Again, you are living in the society shaped by a past generation who's youth put their live son the line. Many died, and never returned home so you can type your irrelevant bullshit today.
It appears the Ukrainians have finally shot down a legit military target unlike that plane full of returning Ukrainian POWs they took down in January. Good work.
LOL of course Russia has been ridiculed, a three day operation now entering it's third year....Russia launched an invasion with 150,000 troops. They have lost those, and since have had not one but two additional call ups of troops of 100,000. If you do the math, that is now 350,000 troops involved in the war for Russia. They lost 30,000 to take Bakmhut, and around the same for Avdiivka. Not to mention the 14,300 or so pieces of equipment.
It's the second one they shot down.
Those wars (WW2 aside) were about profiteering for the richest. And in WW2, who played a huge role in winning it? The Soviet Red Army and the Yugoslav Partisans in Europe, and the Chinese PLA played a big part in the Far East, i.e. basically Communists, the USA's allies in WW2 who the capitalists under Truman turned against viciously after the war, leading to wars like Korea (a total disaster!).
Resorting to personal attacks like you do usually means that you don't have political arguments left.
LOL.
You claimed to not know what freedom means. That is not political that is stupidity, your stupidity, fuck off you selfish worthless cunt. People died for your freedom. Give them the respect they deserve!!
In World War II, both the Soviets and the Chinese were heavily dependent on American arms to wage war. They were able to supply the manpower, but communism failed when it came to production and logistics.
It played a part, but the main part was the nationalized planned economy that the Soviets had. The Soviets lost 27 million people in WW2 and smashed the Nazi war machine. The US lost about 650,000 or so, Britain about 600,000, China somewhere near 20 million. The US were the only ones of these four without war being waged on the mainland, the key to its replacement of Great Britain as the biggest imperialist power in the world, getting other countries in the debt of the US.
The Soviets massively outproduced the German Wehrmacht in equipment after the opening months, and the Germans occupied nearly all of Europe at the time. This was possible because of the nationalized planned economy in the Soviet Union, which was capable of shipping whole industries east, even east of the Ural mountains if necessary and out of danger. Ask yourself how Russia in 1917 was a country with 70% of its population as illiterate peasants, do very poorly in WW1, and how the Soviet Union was able to lose 27 million people in WW2, smash the German war machine and then be a world superpower in competition with the US in the Cold War, without receiving any Marshall Aid. Using your logic, it's magic. No capitalist system could do it.
Stalin wouldn't commit to the Pacific until the threat in Europe was over. Churchill was trying to stall out opening a second front in Europe, to Roosevelt's frustration. Churchill was thinking of the British Empire of course, the Red Sea route to India and the Mediterranean, hence his obsession with Italy and North Africa and his reluctance for some time to open a second front in Western Europe.
The British beat back the Germans in the Battle of Britain, the only real setback that the Germans had in WW2 before the Soviets stopped the Germans at the gates of Moscow around 7-8 December 1941.
Not really in the WW2 years. The Japanese were the more immediate threat from the Chinese Communist point of view, and any Chinese Nationalist who wanted a future in a post-occupation China had to reject collaborating with the Japanese occupiers.
Stalin's huge crime against the world working class right there, following on from his betrayal of the Spanish Revolution.
Do tell us all what you think "freedom" is. We have freedom to starve, freedom to live in poverty etc.
The main point is the land that Russia already holds, especially as it's nearly all the Black Sea coast. Russia will be aiming at landlocking Ukraine completely and having land direct from Russia proper to Moldova. The fools who think Russia taking the whole of Ukraine is the only Russian victory missed the real picture. The fact of the matter is that holding down a hostile population is no fun, and that's what Russia would get in Western Ukraine. Russia will be happy with the land they already have (i.e. all the Black Sea coast east of the Dnieper river) and will seek to bridge to Moldova, and take much Russian speaking areas in Eastern Ukraine up to the Kharkov area. That would landlock Ukraine and leave Ukraine's far-right crazies in Kiev for the EU to deal with, which would be a massive headache for the EU. The European leaders will probably claim that Russia not taking the whole of Ukraine is "victory" for NATO, they are that delusional.
So now you understand freedom. You're correct we have the choice.
The Soviets certainly fought heroically in World War II, but their victory was due more to their massive population advantage over Germany than to the superiority of their economic system. The capitalist United States beat Japan in the Pacific virtually single-handed while simultaneously shipping massive amounts of food and war material to the USSR. It's estimated at the height of the war 1/3 of the trucks used by the Red Army were built in the United States.
I have no problem defining freedom. It is the ability to make choices for yourself, within the legal bounds of the society you live in. As opposed to having no choices and forced into being what the rulers of your society choose.
Ah yes. The choice to starve or work as a wage slave.
Please explain why Germany largely dominated the Russians in WW1 then, and why the opposite was mostly true in WW2.
There's no way it was that many, and your post certainly doesn't explain how Russia in a few decades goes from a 70% illiterate peasant population battered by Germany in WW1 to losing 27 million people in WW2 and smashing Germany, to then rebuilding to become a world superpower without any Marshall Aid. Of course it was the nationalized planned economy, and also why they outproduced the Germans in WW2. The US, Britain and Germany all thought the Soviets would collapse in weeks to months after the German invasion.
In Cuba, their citizens have free healthcare for all, free education for all, affordable housing for all and now a higher life expectancy than here in the US. Is that not more free? In US politics, we can't get anywhere unless we have big (and I mean, big) money behind us.
I'm not talking about the Marshall plan, I'm talking about Lend-Lease, which the US gave to the USSR throughout WWII.
The key word is choice. Not forced.
No it's not, fuck you're dumb.
The Soviets lost 27 million people in WW2, smashed the German war machine and then rebuilt without Marshall Aid to become a world superpower in the Cold War against the United States. How is it possible on a capitalist basis? It isn't. Overstating the impact of Lend Lease doesn't change that.
Freedom to be homeless, freedom not to have healthcare, freedom to starve. Freedom from freedom, also?
"Becky" 
