Comments by "Fabian Schrötter" (@fabianschrotter) on "'Russian Defences Outstanding': CIA Veteran On Putin's Military; 'WWIII Has Begun,' Says Ukraine" video.

Well, Russia has lost over nine million soldiers on the Eastern Front in WW2 despite being massively supported by the USA with ammunition and military equipment. The Nazis lost 3.8 million soldiers on the eastern front even though they still had a western front. So it can be said that pound for pound the Russians have never brought impressive military capabilities.
6
Well, Russia has lost over nine million soldiers on the Eastern Front in WWII despite being massively supported by the USA with ammunition and military equipment. The Nazis lost 3.8 million soldiers on the eastern front even though they still had a western front. It is russian cannon fodder tradition to lose at least three times as many soldiers as the enemy. Qantity is also a form of quality. Stalin. Because you will look in vain for quality in Russia.
6
@trumpforever6706 I thought I explained that to you before. But since you still don't seem to get it, Russia has nuclear weapons and nuclear powers are not allowed to fight each other directly because of the risk of escalation. And why should the US risk a single American soldier when Ukraine alone is also inflicting hundreds of thousands of casualties on the Russians? Russia will lose this proxy war anyway.
3
@antoninagarkalna1444 What nonsense are you writing? Germany had a total of only 6.345 million soldiers on the Eastern Front. And Germany only lost a total of 5,533,000 soldiers in the entire war, including the Western Front, the Atlantic War and Africa. Apart from your Russian propaganda textbooks you will not find a single historian anywhere in the world who says otherwise.
2
@thomasortega3110 The Red Army was barely supported by America? Well you obviously have no idea about history. Using Google for 30 sec was probably already too complicated? Let me help you: World War II Allies: U.S. Lend-Lease to the Soviet Union, 1941-1945 400,000 jeeps & trucks. 14,000 airplanes. 8,000 tractors. 13,000 tanks. 1.5 million blankets. 15 million pairs of army boots. 107,000 tons of cotton. 2.7 million tons of petroleum products. Barely supported... Right?
1
 @antoninagarkalna1444 Ok, the 10 percent loss rate is correct, however, since Germany had less than 70 million inhabitants in 1939 while the USSR had over 170 million inhabitants.
1
@dopplerapples7307 Yes, that's right, luckily the Japanese didn't capitulate quickly enough. The Americans really wanted to test their bomb on a city. John von Neumann then demanded that Moscow be bombed immediately too in order to remain the sole nuclear power. In view of the destructive potential of the cold war, he was probably right. Our civilization was just lucky.
1
@antoninagarkalna1444 Ok let's say a total of 85 to 90mil and the soviet union had 180 to 190 mil. The country with not even half the population had to wage a war on two fronts and the larger country was supported with leand lease 10 times more massively than Ukraine is today. Whichever way you look at it, pound for pound the Russians were never world class... To put it euphemistically. The death of one man is a tragedy, the death of a million men is statistics. Stalin Luckily the Nazis lost but to quote the (smaller) war criminal Kissinger out of context: "it's a shame they couldn't lose both."
1