In the Second World War, 83% of the Germans died on the eastern front, not the western front, do you understand the significance of that ?
56-60, M
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
ViciDraco · 41-45, M
The Soviet Union had a much larger domestic population. The forces of the Western Front had a lot of foreign power that arrived later in the conflict.
The Eastern Front was invaded at a terrible time of year, leading to arduous advancement conditions.
The Soviet Union was a loss leader in the war. They lost 2 soldiers for every German loss. The Soviets also were neck and neck with China as far as most Civilian death.
If Germany had kept its non-aggression pact with the Soviet Union, it might have had significantly more resources to throw at the Western Front, particularly in the post D-Day defense period. Allied losses would have been much greater and would have had less momentum.
The Western Front, while still brutal, held a lot more focus on property and infrastructure destruction. Destroying factories and munitions depots. The Eastern Front was the meatgrinder that chewed through human resources.
The Eastern Front was invaded at a terrible time of year, leading to arduous advancement conditions.
The Soviet Union was a loss leader in the war. They lost 2 soldiers for every German loss. The Soviets also were neck and neck with China as far as most Civilian death.
If Germany had kept its non-aggression pact with the Soviet Union, it might have had significantly more resources to throw at the Western Front, particularly in the post D-Day defense period. Allied losses would have been much greater and would have had less momentum.
The Western Front, while still brutal, held a lot more focus on property and infrastructure destruction. Destroying factories and munitions depots. The Eastern Front was the meatgrinder that chewed through human resources.