Debate: Who was the hero of World War 2?
Side: U.S.S.R

"ignored my other point which was that the western allies fought the Nazis on other fronts, to say that the USSR defeated the Nazis single-handedly is completely false."I didn't ignore it, what more proof do you need? The Soviets casued 88% percent of the total casualities inflcited on the Germans, 9 out of every 10 german soldiers that were killed, were killed by the Soviets, I don't think it's intellectually dishonest to assert based on that, that the USSR defeated the Nazis single-handedly, granted, it may be an exaggeration, as it was a war of information, and there were many other important factors, but you can't dispute the fact that when it came to the physical reality of the war, the USSR done the OVERWHELMING!!! majority of the fighting against the Germans, and beat them.No other nation can claim that."First of all this is a straw man"No it is not, it's reductio ad absurdum.Also in response to this statement: "Most sources seem to indicate about 75% to 80%" ->"A study of Barbarossa allows an appreciation of the role of grave eminence which the Soviet Union played in the defeat of Nazi Germany; the operation resulted in 95% of the German Army casualties from 1941 to 1944"Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Barbarossa  "Japan + Italy = 12 million strong militarilyGermany + Spain + Austria = 13 million strong militarilyI'm only adding them together because most sources seem to include Austrian and Spanish military as part of the German count."The German army was well ahead of any other army in WW2. But there is no way to prove that, that's why it's still being argued by war historians, simply counting the numbers really doesn't do it justice."In what world is this considered a rebuttal. Address the issue."How did the Russian's have a hell a lot more help?. The Soviet Union was left isolated precisely because the Allies wanted it to be destroyed, or severely weakened, or else for the same to happen to Hitler, they didn't want to open up a second front, it is only when one of them gained the upper hand that they knew they had to act. The Russian role is so often completely neglected, or downplayed, despite that fact that it is the most significant in the whole war, but why should we be surprised, communism was despised, after the war ended the cold war began (more or less), and it was prudent for the US (and Western Europe in general) to play down the strength of the USSR, and it's role in war. This is the way the history in the West was written.Hitler and the Allies fully expected a Soviet defeat, and then the Allies would have moved in to defeat a weakened German force. This was essentially the original plan Nobody can argue that the Russians didn't astonish everyone with their emergence as a great military power, while being bombarded by the Germans; 20-25 million russians were killed, this is my mind trivializes any debate about the heroism of the west."What the hell does how they were perceived have to do with anything."Well, it determined their strategy. You must remember how much the USSR was underestimated, people love to talk about Hitler tactical failure, but everyone beleived at the time that the USSR was massively inferior, and first few months of Operation Barbarossa only bolstered this opinion."The USSR received monetary and Supply aid from the US."I'm well aware of that, IMHO, the reason the USSR was able to repel the Nazis and eventually defeat them was primarily due to the following:1. The unbeleivable strength of the Soviet will, buttressed partly by the wilingness on the part of the Nazis to allow detained soldiers to write home to their families. 2. Willingness on the part of Stalin to let an unlimited supply of Soviet soldiers perish in the pursuit of victory, the Soviet Union had a massive population relative to Germany, and the men could almost be called on indefinitely, and were.3. American aid, I'm not going to say for one second that this didn't make a hell of a lot of difference, it providede the Soviets with the ability to effectively push back the Nazis on all fronts, this would have nearly impossible without it, and would most likely have led to a much more protracted conflict, and a possible stalemate.4. Nearly always overlooked (very rarely will you hear much about this if you're reading up on the 2nd world from a Western perspective), the Soviets had moved their essential industrial machinery ahead of the invading army, but it was temporarily destroyed and inoperable for most of 1941. Once they had re-established their industry beyond the Ural Mountains, then they put their Nationalised planned economy to work, which allowed them to produce military hardware at a staggering rate due to it's unparalleled ability to meet collective objectives, i.e.""In 1943 alone, the USSR produced 130,000 pieces of artillery, 24,000 tanks and self-propelled guns, 29,900 combat aircraft. The Nazis, with all the huge resources of Europe behind them, also stepped up production, turning out 73,000 pieces of artillery, 10,700 tanks and assault guns and 19,300 combat aircraft." (See V. Sipols, The Road to a Great Victory, p. 132.)