Not so.
sure you right the LEnd leas helped the Red Army a lot in 1943-45 in its great strategical offensives.
However do not forget that the Lend lise was just a small compensation of the industrial and manpower damage due to the Gemrns cupturing of the East USSR industrial areas of USSR and unhuman policy toward the civil population and TOTAL destraction during the German retreat in 1943-44.( so called the policy of burned off land)
The USSR lost about 50% of its unductry ability. So we why sould not to use the American goods ( especially if the US industry was not damaging by the war).
If you think that the red army was not able to attack without lend lise- i hope you will not deny the obvious fact the WITHOUT the Romanian oil, without the Czech/France military industry and finaly - without the 6 millions of slaves from the Eastern Europe the Germans Army will not able to EVEN to RESIST and protect the GErmans border.
Coz if not the millions of slaves in Germans plants- who would produse the Super/Uber Wearponry like the Nonstrous tanks, Rocketry V-1/2 and other famouse Hitler’s toys?
Never said Germany didn’t need to import raw materials or didn’t profit from the earlier conquests. But they also still had some other situations to worry about, while russia could put all effort in one direction.
But that doesn’t change the global situation let’s say autumn '41. No lend lease, no victory against germany, it’s that simple. Of course Germany would not have the capabilites to win a military victory either, the land is simply to big. You nevertheless tremendously underestimate the impact of lend lease and overestimate the raw numbers of the few goods russia actually produced themselves (the weapons mostly). It’s not only the mere shifting of numbers. The necessary diversification of production capacity would put a strain on russian economy which I doubt they would have been capable to handle easily. I only need to remove some of the actually delivered goods (locomotives, trucks communication equipment, railroads) and russia is paralyzed beyond recovery when it comes to serious large scale offensives. I indeed believe russia could have coped without the stuff from the USA defensivly, but not offensively without all those small things that make a modern war possible in the first place without actual killing capacity.
Its a tupical mistake, Drake.
Even during the hot battles in Stalingrad the USSR still hold the over 1 million soldiers in the FAR East against the possible Syberian Invasion of the Kvantung Army.
This was the fully complected troops, some of them Saved the Moscow in the winter of 1941 from the GErmans offensive being re-moved to the West of USSR.
Besides you forgot that till the mid 1944 the 70-80% of the German war mashine was “busy” in the East. So the "other situation to worry " like the adventure of the African corps and terrorising the Britain via the Bombing and sinkind the transports was’n so importain as the destiny of the 180+ Germans division in the East.
True ,the situation for the Germany has been worsen after the beginning of the intensive Strategic bombing compain since 1944., when they were forced to direct the big part of the AAA-artillery for defence and some of the Luflwaffe.
But that doesn’t change the global situation let’s say autumn '41. No lend lease, no victory against germany, it’s that simple. Of course Germany would not have the capabilites to win a military victory either, the land is simply to big. You nevertheless tremendously underestimate the impact of lend lease and overestimate the raw numbers of the few goods russia actually produced themselves (the weapons mostly). It’s not only the mere shifting of numbers. The necessary diversification of production capacity would put a strain on russian economy which I doubt they would have been capable to handle easily. I only need to remove some of the actually delivered goods (locomotives, trucks communication equipment, railroads) and russia is paralyzed beyond recovery when it comes to serious large scale offensives. I indeed believe russia could have coped without the stuff from the USA defensivly, but not offensively without all those small things that make a modern war possible in the first place without actual killing capacity.
I’ve never told that underestimate the lend lise- i said this help a lot int he 1943-45.
I just noticed you the obvious fact that the Lend-lise ONLY PARTLY compensated ( in different field more or less) the giant 50% damage of Soviet economy and military proiduction after the summer of 1941-42.
Both the western Allies Britain and USA simply avoided the capturing its territories ( althought the Britain lost the colonies in asia). But nevertheless the economic damage was’t so serious like as for the USSR after catastrophical 1941.
Plus the behavour of Germans in the occuped Eastern territories rather differed from its action in the Western Europe ( for instance in France).
And sure you right that the some of critical materials that was so need for soviet industry ( for instance alluminium) were delivered from the USA. However this JUST coz the own soviet industry was lost due to the GErmans offensive.
Cheers.
It doesn’t matter that some russian troops were still in siberia (which I knew), some german troops were elsewhere in europe not fighting, too. What matters is the focus of the industry where russia only had to think rather one dimensional compared to everyone else. This is the reason for the impressive numbers in certain areas such as tanks.
We’re still talking about stalemate in the east without lend lease, aren’t we. The situation is as it is in 1941 and I said russia would have been incapable to change the strategic situation in precisely that scenario without help. I fail to see how complaining about a 50% loss of economy or about atrocities helps you to support what I assume is your point, namely the USSR could have.
stopped the SS cold in Greece, bit of a shock for the SS
Actually British first up, the first Murmansk convoy was sent a few months after Barbarossa
I think eventually the Russians would have had the same outcome but would have taken them a lot longer to build up that “head of steam” that eventually smashed through the Germans.Production capacity would have had to have been diverted from tanks to trucks that sort of thing, Lend lease enabled the Russians to concentrate more production on teeth than tail
The reason of the Great soviet Tank production was not the Syberian inactive army.
The reason of the numerical effective superiority was the Soviet approach to the Tank industry whan on the chassis of the T-34 were prodused over 90% of all armoured track vehicles.
You know it , to thw contrast of he USA and USSR who was concentred to the one-two basic tanks models , the Germany developed at the same time the 5-6 different models.This additionally created the problems for the German army with spare parts and ets.
To tell about the Lend-lise effect do not forget that althought the Germany did not recieved the materials/wearpon outside - the industry capacity of the territories that Germany controlled was enourmous. For instance the only one Chehoslovakia prodused in the 1941 as much wearpon as the whole Britain in that period.( even the Me-262 were prodused here).Plus the manpower of the conquered territories was also great( over 100+ million peoples)
So the situation of the 1941 when the Germans temporary neitralized the Britain via the Bombing compain and concentrated over 80% of its army ( +armies of satellites) on the Eastern front COULD not be Tupical for the all war especially after the USA joining the allies.
We’re still talking about stalemate in the east without lend lease, aren’t we. The situation is as it is in 1941 and I said russia would have been incapable to change the strategic situation in precisely that scenario without help. I fail to see how complaining about a 50% loss of economy or about atrocities helps you to support what I assume is your point, namely the USSR could have.
I do not thinl that the strategic situation of the 1941 would not be changed during the all war. The reason of the soviets initial loses was not the Material/wearponry/Numerical Germans superiority but the pure Tactical professionalism of german hight and medium officer corp plus the positive combat experience of the german soldiers that was based ion the succesfull previous compain in the Western Europe.
Even if the Allies did not help the Red Army by Lend lise and prefered to formed and armed the own troops by their wearpon and materials ( the situation that WOULD much better IMO) and directed those troops to the Africa/Italy or opened the Second front in Frace alredy in the 1942-43- i this way the GErmany could not be concetrated its armies on the East and thay inevitably have to withdraw form the great eastern territories.And the Red Army without the Lend lise could be able to liberate the Soviet territories.
In this way i/m sure the allies could win already in the 1944. However they prefered to make the Stalin stronger by the sending him the Lend lise instead to fought with Gemarny more intensive and saved the Eastern Europe from the Sovet l"iberation". Sure in this way the Allies would have a much more casualties - that’s wat they feared.
Yeah, like it’s that easy to divert a little production in reality. It’s not a slider change in a computer game.
You still completely miss the point. The weapons were not the decisive factor of lend lease, although probably helpful. Russia could produce the weapons it needed. What it couldn’t produce was basically everything else needed for sustained offensive operations, from trains and railroads over trucks to electronics. More than 2/3 of the soviet trucks in ww2 were american lend lease trucks. This figure alone is so significant, that you don’t even need to look at other figures, as trucks are the lifeline of any army.
No Drake i/m very well understand your point.
The Lend lise realy helped but it was not the MAIN thing that DEFINED the ability of Soviets to fight .
If the Soviets did not get the lend lise truck, locomotivs and materials - they coul prodused it themself.
Certainly the payback should be the decrease the Military production: tanks , artillery and ets.
But it wasn’t critical for the Soviets.Coz in the 1941 when the Lend lise was still insignificant they were able to stop the GErmans near the Moscow.
You say that without lend lise the Eastern frons would be strategic stalemate.
I can’t agree coz as we saw if the Soviets could stopped the Germans in the 1941-42 ( and they really did it) then later the Allies opened the second front in the France the Germans would forced to withdraw troops from the East. Thus there vero no any reason to prevent the Soviet strategic offensive at least on the territory of captured USSR.
Sure without lend lise the Soviet were NO able to reach the Berlin or even the German Border.
But they were still able to beat the Germans in the USSR territory and probably in the Eastern Europe.
Cheers.
which is why I said it would take longer :roll:
Russia needs its teeth, they just cannot afford the time to retool the machines to produce locomotives and trucks, yet they need that stuff asap. They don’t have even close to enough capacities in communication electronics and cannot produce production machines themselves. And several of the things delivered by LL were completely inaccessible to russia otherwise.
The longer would rather look like an 8 from the side.
@Chevan: Russia is the soil, where the logistical problems are worst, especially after scorched earth. It matters little who occupies the area, as soon as the front would be pushed west by russia, they would have the same problems as the germans the other way around. They need those trucks, they need them badly. Russia can beat the germans on any given sector in an offensive, but cannot exploit the breakthrough properly, if they lack transport capacity. My bet would be that if germany would be defeated in the end by the allies there would still be german troops on russian soil. Russia would still have had given and taken the highest losses to and from germany, though, but couldn’t have taken the fight back to germany.