News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Donald Knuth was framed by derefr on Monday February 24, 2020 @02:21PM (#22407398)
> the European war was mostly won by American manufacturing and Russian soldiers.

That's one way to think about it. Another way to think about it is that WW2 was two separate campaigns: one between all the powers you normally think about, and the other just between Germany and Russia, an entirely-optional war that likely wouldn't have begun if Germany hadn't decided to start it. It's not really that Russia was aiding the Western powers in a single fight; it's more that an independent, simultaneous Russo-German conflict starved Germany of the materiel it needed for its other campaign.

See also: https://nationalinterest.org/feature/what-if-hitler-never-in...

Re:Donald Knuth was framed by vl on Monday February 24, 2020 @03:22PM (#22408030)
If Germany didn't invade then the USSR would attack first (and WW2 would be over sooner, probably with larger part of Europe under Soviet control). Both powers had attack plans, Germans executed theirs sooner. Some historians claim that Germans got ahead if Soviet attack just by few weeks.
Re:Donald Knuth was framed by jandrese on Monday February 24, 2020 @03:58PM (#22408371)
There's also the point that Germany absolutely needed the oil fields to keep their war machine running.

I'm skeptical on the USSR executing on a plan to attack Germany only two weeks later given how disorganized they were in the face of the German attack. The Russian army isn't something you can move across the country in a couple of weeks.

Re:Donald Knuth was framed by bzbarsky on Monday February 24, 2020 @04:22PM (#22408601)
The argument as I've seen it presented was that a large part of the army was already moved up close to the border and in attack positions, and not set up for defensive operations. Which is why, the argument goes, there were so many soldiers to surround and cut off.

I'm not endorsing the argument, note; I haven't looked into this enough to have anything resembling a useful opinion.

Re:Donald Knuth was framed by gdy on Tuesday February 25, 2020 @03:19AM (#22411627)
"I haven't looked into this enough"

And yet you rushed to disseminate it.

Re:Donald Knuth was framed by bzbarsky on Tuesday February 25, 2020 @11:48AM (#22414688)
No, I commented why the counterargument given is not actually a counterargument against the thing it claims to be arguing about.
Re:Donald Knuth was framed by gdy on Tuesday February 25, 2020 @01:30PM (#22415764)
Fair enough
Re:Donald Knuth was framed by squiggleblaz on Tuesday February 25, 2020 @08:03AM (#22412824)
You have to rush to disseminate it. If you don't, the topic drops off the front page and eventually it gets locked. Hacker News has many pros, but it doesn't exactly facilitate slow, careful and thorough discussion. (Old fashioned mailing lists might've I guess, but I'm not aware of any contemporary platforms that do.)
Re:Donald Knuth was framed by vl on Tuesday February 25, 2020 @08:56PM (#22419592)
This is absolutely funny how balanced unopinionated comment providing additional information gets downvoted. If this is not monoculture then I don’t know what is.
Re:Donald Knuth was framed by anticodon on Tuesday February 25, 2020 @02:09AM (#22411421)
There's exactly zero evidence of such plans. It's a new western attempt to rewrite history again and make USSR even more "evil".

Make people repeat the same lie 10,000 times and they'll start believing it.

Re:Donald Knuth was framed by QuesnayJr on Tuesday February 25, 2020 @04:44AM (#22411952)
I don't think a version of history where the USSR attacks Nazi Germany unprovoked is one that makes the USSR look "evil".
Re:Donald Knuth was framed by asdkjh345 on Tuesday February 25, 2020 @09:04AM (#22413245)
There is plenty of evidence, and it is not new or western. This claim was made in the 1980s, by Soviet defectors.

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/700262.Ice_Breaker

Re:Donald Knuth was framed by anticodon on Friday February 28, 2020 @09:19AM (#22442914)
Ah, Suvorov. Even bigger liar than Solzhenitsyn.
Re:Donald Knuth was framed by asdkjh345 on Saturday February 29, 2020 @07:36AM (#22450265)
Possibly, although as I mentioned he's not alone in his claims, he does have a fair bit of evidence, and he is most certainly not western nor is his claim new.
Re:Donald Knuth was framed by gdy on Tuesday February 25, 2020 @03:17AM (#22411623)
"the USSR would attack first"

[Citation needed]

Re:Donald Knuth was framed by vl on Tuesday February 25, 2020 @09:10PM (#22419642)
Use your favorite search engine and type “evidence that USSR was going to attack Germany”.
Re:Donald Knuth was framed by gdy on Wednesday February 26, 2020 @05:59AM (#22421985)
And I'll find Suvorov's books. Not the kind of source I'm waiting for.
Re:Donald Knuth was framed by badpun on Tuesday February 25, 2020 @08:36AM (#22413036)
> It's not really that Russia was aiding the Western powers in a single fight;

Setting intentions aside, as mentioned by the OP, the Eastern front is where Germans lots the most blood and resources. If not for that, the resistance in the other theaters would be fierce.

Re:Donald Knuth was framed by asdkjh345 on Monday February 24, 2020 @03:47PM (#22408270)
>an entirely-optional war that likely wouldn't have begun if Germany hadn't decided to start it

There is a great deal of consensus among historians that it was absolutely inevitable and unpreventable. A reasonable minority even support Suvorov's claims that the USSR was planning to start the conflict and Germany only beat them to it by a couple of weeks.