Originally posted by raguil_79
Austin:
I think you should reread Overy's book, he clearly mentions that the Allies could not have done it without the Soviets, in fact one of the first chapters is on how the soviets won the battles of Stalingrad and Kurst, THE turning points of the war, way before lend-lease began to show its full effect. I also recommend you read Albert Seaton (The Russo-German War) who convincingly argues that the soviets still could have won without lend-lease. David Glantz also mentions this (When Titan Clashed)
Austin:
I think you should reread Overy's book, he clearly mentions that the Allies could not have done it without the Soviets, in fact one of the first chapters is on how the soviets won the battles of Stalingrad and Kurst, THE turning points of the war, way before lend-lease began to show its full effect. I also recommend you read Albert Seaton (The Russo-German War) who convincingly argues that the soviets still could have won without lend-lease. David Glantz also mentions this (When Titan Clashed)
Without Lend Lease a lot of Russian workers would have been growing food or making trucks instead of endlessly churning out T-34's, so the Red Army would have been a lot smaller. Without the commo gear they would have been stuck with 1941 style tactics (i.e. tank platoons having to manouver in lock step based on hand signals). If the Germans could have maintained the 1941 kill ratio they could have held the Russians off indefinetly.
I'm sorry but the war was a near run thing as it was. Making the Red Army a lot smaller AND simultaneously less capable would have helped the Germans immensely.
Austin
Comment