this post was submitted on 30 Jul 2024
891 points (98.3% liked)

Greentext

4460 readers
1265 users here now

This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.

Be warned:

If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 7 points 3 months ago (2 children)

How can they "spend more" than the US? They were literally given materiel and money by the US. The money the USSR spent was from the West.

The European war was fought with Russian troops, British intelligence, and American money. Also, there was an entire other war in the Pacific that the US fought at the same time. It's not possible for the Soviets to have spent more, just based on that fact alone.

[–] Miaou@jlai.lu 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

You know Russia was also involved in the east right? God American education is hopeless

[–] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 0 points 3 months ago

We're talking about spending money on the war. The Soviets fought Japan for a period of 26 days:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet%E2%80%93Japanese_War

[–] napoleonsdumbcousin 2 points 3 months ago

Lend-Lease was absolutely important when it came to specific material (e.g. trucks, aviation fuel). But in total numbers it was still only 4% of Soviet War production. I don't know who spent more money in the war (and it is irrelevant really when you look at dozens of millions of deaths), but Lend-Lease alone does not answer that question.