• diprount_tomato
      link
      131 year ago

      After Germany declared war on them? They didn’t defeat them out of good will, in fact, I’d say America and South Africa were the closest things to Nazi Germany outside of the Reich

      • Flying Squid
        link
        -31 year ago

        Is it good to beat the shit out of the school bully after he picks a fight with you so he learns to stop picking fights with people? I would say so.

          • Flying Squid
            link
            -81 year ago

            There’s a difference between being a good country and being a global force for good. In helping to defeat the Nazis, the U.S. was a global force for good regardless of what else they did, had done or will do. The same with Stalinist Russia.

            • @Nudding
              link
              81 year ago

              And then they took all the top scientists from Germany and Japan, who were guilty of crimes against humanity, and made them high ups in the American government

              • Flying Squid
                link
                11 year ago

                Bad countries can’t do good things?

                  • Flying Squid
                    link
                    21 year ago

                    So it was bad to defeat the Nazis and the Confederates?

        • diprount_tomato
          link
          91 year ago

          Should I remind you of the land the USA originally had and what they did to the people who lived in the lands they conquered?

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            -51 year ago

            You can if you want to pretend that Russia didn’t do the same thing and that it somehow makes the comparison better for you!

            • diprount_tomato
              link
              4
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              It did, but the natives are more than 1% of the Russian population

    • originalucifer
      link
      fedilink
      61 year ago

      stopped clocked fallacy.

      the united states is in so many wars, they were bound to achieve one somewhat correctly.

      • Flying Squid
        link
        91 year ago

        The U.S. military also defeated the Confederacy. So that’s two.

      • @Organichedgehog
        link
        51 year ago

        Ok…? Does that dispute the point? Original comment said they were “never” a force for good

    • @captainlezbian
      link
      41 year ago

      Global force for better

      Good would’ve involved them allowing Spanish civil war vets to fight

    • @Nudding
      link
      11 year ago

      You know that was more so Russia right?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        41 year ago

        Not really, no. And let’s ignore the part where the only reason they even fought is because Russia wanted to conquer some of the same land as Germany 😂

        • @RichCaffeineFlavor
          link
          3
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Anticommunists never stop rewriting history to make the nazis look less bad

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            0
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Because Stalin didn’t invade Poland and the Baltic states, right? And he didn’t sign agreements with hitler before the war?

            Oh oh let me guess, they were “saving them from Nazis”! Now where have I heard that before…

            • @RichCaffeineFlavor
              link
              21 year ago

              The west constantly uses the memory of appeasement to justify its killings today but back when it was happening Stalin tried to start the war when Hitler could be easily crushed. It’s only after the west decided they would rather use the nazis to kill the communists than prevent the holocaust that deal was made.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                01 year ago

                What are you even talking about? Hitler attacked the Soviets, not the other way around. And it was because they broke their agreement and took territory that they said they wouldn’t.

                Appeasement isn’t even relevant in this context, so not sure what you mean by that.

                • @RichCaffeineFlavor
                  link
                  11 year ago

                  “made a deal with Hitler”

                  What the fuck do you think appeasement was?

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    01 year ago

                    In the context of WW2 appeasement refers to Britain and the rest of Europe giving pieces of Czechoslovakia to Germany. Not a deal between the Soviets and Germany to carve up Eastern Europe.

                    It’s ok keep working on your English!

      • Flying Squid
        link
        41 year ago

        I would say it was a combined effort, but Russia suffered a lot more. They didn’t liberate Paris though.

        • @Nudding
          link
          -21 year ago

          It was a combined effort, but Russia did most of the work and lost most of the lives? Nice

          • Flying Squid
            link
            61 year ago

            The Russians did nothing on the Western Front or North Africa.

            But yes, they lost the most lives. I’m not sure why that means it wasn’t a collaborative effort. Are you claiming that if the U.S. and Britain had sat by and done nothing, Russia would have defeated Hitler singlehandedly and liberated Western Europe? Because I find that to be a very spurious claim if so.

          • @FireTower
            link
            01 year ago

            Suffering more losses does equate to contributing more to towards the victory. For example America’s Lend Lease Act didn’t cost American soldiers but contributed towards the allied victory.