Why did the Soviet Union not go bankrupt following WWII like every other country in Europe. Was it because the economy was state-owned, or because they had never been purchasing war materials, or both?
Robbing the eat germans through heavy taxation and reparations for the war.
The Soviets had a knack for bleeding other countries dry. They gained a good bit of territory after WW2, which gave them access to resources in many countries. Even though they weren't officially owned by the Soviets, the resources were slowly consumed by them.
that and the robbing of other occupid countries and the 20 millions less to feed.David.P wrote:
Robbing the east germans through heavy taxation and reparations for the war.
would have been better for america to fight with germany against russia
But did the fact they had no companies to pay like the British mean anything?
Well if hitler wasn't fighting against the brits than maybe.SineNomine wrote:
that and the robbing of other occupid countries and the 20 millions less to feed.David.P wrote:
Robbing the east germans through heavy taxation and reparations for the war.
would have been better for america to fight with germany against russia
If it was solely Germany and Russia, the US would have let the two countries wear each other down, basically as they did in the Iran-Iraq war.David.P wrote:
Well if hitler wasn't fighting against the brits than maybe.SineNomine wrote:
that and the robbing of other occupid countries and the 20 millions less to feed.David.P wrote:
Robbing the east germans through heavy taxation and reparations for the war.
would have been better for america to fight with germany against russia
Last edited by nukchebi0 (2008-02-23 22:29:59)
Russia didn't want to fight Germany by itself. Stalin was wary of a fascist Europe, since Nazis didn't like communists and communists didn't like Nazis. I remember reading somewhere that Russia probably would have attacked Germany before the end of the war anyway, since they knew they were Hitler's next target.nukchebi0 wrote:
If it was solely Germany and Russia, the US would have let the two countries wear each other down, basically as they did in the Iran-Iraq war.
July 6th of 1941 was the planned date for the Soviet attack on Germany.SenorToenails wrote:
Russia didn't want to fight Germany by itself. Stalin was wary of a fascist Europe, since Nazis didn't like communists and communists didn't like Nazis. I remember reading somewhere that Russia probably would have attacked Germany before the end of the war anyway, since they knew they were Hitler's next target.nukchebi0 wrote:
If it was solely Germany and Russia, the US would have let the two countries wear each other down, basically as they did in the Iran-Iraq war.
Last edited by nukchebi0 (2008-02-23 22:50:31)
And regarding your original question -- wasn't the Soviet Union practically bankrupt at the beginning of the war anyway? They couldn't even afford weapons for all their soldiers.nukchebi0 wrote:
July 6th of 1941 was the planned date for the Soviet attack on Germany.
Ya i heard they armed some of their men with old Single shot rifles. And combat knives were outta the question so soldiers had to bring their own or use their fists.SenorToenails wrote:
And regarding your original question -- wasn't the Soviet Union practically bankrupt at the beginning of the war anyway? They couldn't even afford weapons for all their soldiers.nukchebi0 wrote:
July 6th of 1941 was the planned date for the Soviet attack on Germany.
One guy gets a loaded rifle, the next man gets another load of ammunition.David.P wrote:
Ya i heard they armed some of their men with old Single shot rifles. And combat knives were outta the question so soldiers had to bring their own or use their fists.
The Soviet Union did an awful lot of dying in WW2.
I don't think they could produce them.SenorToenails wrote:
And regarding your original question -- wasn't the Soviet Union practically bankrupt at the beginning of the war anyway? They couldn't even afford weapons for all their soldiers.nukchebi0 wrote:
July 6th of 1941 was the planned date for the Soviet attack on Germany.
True. Russia was in bad shape before the war.nukchebi0 wrote:
I don't think they could produce them.
And the industry they had at the time was moving eastward.SenorToenails wrote:
True. Russia was in bad shape before the war.nukchebi0 wrote:
I don't think they could produce them.
I can't tell if this is some strange form of satirical irony, sarcasm, or some strange combination. It just doesn't make sense....SineNomine wrote:
that and the robbing of other occupid countries and the 20 millions less to feed.David.P wrote:
Robbing the east germans through heavy taxation and reparations for the war.
would have been better for america to fight with germany against russia
Stick that in Babelfish and repost in English.SineNomine wrote:
that and the robbing of other occupid countries and the 20 millions less to feed.
would have been better for america to fight with germany against russia
The purges of the 1930's wreaked the Red Army itself, this led to all sorts of leadership and supply problems. A massive re-arming and training program was started after there humiliating victory in the Russ-Finnish war but it was'nt completed befor the war started.
I assume they didnt go bankrupt because as said befor it was a state owned economy so they would only have to pay for labour which id imagine was'nt very expensive. They also recieved large amounts of aid, they were'nt fond of the weaponary but food and materials would have been important. Any economists around?!
I assume they didnt go bankrupt because as said befor it was a state owned economy so they would only have to pay for labour which id imagine was'nt very expensive. They also recieved large amounts of aid, they were'nt fond of the weaponary but food and materials would have been important. Any economists around?!
Last edited by Jepeto87 (2008-02-24 00:47:09)
the majority of logistics vehicles in the red army during ww2 were from the US
Yep, the Soviets drove to Berlin in Dodge Power Wagons and Ford deuce-and-halfs.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
the majority of logistics vehicles in the red army during ww2 were from the US
Last edited by Reciprocity (2008-02-24 01:29:20)
Think Yalta / Potsdam for resources for Russia. In turn, "(temporary) economic prosperity"
Last edited by kylef (2008-02-24 01:43:34)
Wow, that's fucked up. Russia was bad, but let's face it. Nazi Germany was the worst thing to have ever hit this planet, ever.David.P wrote:
Well if hitler wasn't fighting against the brits than maybe.SineNomine wrote:
that and the robbing of other occupid countries and the 20 millions less to feed.David.P wrote:
Robbing the east germans through heavy taxation and reparations for the war.
would have been better for america to fight with germany against russia
Nope. The major problem which caused two years of german success was the fact that Russia was going to attack Germany itself in a month or two (it isn't official history, but a lot of facts prove that) So tanks, aircraft, men, artillery, ammo & oil supplyes were located near state border - when Germans striked, most of vehicles were empty - no crewmen, ammo & oil weren't loaded. That made them easy targets for Ju-87's/Ju-88's and HE-111's. About 75% of vehicles were lost in the first two month of war (most of them didn't even seen combat - they were wrecked on tank parkings and airfields.SenorToenails wrote:
True. Russia was in bad shape before the war.nukchebi0 wrote:
I don't think they could produce them.
As for weapons - Russia wasn't in bad shape before war. We had the best tanks in the world, one of the best world's antitank & field artillery and quite decend aircraft (which even became better during war time). As for small arms, well yes, most of soldiers were armed with Mosin rifle or Mosin carbine. Yet there was some SVT-40 self-loading rifles, PPsh-41 smg's, etc. But come on, most of Germans didnt have anything better than old and trusty 5-round bolt-action rifle (K98)
+ in 1940-1941, after Winter War experience Red Army was under heavy rearmanent procedure - old light, medium and heavy tanks (BT-5\BT-7, T-26, T-28, T-35) were replaced with new ones (T-60, T-34\76, KV-1, KV-2). Only about 30-35% of rearmanent was done before the beginning of the war.
Last edited by Longbow (2008-02-24 03:50:50)
Did Russia actually have a war debt?
Fuck Israel
Actually, they were a bigger purchaser of lendlease equipment than the UK.nukchebi0 wrote:
But did the fact they had no companies to pay like the British mean anything?
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular