Importance of American lend-lease to Soviet war effort in WW II?

[Serb]

Yea, sure... But wait, in this case I must be also anti-Russian. While I like Russia as country, have a lot of Russian friends, have a Russian wife...

You have a Russian wife?
It explains why you know Russian so well. (I russkie rugatelstva tozhe)

... and lived in Russia for years, I heavily criticized Yeltsins policy in the 90s. And before you respond that Yeltsin is gone, yes, Putin is a bit better,

In that case i'm anti-Russian too. Because I consider times of YeltSin, as disgrace and greatest tragedy in our history.

but not much (menja ne povesjat na chlene za eto, pomnish? )

Konechno net. And there is no 100% support of Putin's actions. A lot of dudes here screams a lot of bs about dictatorship, cult of personality, incoming apocalypse, etc. I nikto ih za eto, za chlen ne veshaet.

But does that make me a Russia-hater? No.

Of course, not. It makes you pro-Russian.

As for Ned insulting me for my opinion about the american government, oh well... He just outed himself as one of the dudes I avoid to meet in the streets. Not a big deal.

Btw, the October is already started? I'm just curious, because few barrels of special brend beer were delivered in local pub. Those guys tells that this beer created specialy for October fest (I don't remember how it calls). I don't trust them, but going to test it anyway.

[Serb]

Originally posted by David Floyd
"The Role of Lend-Lease in Soviet Military
Efforts, 1941-1945" by BORIS V. SOKOLOV

Hmmm...written by a Russian....any more comments, serb?

Are you sure that it is writen in Russia? More likely its writen on West, by Russian desident, who wanted to make some $$$ and write a story for western, how they wanted to hear it?
Actualy I don't know. Perhaps you will enlighten me about this?
As for comments, why you replaced part of text with word "further"? Perhaps you wanted to hide smth?
Anyhow, I could always comment it like you done about my quote of Rosevelt. Something like this:

But in any case, Zhukov was a strategist, a soldier, not an economist.

[Serb]

Originally posted by David Floyd
For example, the US produced something like 30 million tons of merchant shipping, 28 aircraft carriers, over 100 escort carriers, 8 battleships, over 40 cruisers, and over 300 destroyers during the war.

We didn't need those thing. We fought on land, not on sea.

And what exactly was the Soviet Union shipping the US? I can't think of any natural resource, and they certainly weren't shipping us military equipment or food. So what was it, precisely? Air?

I'll give you a list tommorow. I have to check book.

Believe me, even a single destroyer takes a lot more effort than a tank, or even a bunch of tanks.

Oh really? Are you serious? No, It's just can't be.
You think here should be people who don't understand this?

In spite of this concentration on shipbuilding, however, the US outproduced the Soviets by a ratio of greater than 2 to 1 in aircraft production, and this total included around 90,000 strategic bombers, of which the Soviet Union had virtually none.

Give me a TOTAL number of aircrafts in both armies to compare. T O T A L in 1945.

Of course, this assumes that Moscow would have been retaken. I don't necessarily agree that it would have been, especially if Typhoon succeeded in wiping out all of the defenders, rather than just most, leaving the new conscripts no veterans in their ranks.

You still don't understand. Germans lost about ONE MILLION soldiers in Moscow battle. You portray Moscow battle as -" the winter has come and Germans start to run away". It's bs David, B S.

[Harovan]

Originally posted by Serb

Btw, the October is already started? I'm just curious, because few barrels of special brend beer were delivered in local pub. Those guys tells that this beer created specialy for October fest (I don't remember how it calls). I don't trust them, but going to test it anyway.

There is really a special brand of beer, brewed for the Oktoberfest, so they may say the truth. Btw, the Oktoberfest already ended. It's called Oktoberfest, because it runs mostly in September and ends after the first week of October

</off topic spam>

[DinoDoc]

I love the way Serb allows his nationalist pride to so easily dismiss historical evidence.

[chequita guevara]

Like no Americans ever do that.

[David Floyd]

Are you sure that it is writen in Russia? More likely its writen on West, by Russian desident, who wanted to make some $$$ and write a story for western, how they wanted to hear it?

No, it was said by Zhukov in the 1960s.

As for comments, why you replaced part of text with word "further"? Perhaps you wanted to hide smth?

No, they are two separate quotes.

But in any case, Zhukov was a strategist, a soldier, not an economist.

First of all, using that argument validates my argument against FDR.

Second of all, saying that one of the highest ranking generals in the Red Army (who was later defense minister under Khrushchev) is not qualified to talk about the effects of Lend Lease upon the military forces he controlled is preposterous. Further, it isn't propaganda because it was said privately.

We didn't need those thing. We fought on land, not on sea.

Again you miss the point. The US put so much effort into shipbuilding, sacrfices were made in other areas. If they were concentrating on ONLY LAND AND AIR POWER, as the Soviet Union was, you can't deny that the US would have far outproduced the Soviet Union.

Give me a TOTAL number of aircrafts in both armies to compare. T O T A L in 1945.

I'd have to look that up, but it isn't really relevant to the point that the Soviet Union was far outproduced by the US.

You portray Moscow battle as -" the winter has come and Germans start to run away". It's bs David, B S.

Yes, the Germans lost a lot of men. But the fact remains, if they had launched the attack on Moscow earlier instead of going for Kiev, they probably would have taken it. Everyone else here admits this, why won't you?

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Like no Americans ever do that.

Does that make Serb any less sad and ignorant?

[Sandman]

For Che:

Sandman, every history of the Russian revolution discusses the German occupation of Western Russia. While the occupations proved a tar baby for the Germans, the Germans didn't leave the Russians unpunished. They allowed Tsarist generals to establish new armies in the occupied territories, and they areas provided a base of operations for the Whites against the Reds. It took the Russians years and millions of lives to retake the formerly occupied areas.

I don't dispute this. What I dispute is your suggestion that if the Germans had withdrawn all their troops they would have flattened the Western Allies.

My main reason is that their conquests were held by poor quality divisions. These divisions would not have been much use for the offensive, led as it was by elite stormtrooper divisions. These elite units took heavy casualties attacking average Allied units, and they were trained and equipped for attack. The old men of the Eastern divisions could scarcely be expected to attack Allied lines and achieve anything of note. Furthermore, they would have consumed resources which could have been given to the stormtroopers, such as food, ammunition and rail transport.

For Floyd:

Context:Anyone without a patriotic axe to grind knows that it was the SU's industrial base which was the key factor in their victory. This stuff about lease-lend is pure fantasy.

If you want to talk about a massive industrial base, look at the US, not Russia. Russia was puny in comparison. Russia's victory was more due to America's industrial and economic base rather than its own.

What a silly response. This is akin to me replying to someone talking about American naval victories by saying 'yes, but Britain had a bigger navy'. At a long stretch I'd say that the SU's war production was half of America's, but that is certainly not 'puny'.

[David Floyd]

What a silly response. This is akin to me replying to someone talking about American naval victories by saying 'yes, but Britain had a bigger navy'.

But Britain didn't have a bigger navy, or at least not a more powerful one.

Further, it wasn't a silly response. It made the point that no matter how big you think Soviet industry was, US industry was much bigger, and it was US industry (and agriculture) which, through Lend Lease, sustained the Soviets and allowed their eventual victory.

At a long stretch I'd say that the SU's war production was half of America's, but that is certainly not 'puny'.

No, not puny in absolute terms, but puny in relative terms.

[David Floyd]

Sandman,

My main reason is that their conquests were held by poor quality divisions. These divisions would not have been much use for the offensive, led as it was by elite stormtrooper divisions. These elite units took heavy casualties attacking average Allied units, and they were trained and equipped for attack. The old men of the Eastern divisions could scarcely be expected to attack Allied lines and achieve anything of note. Furthermore, they would have consumed resources which could have been given to the stormtroopers, such as food, ammunition and rail transport.

You're absolutely right on this point, in my opinion.

[Sandman]

Further, it wasn't a silly response. It made the point that no matter how big you think Soviet industry was, US industry was much bigger, and it was US industry (and agriculture) which, through Lend Lease, sustained the Soviets and allowed their eventual victory.

US industry was much bigger, but the lend lease program was not the critical factor for the soviet victory.

No, not puny in absolute terms, but puny in relative terms.

Half is a relative term. And it's not puny.

[David Floyd]

US industry was much bigger, but the lend lease program was not the critical factor for the soviet victory.

Then I suggest you re-read the thread. Pay particular attention to the two quotes by Zhukov.

[Ned]

David, Serb, et al., This debate is inconclusive. The data is not there, one way or the other.

What I suggest is consulting the people who have no present ax to grind - the Nazi command structure in the East. Did they have anything to say on this topic? Do they know or have an opinion on whether Lend Lease was critiical to any Soviet victory?

[Sandman]

The Journal for Slavic Military studies (from where the quotes are taken) is an American journal. I'm not prepared to accept those quotes as gospel usless you can provide at least one other source.

What strikes me as particularly suspect is your comment that his comments were taped by the NKVD in 1965 and 1966. The NKVD did not exist in those years.