In return, the USSR agreed to buy 72,000 unassembled Ford cars and trucks and all spare parts to be required over the following nine years, a total of some $30 million worth of Ford products. Valery Meshlauk, vice chairman of the Supreme Council of National Economy, signed the Dearborn agreement on behalf of the Soviets. To comply with its side of the deal, Ford sent engineers and executives to the Soviet Union.
So yes: without the US, The USSR wouldn't have HAD their own automotive industry. And it was all done years prior to any interwar production agreement with the Germans.
>you better not touch that subject.
oh, I know it all. US car companies also were responsible for the USSR auto indutry, BTW.
>the more you dig where germans got all their shit from, the more depressing it gets.
they had sympathizers, collaborators and spies all over the US and other western nations, yes.
In fact, there's a good argument about nazi ideology just being a rehashed larp of the US racist chimp outs of the 1900-1920s and manifest destiny (cowboy tales were very popular in germany, and Hitler was a fanboy).
It's always hard to remember nowadays that fascism was just another ideology, not automatically either hecking bad or based like people think of it nowadays
Certainly it wasn't any more disgusting than communism
Doesn't sound like a good argument.
>"might have taken twelve to eighteen months longer"
Lots of Monday-morning quarterbacks among historians, and what I've read of Glantz leads me to believe he's overcorrecting previous underestimates of Soviet performance, though maybe not veering into hardcore Commieboo territory. The simple truth is that we just can't know for sure how some things would have shaken out. I've seen attempts to try and quantify it with things like the dollar value of the goods donated, but that doesn't capture everything.
The Studebaker trucks are a good example: without them, logistics hits a bottleneck and all the T-34s in the world won't make up for it. A solo Russia couldn't have built enough GAZ-AA and ZIS-5 units to make up for the shortfall, and the Studebaker was a superior design to boot. Another item was that chemical plant that got modularized and shipped over: if the USSR didn't have the precision equipment and know-how to engineer the different reagents without instructions, then they'd have needed time for costly trial and error.
The biggest thing that goes unremarked, however, is that even before entering the war the US and Great Britain had severely constrained the Germany's access strategic materials like wolframite minerals or rare earths on the open market. That drove the price up and availability down, which had a ripple effect on German engineering designs and factory output. A USSR fighting solo would have faced a Germany with a different set of capabilities.
>But what about the US and UK fighting without the USSR?
It would have been a tougher on them until, oh, August of 1945.
Its been a while since I read the book, but skimming through he does put high importance on lend lesase on logistics(reason why he shifted it back 12-18 months), mentions food aid and gives credit to the allies for doing more to cripple the Luftwaffe. Didn't see much on him taking the blockade into account and he waffles a bit on the importance of North Africa. Didn't see anything on blocking Germany from international trade. Not sure if he would also be mentally excluding the bombing campaign, but it really does sound like picking and choosing allied involvement to support tankie shrieking.
His assertion that previous accounts used (uncritically) too many German eyewitness reports has some merit, and I can see where Western historians might have been critical of Red Army performance in the 1950s and 60s.
>it really does sound like picking and choosing allied involvement to support tankie shrieking
I'd have to agree. While I'd hesitate to call him a dyed-in-the-wool tankie himself, he kind of overcorrects previous accounts, and when you see that basically his entire output is centered on the Red Army, I think he's subconsciously fanboying.
Lend-lease Hurricanes were better than Soviet aircraft, lend-lease Studebakers were so superior to the Soviet trucks that their reverse-engineered designs were the template for generations of Soviet military logistics, and intelligence-sharing gave the Soviets and edge they wouldn't have otherwise had. And without the US forcing them to spam U-boats, the Germans would have had spare engineer time and materials to devote to the land war.
> lend-lease Studebakers were so superior to the Soviet trucks that their reverse-engineered designs were the template for generations of Soviet military logistics
the most numerous soviet truck of the war, the GAZ-MM, was already classed a reserve vehicle
meaning half of domestic soviet trucks were literally unfit for frontline service
and even their good truck, the ZIS-5, was only about as good as the chevrolet 4x4 (weighted less but had less hp) but with less offroad ability
>And without the US forcing them to spam U-boats, the Germans would have had spare engineer time and materials to devote to the land war.
U-boats actually used up twice as much steel as tanks did
and the luftwaffe always had priority on rare resources like aluminum, gasoline, and even tungsten
>I'd have to agree. While I'd hesitate to call him a dyed-in-the-wool tankie himself, he kind of overcorrects previous accounts, and when you see that basically his entire output is centered on the Red Army, I think he's subconsciously fanboying.
Probably, didn't think the book was bad either, just that section was really felt unnecessary and not well thought out. Changing two major parts of the conflict, western landings and lend lease then speculating on it shouldn't be a confident statement. I'm betting if someone walked him through his own book and asked where he was changing things and how it would effect the war he might not be so confident with it.
Really would expect something more like this:
>While it is obviously impossible to know what would have happened without the aid, it is clear that Lend-Lease came too late to be the decisive factor in the Soviet victory. But it is equally clear that when aid began to arrive on a massive scale, it significantly increased the speed with which the German Army was pushed out of the Soviet Union. Without Lend-Lease, the Soviet people would have had to make even greater sacrifices and would have suffered even more deaths.
>Ironically, although the Soviet Union would have won the war on the Eastern Front without Lend-Lease, American aid facilitated the Red Army’s arrival in Eastern Europe before Anglo-American forces, which set the stage for the beginning of the Cold War.
https://notevenpast.org/lend-lease/
Which while it doesn't give a completely different view of the situation regarding lend lease it doesn't have the same confidence and speculates on more minor changes to history.
No. They both directly said the USSR would have lost the war without allied equipment
>they both directly said Russia won WW2 and thanked the west for material support
>if I change the words from what they said to what I want to believe, I’m right
So those quotes saying they would have lost without lend-lease don’t exist to you? It’s a yes or no question?
>Glantz
Took soviet documents at face value (lol), and didn't want to question too much the zigger narrative to keep access to russian archives.
Nazi Germany wasn't going to win without access to the caucasus oil, but it also wasn't going to be beaten back without US help, period
> He has argued that the view of the Soviet Union's involvement in the war has been prejudiced in the West, which relies too much on German oral and printed sources without being balanced by a similar examination of Soviet source material
Tankie please
>russia won WW2
No it didn't. First of all it wasn't Russia alone, it was the USSR, and it survived the war just like the UK or France, nothing more.
The real winner of WW2 was the US by all metrics. Soviets just bled more.
>losing twice as many men on one front in 3 years than Germany on 5 fronts in 6 years while getting 70% of your vehicles and aost 100% of your fuel from overseas
>less than 10 years after the war the people in the nations you sacked revolt and you have to run them over with tanks, dropping all masks and to give them a choice between poverty, surveillance, re-education, propaganda or death
>less than 30 years later you're already getting economy-mogged by one half of Germany
>less than 50 years later your empire is in shambles and people in your satellite states risk their lives to protest against living in a communist shithole affiliated to yours
>less than 80 years later you try to invade such a satellite state but they fight back and push you out of thrir country using nato scraps while you're on your last almost 80 year old tanks, isolated from every nation on the planet that has clean tap water for the next decades
cool win bro
I'll take the bait.
>British involvement was a joke
Britain had it's fair share outside of North Africa and Dunkirk. They fought well in Italy as well, in Northern France, and with plenty of meth and Sten Guns managed to fuck with the Germans a fair bit.
>Their involvement on the Western Front
America Outshone them with the Battle of the Bulge. Yet they still fought alongside with them, not to mention the importance of the RAF from the Battle of Britain and then on.
These industrial goblins put up a fight, and you can't take that away from them.
Having the most casualties doesn’t make you a winner. Reminder that the “best tank of the war” T-34 had a 1:3 K/D against German armored vehicles. Not just tanks, armored tracked vehicles.
I remember reading somewhere that 50% of T-34 losses were due to mechanical failures, so 40k Soviet tanks died trying to reach Germans
Russia won WW2 by killing all the germans and occupying their shithole for 50+ years : )
pic related: 5 mile long march of surrendred germans after Russia won the Battle of Moscow, 1941 : )
That picture is from 1944
>by killing all the germans and occupying their shithole for 50+ years
none of that happened but cope away
>none of that happened
8 mln germans commited mass sudoku and 2 mln german women raped themselves, and then allowed the Russians to occupy half of Germany for 50 years.
nice
germans are so generous.
slow down with those goalposts I can barely see them anymore
And what does that have to do with T-34s being pretty shit and only have a reputation due to propaganda?
they walked them in a circle to make it seem larger...
"Russia won WW2" is commie cope. We could and would have done it without you, but sacrificing a few million reds for our cause was obviously favorable
>WW2 by the time the japs nukes the silly american island.
What?
He no speaky the engrish gode.
>Russia pretty much won the entire WW2
Post lend-lease statistics
Also
>the entire WW2
ESL detected. Poo or vatmoron?
>Russia won WW2, with help
>NO NO NO NO IT DIDNT WIN
lmao
Correct. The massive amount of help they received won the war.
>loses argument
>invent strawman that nobody said
>declare victory
liyng is in your blood, isn't it zigger?
sirs?
>IESLB
I’m just amazed at how they parked them. Why so close? You’re in an empty field, even if it might not stay empty for long, you’ve got room. I guess I’d be questioning this no matter what but I still think it’s a valid point.
They are just trying to make the cube out of T-55
shit posting shis poorly isn't going to keep you from getting mobik'd, Ivan.
>and they didn’t even have to spend 3/4 of a trillion dollars every year tor 2 decades to do it that’s wierd
Instead they managed to have almost their entire military destroyed and reconstituted in less than 2 years. Incredible.
Anyone who thinks this war is going to end in anything other than a fucking disaster for Russia in the long term (more than it is already) is a bumbling fucking moron.
>Russia is sitting on shiny new land
Brother that land is nothing but rubble thanks to Russia bombing it until there was nothing left
yeah I think Russia's new Kherson Oblast is missing it's capital city though brother
Tragically the Zaporizhzhia one too.
don't Ukrainians know it's legally theirs?
>day 564 of decartelization of Mexico
>US reactivates Korean War m46 Pattons
>I wonder which town they’ll not be taking by this time next year?
>next year
This gets just sadder and sadder.
>I wonder which town they’ll not be taking by this time next year?
uhh, robotino?
the vatmoron vermin have been pretty generous as of late, with their tactical retreats.
5 miles of advancement is more than all of russia's advancement over the last 12 months.
why do vatmorons use graves as some gotcha post. These are marked graves. vatmorons go in mass graves or are buried in ditches on the sides of roads. Or in the case if Wagner, the road is their graves lmao
>or are buried in ditches on the sides of roads
You mean "are left in cube form on the sides of roads".
it's not on a road it's a parking lot, have a little respect !
actually 0.037% of USA GDP, but what are trifles between frens?
>Washington post, reliable
This thread surely woke up the padjeet crusade. The 2nd army of the world reduced to post WW2 tanks. How utterly pathetic
>T-55 hull with new engine, NATO L7 gun and Israeli reactive armor and fire control system is the same as T-55 obr. 1961 with RHA and iron sights
Modernized soviet tanks are really cool, and feel like best of both worlds situation.
Afghan women are killing themselves en masse because they consider death a preferable alternative to life under taliban rule
Is this why based taliban are begging for Western humanitarian aid?
Like begging Ukraine for a Christmas truce after the retreat in Kharkiv?
The Taliban were never designated a terror group by the US.
Ive got multiple t55s in my collection. On is painted bronze, the other sand, and another one silver. If I have all these t55s, how many do you reckon Russia must have? A near infinite amount, I'd say. In wouldn't be surprised if they could build a bridge across the Pacific ocean with all of them.
can i have one?
No, a completely different kind. The kind that decides whether they get to keep power or not.
Reminder that those aren't supposedly going to be used as tanks, but as self propelled artillery because Russia is running out of it. They had a lot of those t-54/55 but no ammo, so now they're buying from the iranians.
So spamming them it's unironically a smart move on their part, even if it's also another sign of their weakness and lack of modern weapons.
we have already seen them beeing used as tanks and direct fire field guns its the same cope with the t-62s supposedly only beeing used as static defense last year
I guess it was too much to expect the russians to avoid to use them wrong.
There's also something to say about any armoured vehicle with a gun being forced into the tank role
>we have already seen them beeing used as tanks and direct fire field guns
among other things
there is literally no way they can aim that shit like artillery
I know they're incompetent but the practice has been around almost as long as tanks have
It has rifled barrel, it can be reasonably accurate.
tank guns have shitty service life compare to artillery guns, after several hundred shots it won't hit shit at 10km
Needing to use the T-55's as demi-artillery is in some ways worse than them simply running short of functional tanks. Russia's artillery arm is the one part of their army that performed at least somewhat close to pre-war expectations, and volume of pre-war shell stockpiles was pretty much the one category they had NATO totally outmatched in overall. Expending that pre-war artillery stock without achieving decisive effect while the much larger industrial economies of NATO nations art starting to amp up artillery shell production kind of brings into question how feasible Russia's plan for a long war actually is.
The ukies getting near parity in volume of artillery fire would be pretty bad for the Russians. Especially since the Ukrainians have the edge in terms of precision munitions and counter battery radar systems.
I like how every vatnik conveniently ignores the fact russias new budget cuts pretty much everything outside of the military.
public spending, infrastructure, social services, administration, education....everything got a large budget cut to pay for the military to continue fighting a defending war in the nation they invaded.
>umm the counter offensive is failing thats why Russia is ceding ground every day!!!
The ziggers mind cannot comprehend this.
So you basically ruined your country for some farmland in the poorest country in Europe? gg's
So their women are basically whores for Western men?
It's what Russian women are best known for.
real talk, Russia will be completeley defenceless after this meme war. Best korea might become one of the largest countries in the world in our lifetimes.
This time two years ago, it would've been unthinkable that Russia would be where they are now. Such a dramatic decline.
PT-76's WHEN?
Do mobiks realize what happens when glorious poosoa runs out of T-55s too? The luckier ones will get to hold up the cardboard tanks while their comrades climb the body hills of the earlier waves.
Bottom tanks are probably better anyway, they can at least drive on its own
At least Kim might be able to upgrade them like he did for Assad.
Theoretically they have none.
In practice a lot of the scrapping budget magically manifested as new Ladas for the stockpile commander and his lieutenant
Russia is now has a slovakia quality stockpile of Main Battle Tanks
What is the one single wunderwaffe we could give Ukraine that would have the biggest impact? Probably better missiles like ATACMS, right?
I don't think just giving F-35s would help since US air power doesn't come from just a single plane
We don't give them aircrafts.
We lend them an air wing for a week.
59517760
Absolutely terrible bait. No (you) for ((you))
They have a lot of them but they appear to use them as pillboxes or on earth ramps as improvised artillery because they have the ammunition for them. However the barrels wear even faster than towed artillery and Ukrainian counterbattery just nails them. Going by the T62s it can be assumed half of them can't even move on their own. They sold so many and left so many out in the elements and cannibalised so many (you could actually see the periscopes and prisims and NV on sale on ebay etc for a decade) that what they have left is just shit. What they could get running easily is probably mostly already gone as we have seen them reach back to T10s which predate T54s already.
BBE SAD AND ANGRY BECAUSE WE TELL YOU HITLER KILLED YOUR RELATIVES NOT STALIN EVEN THOUGH IT WAS ACTUALLY STALIN. LET'S HAVE A VICTORY DAY. WW2 STARTED IN 1941. DON;T THINK ABOUT STALIN INVADING POLAND AS HITLERS ALLY, THINK ABOUT HOW YOU SHOULD SACRIFICE YOUR LIFE FOR PUTIN IN UKRAINE
IDK man they seem to be working decently well.
Why don't the Ukrainians just win then?
Well actually, that doesn't matter. According to you, the airforce is just for showing off on parades
https://desuarchive.org/k/thread/58733603/#58737824
bro, do not post memes about superiority of Russian AA at least until this war ends
Remember when there were posters here a year ago saying
>RUSSIA DOESN'T HAVE ANY T-55s, THEY WERE ALL PROPERLY/OFFICIALLY DISMANTLED AND SOLD TO ALLIED NATIONS IN THE 90s
Then the T-55s showed up. Guess we'll eventually find out if Russia really dismantled it's T-34s.
I dunno if anyone ever claimed that they dismantled the T-34s, it's pretty well-known that thousands of them are monuments
They had to buy parade models from Cambodia
Fantastic analysis just dropped from France.
https://www.institutactionresilience.fr/publications.php
They have quite a poor intelligence apparatus, I think OSINT dources are more reliable than the French.
Itt. Russians try to gloat about using westerm equipment in a war that happened over 80 years ago
Reminder that T-55 has facings easily defeated by .50 SLAP.
You have to give some credit or the vatnik. He managed to derail the conversation from Russia Stronk fielding T-55s to a worthless conversation about WW2. Well done.
>>but when Russia does it, it’s a joke to you
lets get back to the t-55 then. what is the first hit percentage on a t-55 without a range finder?
motherfucker the vatnik got BTFO so hard he's trying to memoryhole his own fucking idol Joseph Stalin.
that's why ziggers hate PrepHole, there's too many military history autists and their bullshit doesn't work here
Why haven’t you posted a gun yet? I even honored you by showing glorious mosin earlier
59519494
59519532
>lying zigger can't deal with reality even when Stalin confirming it
Pathetic
I've noticed this weird facet of the puccian psyche, it seems like they equate having huge casualties with doing good. Putin for example is obsessed with some battle in Chechnya were the entire puccian unit was wiped out.
they mythologize their deaths as "sacrifice" to cope about their incompetence and human life having no value for their rulers.
It's like a retarded death cult version of Omaha Beach, which was just a fuck up but got the Hollywood treatment as a symbol of the US war effort, but applied for the entire WW2 and beyond for Russia
If they didn't treat their casualties as some great feat they would have literally nothing to brag about. Dying is literally the only thing they're good at.
Its like being on a jobsite with someone who adamantly believes he does the most work because he sustains the most injuries.
Anyway, the Soviet Union was not Russia, and they started the war on the side of the axis and assisted in invading Poland, so as far as anyone is concernes they should be treated with the same contempt as the shitalians
They did the majority of the fighting on land in Europe during WW2. They tend to not mention pre-war pacts, leave out "on land" and sometimes they also leave out "in Europe".
>WW2
>be USSR
>take a while to figure out how Deep Battle works
>retarded logistics problems
>build quality on manufacturing is frequently shit
>callous disregard for own troops magnifies casualties
>"27,000,000 Soviet dead! We did ALL the dying!"
>be US and UK
>start Ultra project ahead of time
>break Enigma codes
>push the Wehrmacht's shit in
>Triton? 4-rotor Enigma?
>Fuck it, break that too
>keep innovating new depth charge refinements
>bitchslap the Kriegsmarine
>Purple, Magic, we're on a roll here
>IJA & IJN BTFO
>final boss: invading the home islands
>might require 1,000,000 US casualties?
>drop two A-bombs
>Hirohito announces surrender that same month
It's like they think their stubborn inability to learn "work smarter not harder" is some sort of virtue instead of the world's biggest self-own. If the Allies had to do it minus the Soviets they'd have taken more casualties, but they never would have been so stupid and inefficient as the USSR.
being Extremely liberal with the number. 125-180k tanks were built (all variants)
I THINK the real number is around 135k
Yeah? Ever seen a tractor that has been left in afield for 80 years having had all the electrics valuable parts removed and sold on ebay? Fearsome weapon of were.
>go check wikipedia's primary sources
>total doesn't add up to anywhere near 10,000
??????
The same article also says the US flew 5.25 million sorties for a loss of 0.4 aircraft per 1000 sorties, and most aircraft losses were rotary wing. Is this really supposed to be some epic gotcha?
Remember to call vatniks out on their bullshit wherever possible.
That was an impressive level of retardation faked or otherwise