333

Poll data source

Explanation
The losses of Germany on the eastern front are widely believed to be the most significant factor in defeating Nazi Germany and the USSR won the battle of Berlin, the final battle before the German capitulation. Thus Europe widely believed (for a good reason) that the USSR was the main contributor in defeating Germany. With the cold war the perception of the USSR became a lot worse in western countries like France and with increasing anti-USSR sentiment the view flipped to viewing the USA as the deciding factor. The USSR (and the Russian Federation today, even if its government is very anti USSR) viewed itself as the most important force in defeating Germany, especially because the USSR had the biggest amount of deaths. It is worth noting that the USSR was at least commercially allied with Nazi Germany until June 22, 1941 and there was an agreement between the nations on which parts of Europe each could invade and which where reserved for the other.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_Union_in_World_War_II

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] clot27@lemmy.zip 1 points 10 hours ago

"We stopped fascism in europe and they will never forgive us for that"

Zukhov is always vindicated, eruopeans never acknowledge USSR, they never will. USSR was blessing for us "3rd worlders".

[-] neidu3@sh.itjust.works 31 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Well, USSR wouldn't have survived without US help. USSR contributed the most in terms of territorial gain and manpower spent, but they would not have been able to make it without convoys to Archangelsk and Murmansk. These convoys were packed with materiell, mostly from the US, but a lot from the UK as well. Western tanks were vital in the defense of Moscow and Leningrad.

So, an objective answer to the question can only be provided if "most of what" is specified.

Nuance matters. Surveys like these rarely allow for that.

[-] TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world 8 points 6 days ago

Yeah, even Soviet leaders, including the legendary Georgy Zhukov, low key admit (I will get to that later) that if it weren't for Lend Lease, USSR may have been defeated especially during the pivotal moments in the first couple of months of the German invasion. The material deliveries from the Allies filled the gap while the Soviet rushed their industries out of the German advances and restructuring the Soviet supply chain. Since you mentioned the Allied tanks, the British tanks made up around 40% of Soviet armoured forces in the Caucasus, since the Soviets couldn't easily deliver their own tanks to the Caucasus after the land route was cut off by the Germans.

After the war, the Soviet leadership aimed to minimise the importance of the Allied material deliveries in order lionise their own effort and exalt the communist system. But unofficially, many Soviet leaders were thankful of Lend Lease in a hush hush and low key manner.

[-] clot27@lemmy.zip 1 points 10 hours ago

Wrong, Khrushchev was the first one to say they wouldve been defeated if not for lend lease, soviet leadership after stalin tried to be friendly with west and betrayed socialism. There is no concrete proof either stalin or zukhov said it. USSR wouldve sailed through even without lend lease, altho they wouldve been much weaker after war and wouldve taken more damage. Most of the lend lease arrived after battle of stalingrad

[-] piccolo@sh.itjust.works 6 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Ive always heard it as British intelligence, American steel, and Russian blood won the war.

[-] Akasazh@lemmy.world 14 points 6 days ago

In terms of casualties the Russians did the most, no contest.

[-] LaLuzDelSol@lemmy.world 11 points 6 days ago

I mean they undoubtedly died the most, that's not really the same thing though.

[-] sidebro@lemmy.zip 6 points 6 days ago

Indeed, because that can mean they had bad tactics and gear just as likely 

[-] Riverside@reddthat.com 11 points 6 days ago

It could potentially mean that, but 80% of Nazi soldiers who died in WW2 died in the Eastern Front, so it doesn't mean that.

[-] Akasazh@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago

No, but it is a measure of sacrifice. The numbers involved are incredible and without comparison to any allied nation.

The amount of German casualties on the eastern front is not coincidentally the highest, so if killing Nazis is your metric the Russians did most of that.

[-] vga@sopuli.xyz 3 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

It's a pretty wild to say that russians dying more than anyone else is the reason nazis lost the war. You usually don't win wars by dying the most. Almost the exact opposite is the goal.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[-] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 11 points 6 days ago

Out of every nation to flip to, why the US?

Their impact was in the Pacific theatre not Europe.

[-] MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip 23 points 6 days ago
[-] Madison420@lemmy.world 6 points 6 days ago

Well and American equipment was integral to Nazi defeat even though a large part of it was given or sold to the USSR so they could keep fighting.

[-] wieson@feddit.org 4 points 6 days ago

But that's not the reason why the impression flipped.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] kandoh@reddthat.com 15 points 6 days ago

American movies are more popular in France than Russian

[-] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 10 points 6 days ago

Their impact was in the Pacific theatre not Europe.

?

from the bombing of europe, to overlord - the invasion of europe - this is factually incorrect. the US got into africa later than the UK because, uh, they didn't have colonies lol....

but half of the forces that landed on normandy were US.

the US had a larger footprint, and other allies smaller, in the pacific, but "their impact was in the pacific theater not europe" is incorrect. The US helped bomb germany into rubble, there were impacts in europe lol.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] redhorsejacket@lemmy.world 9 points 6 days ago

That's a wild take. Quibble over exact war contributions scores all you like, but to say the US didn't have an impact in Europe is blatantly false.

[-] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 10 points 6 days ago

Germany would have lost the eastern and western front without them. What they did was speed up the western so the Soviets owned less of Europe afterwards.

[-] kandoh@reddthat.com 4 points 6 days ago

Very true, but the lend leasing that the US gave the USSR is significant (just not as significant as 8.7 million dead Soviets)

load more comments (8 replies)
[-] vga@sopuli.xyz 4 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Even though USSR has some blame for WW2 starting (Molotov-Ribbentrop and its follow-up), I'm sure Germany did the most for it.

[-] clot27@lemmy.zip 1 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

As if most of the europeans didnt sign pact with hitler? lol. Blaming USSR for WW2 is beyond crazy, are you guys really this brainwashed?

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 3 points 5 days ago

That's what happens when a state collapses, they stop getting as much credit.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 29 Jan 2026
333 points (99.4% liked)

History Memes

1823 readers
502 users here now

A place to share history memes!

Rules:

  1. No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia, assorted bigotry, etc.

  2. No fascism (including tankies/red fash), atrocity denial or apologia, etc.

  3. Tag NSFW pics as NSFW.

  4. Follow all Piefed.social rules.

  5. History referenced must be 20+ years old.

Banner courtesy of @setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world

OTHER COMMS IN THE HISTORYVERSE:

founded 8 months ago
MODERATORS