I mean just the numbers don’t mean much as absolute values. Sure, USSR did a lot to counter nazis, and should be praised for that, but to think that their contribution scales with the number of dead… that’s the part that makes no sense.
Nazis and Russians died in huge numbers in the eastern front simply because there were so many of them on both sides. If Russia had stopped the Nazis and lost only 1000 soldiers, the effort would have been exactly as good.
The chart shows the number of Nazi dead, not the number of Soviets dead. It seems intuitive to me to measure the contribution toward stopping Nazi Germany by the number of Nazi dead. Presumably, the Nazis were going to keep fighting until they lost a certain amount of people (maybe losing ground is more relevant than losing people but the way they’d lose ground is by losing people anyway) which means that whoever put in more work to push them back and kill more of them contributed more to victory over Nazis than anyone else. That’s the USSR.
I mean just the numbers don’t mean much as absolute values. Sure, USSR did a lot to counter nazis, and should be praised for that, but to think that their contribution scales with the number of dead… that’s the part that makes no sense.
Nazis and Russians died in huge numbers in the eastern front simply because there were so many of them on both sides. If Russia had stopped the Nazis and lost only 1000 soldiers, the effort would have been exactly as good.
The chart shows the number of Nazi dead, not the number of Soviets dead. It seems intuitive to me to measure the contribution toward stopping Nazi Germany by the number of Nazi dead. Presumably, the Nazis were going to keep fighting until they lost a certain amount of people (maybe losing ground is more relevant than losing people but the way they’d lose ground is by losing people anyway) which means that whoever put in more work to push them back and kill more of them contributed more to victory over Nazis than anyone else. That’s the USSR.