Which means that the US was potentially keeping 60 of 150 total Russian divisions in the Field in the early crucial stages.....certainly by 1942 considerable armaments were flowing. But these numbers would require a detailed reconstruction, the 60 divisions only reflected Persian corridor shipments.
So I’m inclined to believe Russia’s most respected general when he said that the American shipments kept them in the war and logic dictates that was the early/middle period which included Stalingrad and Kursk.
And it matters little if that equipment went specifically to Stalingrad as it was all fungible. The fact is the US industrial complex saved Britain and Russia.
In the new Mule L Marshmallow blockbuster Moffie and the Servile Gimps Take Stalingrad.
Shame, nobody took Stalingrad Peeper.....that’s why they call it the defence of Stalingrad.
Wow we are dealing with some major malfunctions here....hahaha!
Anything the U.K provided Russia pales by comparison to what the US provided the U.K....so all the material assistance started in the US, even though it might have been transformed before it reached the final destination. For logistical reasons US tanks may have gone to the British forces in North Africa and British tanks might have gone to Russia.....the net though is the US gave tanks and the Soviets got tanks
You keep ranting....I keep finding quotes which say exactly the opposite. Here’s Nikita Krushchev admitting the US was essential to Russia surviving:
According to the Russian historian Boris Vadimovich Sokolov, Lend-Lease had a crucial role in winning the war:
On the whole the following conclusion can be drawn: that without these Western shipments under Lend-Lease the Soviet Union not only would not have been able to win the Great Patriotic War, it would not have been able even to oppose the German invaders, since it could not itself produce sufficient quantities of arms and military equipment or adequate supplies of fuel and ammunition. The Soviet authorities were well aware of this dependency on Lend-Lease. Thus, Stalin told Harry Hopkins [FDR's emissary to Moscow in July 1941] that the U.S.S.R. could not match Germany's might as an occupier of Europe and its resources.[32]
Nikita Khrushchev, having served as a military commissar and intermediary between Stalin and his generals during the war, addressed directly the significance of Lend-lease aid in his memoirs:
I would like to express my candid opinion about Stalin's views on whether the Red Army and the Soviet Union could have coped with Nazi Germany and survived the war without aid from the United States and Britain. First, I would like to tell about some remarks Stalin made and repeated several times when we were "discussing freely" among ourselves. He stated bluntly that if the United States had not helped us, we would not have won the war. If we had had to fight Nazi Germany one on one, we could not have stood up against Germany's pressure, and we would have lost the war. No one ever discussed this subject officially, and I don't think Stalin left any written evidence of his opinion, but I will state here that several times in conversations with me he noted that these were the actual circumstances. He never made a special point of holding a conversation on the subject, but when we were engaged in some kind of relaxed conversation, going over international questions of the past and present, and when we would return to the subject of the path we had traveled during the war, that is what he said. When I listened to his remarks, I was fully in agreement with him, and today I am even more so.[41]
By the way Anger, I don’t think the US is always right or the bee’s knees. But your fellow Irish folk apparently do....there are 34.5 million people of Irish descent in the US, and only 4.7 slow learners left in Ireland.
Lend lease to the Soviet Union as a % of the total industrial production of the USSR during the war amounted to 4%. That was spread over 5 years. By the numbers you took off Wikipedia. just 16.1% of that was sent in 1941-1942. We know there was no material aid from the USA in 1941 and most of the aid sent in 1942 was sent by Britain.
It was Britain who reduced the Luftwaffe strength by a third before Barbarrossa. It was Britain continuing in the fight that forced the Luftwaffe to keep resources in France and divert notable forces into the Mediterranean. It was the British presence in Africa that forced the Germans to send the Africa Korps and engage in a very fuel intensive war, a resources that would have better spent on the Eastern front. It was Britain being in the war that forced the Germans to throw huge resources into its U-Boat fleet, something that could not be used against the USSR, those resources that could of been spent on tanks and planes, trucks, artillery, equipment that could of been. It was Britain that sent aid in 1941 and more aid than the US did in 1942 during the early critical years.
So if anything Britain helped the Soviet Union more in the early years. But they don't go around bragging that they saved the Soviet Union.
I can also quote sources that support my viewpoint.
"Lend-Lease aid did not arrive in sufficient quantities to make a major difference between defeat and victory in 1941 and early 1942; that achievement must be attributed solely to the Soviet peoples" David Glantz :When Titans Clash.
Also from Glantz
"If Western Allies had not provided equipment and invaded northwest Europe, Stalin and his commanders might have taken twelve to eighteen months longer to finish off the Wehrmacht."
"The Soviet miracle was not due to Western assistance. Lend-Lease did not begin to affect the balance on the Eastern Front until 1943. Adam Tooze: The Wages of Destruction. The Making and Breaking of the Nazi Economy.
Absolutely lend-lease was important, without the war would of been worse for all for Russia and the Allies. It was a team effort by the Allies and Russia, they all made significant contributions to the defeat of Germany the Russian's making the largest one. To imply the Americans saved both Britain and Russia is just totally dis-respectively to war time allies who sacrificed so much.
"But your fellow Irish folk apparently do....there are 34.5 million people of Irish descent in the US, and only 4.7 slow learners left in Ireland."
You actually think Irish Americans are Irish, as in the same as people living in Ireland. Really? Where's my Picard face palm picture gone.
"Ignorant. Check.
No it was simply too stupid a comment to give a serious response too.
Yes the British helped the Russians in the early phase of the war more the Americans did . You do know the British where actually "in" in the war both when the Germans invaded Russia and for over a year and half before that, the Americans didn't join in till December 1941. Either way the Russians where not saved by Lend-Lease in 1941 or 1942 but Lend-Lease was extremely helpful from 1943 onward.
Sure you can make hypothetical sceanrios all you want, it can be fun to speculate. Say the above is true, though I wouldn't say the Germans had the ability to transfer vast resources to the Russian front, most of their resources where already there. You can turn that around and ask how would America fair without British and Russian support. Could they have invaded occupied Europe straight from the US with a supply line going the whole way across the Atlantic. Could they have defeated Germany that hadn't taken immense material and manpower losses in Russia. Would have they been able to defeat the full strength of the Luftwaffe instead of a third of it (with British support) and if so could they have done it before the Germans started deploying jet fighters in significant numbers. Maybe they could have, but the causalities would of been into the millions.
Yes Stalin made multiple offers for peace with the Germans. But Hitler was never going to accept anyone of them.
As I said already the Germans where probably already beaten in 1941 and certainly by 1942 when they failed to take the Caucasus oilfields, Allied manpower and material resources where just too great too overcome. It was a matter of time and will power. Now the Russian people and army demonstrated they had that will power by enduring what they did and going on to win. Russian political power wasn't as strong and they did offer peace on several occasions. Not surprisingly in 1941, things looked terrible and for a while they also looked bad in 1942. However Hitler would never accept any peace terms that did include the Germans getting the Caucasus oilfields. Any peace terms which didn't leave the oilfields in German hands where tantamount to death. There is no scenario where the Russians would have given them to the Germans either, as that would of been the same as defeat for Russia.
The 1943 terms where not favorable to the Germans, all of those territories offered where strategically not significant and Romania territory would of gone to Romania and the Finnish territory to Finland not Germany.
Interpretation, you had no comeback.....people of Irish descent have chosen America over Ireland 80 to 20. I can see how you would rather take the deep dive.
As for Britain being in the war.....yes....but only able to help themselves until American resources were available. As for the peace terms not being to Hitler’s liking, sure, but that’s not the point. The point is you don’t sue for peace if you have defeated the enemy.
Germany was not done on the Eastern front till Kursk, which I rather suspect you had never heard of till I schooled you.
No but I could google it just like you....and then interpret it intelligently, unlike you. As for Irish Americans being separate culturally.......woooosh....you miss the point yet again.
"No but I could google it just like you....and then interpret it intelligently"
You really missed your true calling as a comedian.
"As for Irish Americans being separate culturally.......woooosh....you miss the point yet again."
You really have no idea how monumentally stupid some of your arguments are do you? Looking at the average IQ of America they most have some seriously smart people over there to compensate for the likes of you.
I'll let you get back to masturbating to the stars and strips.
"Looking at the average IQ of America they most have some seriously smart people over there to compensate for the likes of you.
I'll let you get back to masturbating to the stars and strips."
Typical Rooinek argument....are you 2 related?
Typical Rooinek argument....are you 2 related?
Seriously I've shown the upmost patience when debating with Moz in the past, he's the first one that started throwing insults around and acting like a child. Odd that you decided to be critical towards me before him
Gotta love it when Moz makes an absolutely idiotic point and when called out on it he just doubles down on it, its hard to tell if he actually knows how stupid what he said was and just can't bring himself to admit it or just genuinely doesn't understand its stupid.
I wasn't being sarcastic it was a honest question. I know Moz can be a bit snarky at times...I've been on the receiving end of it myself...so I'm not blind to it. I wasn't trying to be overly critical...sorry if it came across as such. I really don't have a horse in this race so I just read both sides out of curiosity...some of your other responses have a familiar feel to it...almost like a more polite Rooinek alter ego, but not quite...on this and other threads.
Not accusing you of anything, just curious.
He goes beyond being snarky though. His character flaws are much worse.
O ne can only be polite and civil for so long if the other side is consistently not over a prolonged period of time.
We all have our peculiarities...
PS, you do come across a tad condescending at times...
We do indeed!
Rudeneck...my utter contempt for you has nothing to do with the fact that Mozart and you are in a perpetual argument spanning decades...you really don't have a clue do you?
PS, Rooi, you are the gatkruiper...hou op om ander agter die deur te soek poephol.